[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                 AMTRAK OPERATIONS: EXAMINING THE CHAL-
                  LENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVING 
                  EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE

=======================================================================

                                (118-20)

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES,
                        AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              JUNE 6, 2023

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
             
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]             


     Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
     transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                             transportation
                             
                               __________

                                
                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
53-969 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2023                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                  

             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                     Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
                     
Rick Larsen, Washington,             Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, 
  Ranking Member                       Arkansas
Eleanor Holmes Norton,               Daniel Webster, Florida
  District of Columbia               Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Grace F. Napolitano, California      Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Brian Babin, Texas
John Garamendi, California           Garret Graves, Louisiana
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.,      Georgiavid Rouzer, North Carolina
Andre Carson, Indiana                Mike Bost, Illinois
Dina Titus, Nevada                   Doug LaMalfa, California
Jared Huffman, California            Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Julia Brownley, California           Brian J. Mast, Florida
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey       Puerto Rico
Mark DeSaulnier, California          Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Salud O. Carbajal, California        Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Greg Stanton, Arizona,               Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
  Vice Ranking Member                Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey,
Colin Z. Allred, Texas                 Vice Chairman
Sharice Davids, Kansas               Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Lance Gooden, Texas
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Tracey Mann, Kansas
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Burgess Owens, Utah
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts      Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana            Chuck Edwards, North Carolina
Patrick Ryan, New York               Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Mary Sattler Peltola, Alaska         Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Robert Menendez, New Jersey          Eric Burlison, Missouri
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon                 John James, Michigan
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio            Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan        Brandon Williams, New York
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
                                     Mike Collins, Georgia
                                     Mike Ezell, Mississippi
                                     John S. Duarte, California
                                     Aaron Bean, Florida

     Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

  Troy E. Nehls, Texas, Chairman
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey,    Brian Babin, Texas
  Ranking Member                     David Rouzer, North Carolina
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Mike Bost, Illinois
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Doug LaMalfa, California
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana            Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Andre Carson, Indiana                Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Mark DeSaulnier, California          Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina,  Lance Gooden, Texas
  Vice Ranking Member                Tracey Mann, Kansas
Grace F. Napolitano, California      Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiaic Burlison, Missouri
Jared Huffman, California            Brandon Williams, New York,
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois     Vice Chairman
Robert Menendez, New Jersey          Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) John S. Duarte, California
                                     Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)

                              CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Troy E. Nehls, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, 
  and Hazardous Materials, opening statement.....................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of New Jersey, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
  Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, opening 
  statement......................................................     3
    Prepared statement...........................................     5
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     6
    Prepared statement...........................................     8

                               WITNESSES

Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, National Railroad 
  Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), oral statement.................     9
    Prepared statement...........................................    11
Mitch Warren, Executive Director, Northeast Corridor Commission, 
  oral statement.................................................    19
    Prepared statement...........................................    20

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Submissions for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls:
    Statement of Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive 
      Officer, Association of American Railroads.................    22
    Letter of May 30, 2023, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, 
      U.S. Department of Transportation, from the Coalition for 
      the Northeast Corridor.....................................    25
    Statement of Jim Mathews, President and Chief Executive 
      Officer, Rail Passengers Association.......................    26
    Statement of Scott R. Spencer, Chief Operating Officer, 
      AmeriStarRail LLC..........................................    77
    Statement of James Tilley, President, Florida Coalition of 
      Rail Passengers............................................    79
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Marcus J. Molinaro:
    Article entitled, ``G.O.P. Lawmakers Question Amtrak Over 
      Six-Figure Bonuses,'' by Mark Walker, New York Times, 
      November 4, 2022...........................................    59
    Article entitled, ``Amtrak Rewarded Executives With Six-
      Figure Bonuses as Rail Service Struggled,'' by Mark Walker 
      and Niraj Chokshi, New York Times, August 5, 2022..........    84

                                APPENDIX

Questions to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, National 
  Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), from:
    Hon. Troy E. Nehls...........................................    87
    Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr.....................................    91
    Hon. David Rouzer............................................    92
    Hon. Lance Gooden............................................    94
    Hon. Rudy Yakym III..........................................    96
Questions to Mitch Warren, Executive Director, Northeast Corridor 
  Commission, from:
    Hon. Troy E. Nehls...........................................    99
    Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr.....................................    99

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                              June 2, 2023

    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

    TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, 
and Hazardous Materials
    FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and 
Hazardous Materials
    RE:      LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Amtrak Operations: 
Examining the Challenges and Opportunities for Improving 
Efficiency and Service.''
_______________________________________________________________________


                               I. PURPOSE

    The Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous 
Materials of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
will meet on Tuesday, June 6, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2167 
Rayburn House Office Building to hold a hearing entitled 
``Amtrak Operations: Examining the Challenges and Opportunities 
for Improving Efficiency and Service.'' At the hearing Members 
will receive testimony from Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive 
Officer (CEO), Amtrak, and Mitch Warren, Executive Director, 
Northeast Corridor Commission. The hearing witnesses will 
discuss the current state of Amtrak and plans for growth for 
passenger rail.

                             II. BACKGROUND

    Amtrak operates a National passenger rail system, which 
includes the Northeast Corridor (NEC), long-distance routes, 
and state-supported routes.\1\ Amtrak generally runs more than 
300 trains per day, services more than 500 stations located in 
46 states and Washington, D.C., and operates a network that 
stretches more than 22,000 miles across the country.\2\ Of all 
Amtrak passenger trips in 2022, approximately 40 percent were 
taken on the NEC; 44 percent on state-supported routes; and 15 
percent on long-distance routes.\3\ In Fiscal Year (FY) 2022, 
Amtrak carried 22,930,499 riders (roughly 71 percent of FY 
2019's total of 32,519,241 customers) and brought in a total 
annual revenue of $2.8 billion, which remained roughly 15 
percent below FY 2019 pre-pandemic revenue.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  24102.
    \2\ Ben Goldman, Cong. Rsch. Serv. (R47260) Intercity Passenger 
Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs, (Mar. 23, 2023), available at https://
crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47260 [hereinafter Intercity 
Passenger Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs].
    \3\ Amtrak, FY 22 Year End Revenue and Ridership, available at 
https://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/FY22-Year-End-
Revenue-and-Ridership.pdf.
    \4\ See Amtrak, FY 19 Year End Revenue and Ridership, available at 
http://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/FY19-Year-End-
Ridership.pdf; see also Press Release, Amtrak, Amtrak Fiscal Year 2022: 
The Beginning of a New Era of Rail, (Nov. 29, 2022), available at 
https://media.amtrak.com/2022/11/amtrak-fiscal-year-2022-the-beginning-
of-a-new-era-of-rail/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (P.L. 117-58). 
The bill authorizes and appropriates over five years an 
unprecedented $100 billion for Amtrak and another at least $30 
billion in discretionary multimodal grants for which Amtrak and 
other intercity passenger rail projects are eligible.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ See e.g., 49 U.S.C. Sec.  6701 (noting the National 
Infrastructure Project Assistance, authorized at $5 billion and 
appropriated at $10 billion over five years); 49 U.S.C. Sec.  6702 
(noting the Local and Regional Project Assistance, authorized at $7.5 
billion and appropriated at $7.5 billion over five years); see also 23 
U.S.C. Sec.  149; see also 49 U.S.C. Sec.  224, et seq.; 23 U.S.C. 601, 
et seq. (describing two Federal loan programs that include this 
eligibility, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing and 
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     III. FEDERAL RAILROAD FUNDING

    IIJA authorizes more than three times the amounts 
authorized over the same period in the Fixing America's Surface 
Transportation Act (FAST Act) (P.L. 114-94). Additionally, IIJA 
appropriated more than $66 billion in supplemental funding for 
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) programs, including 
nearly $22 billion in direct funding for Amtrak.\6\ Taken 
together, the authorizations and supplemental appropriations 
for FRA programs under IIJA exceed $100 billion.\7\ IIJA\\ 
authorizations\\ and supplemental\\ appropriations\\ are 
outlined below along with the amounts authorized and 
appropriated during the years of the FAST Act. Under the law, 
the Amtrak Northeast Corridor and National Network grant 
amounts are directed to Amtrak while the four competitive grant 
programs are administered by the United States Department of 
Transportation (DOT) and have multiple eligible applicants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ DOT, DOT Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Investment Act 
Authorization Table, available at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/
dot.gov/files/2022-01/DOT_Infrastructure_Investment_
and_Jobs_Act_Authorization_Table_%28IIJA%29.pdf.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, Division B, Title II, Subtitle A--
Authorization of Appropriations, 135 Stat. 429.
    \9\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, Division J--Appropriations, Title 
VII, 135 Stat. 429.
    \10\ FAST Act, Pub. L. No 114-94, Division A, Title XI, Subtitle 
A--Authorizations, 129 Stat. 1312.
    \11\ See e.g., Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, Pub. L. No. 
115-31, 131 Stat. 135; Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Pub. L. 
No. 115-141, 132 Stat. 348; Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, Pub. 
L. No. 116-6, 133 Stat. 13; Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 
2020, Pub. L. No. 116-94, 133 Stat. 2534; Consolidated Appropriations 
Act, 2021, Pub. L. No. 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182 (comparing 
appropriations, including the FY 2021 one-year FAST Act extension at FY 
2020 authorized levels and noting FY 2016 appropriations are not 
reflective of the FAST Act).

                                                       Comparison of IIJA to FAST Act Rail Funding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        IIJA                                    FAST Act
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Program                                                                                                  FY 17-21 Enacted
                                                                            FY 22-26         FY 22-26 Enacted         FY 16-20             Regular
                                                                       Authorizations \8\   Appropriations \9\  Authorizations \10\  Appropriations \11\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amtrak--Northeast Corridor.........................................          $6.57 billion         $6 billion        $2.60 billion        $3.03 billion
  NEC Commission...................................................            $30 million        $30 million          $25 million          $25 million
  Accessibility Upgrades...........................................           $250 million                  -                    -         $275 million
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amtrak--National Network...........................................         $12.65 billion     $15.75 billion        $5.45 billion        $6.35 billion
  Interstate Rail Compacts State-Amtrak Intercity..................            $15 million        $15 million                    -                    -
  Passenger Rail Comm..............................................            $15 million        $15 million          $10 million          $10 million
  Accessibility Upgrades...........................................           $250 million                  -                    -                    -
  Corridor Development.............................................          $1.26 billion                  -                    -                    -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal Amtrak................................................         $19.22 billion     $21.75 billion        $8.05 billion        $9.38 billion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Grants \12\.           $7.5 billion        $36 billion         $997 million        $1.08 billion
  Northeast Corridor...............................................       Not less than 45  Not more than $24                    -                    -
                                                                      percent reserved for            billion
                                                                             NEC inventory
                                                                                  projects
  National Network.................................................       Not less than 45                  -                    -                    -
                                                                      percent reserved for
                                                                       National Network of
                                                                         which at least 20
                                                                         percent for long-
                                                                           distance routes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Grants....             $5 billion         $5 billion        $1.10 billion        $1.62 billion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RR Crossing Elimination Program Grants.............................           $2.5 billion         $3 billion                    -                    -
  Planning.........................................................            $75 million                  -                    -                    -
  Highway-Rail Grade Crossing......................................          $6.25 million                  -                    -                    -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restoration & Enhancement Grants...................................           $250 million  $250 million \13\     $100 million, or          $37 million
                                                                                                                  $20 million/year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Competitive Grants Subtotal......................................         $15.25 billion     $44.25 billion         $2.2 billion        $2.73 billion
                                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Five Year Total................................................         $34.47 billion        $66 billion       $10.25 billion        $12.1 billion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Additionally,\\ Congress\\ provided more than $3.7 billion 
in Northeast Corridor and National Network Grants to Amtrak 
during the COVID pandemic to offset revenue losses from 
decreased ridership and to maintain employment levels.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Re-named program in IIJA, formerly Federal-State Partnership 
for State of Good Repair in FAST Act.
    \13\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, Division J, 135 Stat. 192 
(describing amounts appropriated from Amtrak NN emergency-designated 
supplemental appropriation provided in Division J of IIJA).
    \14\ See CARES Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281; 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. No. 116-260, 134 Stat. 
1182; American Rescue Plan Act, Pub. L. No. 117-2, 135 Stat. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Passenger rail lines rarely generate an operating 
profit.\15\ Recently, FY 2019 was one of the closest years that 
Amtrak came to making an operating profit, when it registered a 
net loss of $881 million and a net operating loss, after 
adjustments, of $29 million for the year.\16\ Due to the COVID-
19 pandemic, Amtrak's FY 2020 revenues fell by 60 percent and 
ridership plummeted.\17\ Amtrak's FY 2021 net loss was over $2 
billion, which recovered somewhat in FY 2022, with a loss of 
$1.825 billion.\18\ According to Amtrak's Five-Year Plans for 
FY 2022-2027, Amtrak is projecting operating losses of at least 
roughly $1 billion per year on its service.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Intercity Passenger Rail: Federal Policy and Programs, supra 
note 2.
    \16\ Id.
    \17\ Id.
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Amtrak, Five-Year Plans, Historic Opportunities--Amtrak's FY 
2022-2027 Service and Asset Line Plans, available at https://
www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/
corporate/businessplanning/Amtrak-Service-Asset-Line-Plans-FY22-27.pdf; 
see also Jeff Davis, Amtrak Concedes Perpetual $1 Billion/Year 
Operating, Eno Center for Transp., (Apr. 21, 2023), available at 
https://www.enotrans.org/article/amtrak-concedes-perpetual-1-billion-
year-operating-losses/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          IV. AMTRAK RIDERSHIP

    In pre-pandemic FY 2019, Amtrak set a record of 32.5 
million trips taken on its system.\20\ FY 2019 marked the 
eighth straight year Amtrak ridership surpassed 30 million 
trips.\21\ In FY 2020, following the onset of the pandemic, 
ridership plummeted to roughly 16.8 million people.\22\ April 
2020 saw ridership fall to nearly 95 percent of its total one 
year prior.\23\ Demand bottomed out in FY 2021 when Amtrak 
carried 12.166 million riders, representing a drop of 62.6 
percent in ridership.\24\ In FY 2022, ridership increased as 
the pandemic ended, but still only reached 68 percent of pre-
pandemic levels.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ Amtrak Route Ridership, FY19 vs FY18, https://
media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/FY19-Year-End-
Ridership.pdf.
    \21\ Intercity Passenger Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs, supra note 
2.
    \22\ Amtrak, FY 20 Year End Revenue and Ridership, available at 
https://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/FY20-Year-End-
Ridership.pdf.
    \23\ Intercity Passenger Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs, supra note 
2.
    \24\ Amtrak, FY 22 Year End Revenue and Ridership, available at 
https://media.amtrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/FY21-Year-End-
Revenue-and-Ridership.pdf.
    \25\ Intercity Passenger Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs, supra note 
2.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

  Source: Ben Goldman, Cong. Rsch. Serv. (R47260) Intercity Passenger 
          Rail: Federal Policy and Programs, (Mar. 23, 2023).

             V. ILLUSTRATIVE CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

FRA CORRIDOR IDENTIFICATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

    Established by IIJA, the FRA's Corridor ID program will 
guide intercity passenger rail planning and development. It is 
intended to become the primary means for directing Federal 
investment and assistance for new and improved intercity 
passenger rail routes.\26\ The Corridor ID program will support 
the sustained long-term development of intercity passenger rail 
and will create a capital project pipeline ready for Federal 
(and other) funding.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for FRA Corridor ID Program, 
available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/20/2022-
27559/notice-of-solicitation-of-corridor-proposals-and-funding-
opportunity-for-the-corridor-identification
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONNECT NEC 2035

    In July 2021, the Northeast Corridor Commission 
(Commission) released CONNECT NEC 2035 (C35), a plan that 
details the sequencing of infrastructure investments and 
capital renewal projects to be made throughout the Northeast 
Corridor (Corridor) over 15 years.\28\ The Commission is 
comprised of 18 members, including representatives from each of 
the eight Corridor states, the District of Columbia, Amtrak, 
and the DOT.\29\ The NEC Project Inventory, established by the 
IIJA, is a predictable pipeline of projects that will assist 
Commission Members and the public with long-term capital 
planning for the NEC.\30\ To be eligible for the Federal-State 
Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Program, NEC projects 
must be on the NEC Project Inventory.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ Northeast Corridor Commission, CONNECT 2035 (July 2021), 
available at https://nec-commission.com/app/uploads/2021/08/CONNECT-
NEC-2035-Plan.pdf [hereinafter CONNECT 2035].
    \29\ Commission, The Commission, available at https://nec-
commission.com/commission/.
    \30\ 2022 Northeast Corridor Project Inventory, available at 
https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2022-11/
NEC%20Project%20Inventory.pdf.
    \31\ FRA Publishes Northeast Corridor Project Inventory, Laying Out 
Priorities for Intercity Passenger Rail Development on the NEC, 
available at https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/fra-
publishes-northeast-corridor-project-inventory-laying-out-priorities-
intercity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CALIFORNIA

    The California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) is the 
Nation's largest state transportation agency responsible for 
maritime, highway, transit, and rail systems planning, 
investment, and oversight.\32\ California has three long-
standing intercity passenger rail corridors currently led by 
joint powers authorities serving markets in the San Diego-Los 
Angeles area, the San Joaquin Valley to Bakersfield, and the 
San Francisco Bay Area to Sacramento.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ See CalSTA, Home, available at https://calsta.ca.gov/.
    \33\ CalSTA, California State Rail Plan, available at https://
dot.ca.gov/programs/rail-and-mass-transportation/california-state-rail-
plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR COMMISSION

    The Southeast Corridor Commission (SEC) consists of 
departments of transportation from Florida, Georgia, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington, 
DC.\34\ The SEC issued the Southeast Regional Rail Plan in 
December 2020, which seeks to increase intercity passenger rail 
service in the region.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\ SRC, Partners, available at https://www.southeastcorridor-
commission.org/partners.
    \35\ SRC, Southeast Rail Plan, Final Report, (Dec. 2020), available 
at https://www.southeastcorridor-commission.org/copy-of-commission-
reports-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOUTHERN RAIL COMMISSION

    The Southern Rail Commission (SRC) is an interstate compact 
approved in 1982 by the legislatures of Louisiana, Mississippi, 
and Alabama. The SRC is composed of commissioners appointed by 
their respective governors, with a mission to promote the safe, 
reliable, and efficient movement of people and goods to enhance 
economic development, provide transportation choices, and 
facilitate emergency evacuation routes.\36\ Section 11304 of 
the FAST Act directed the DOT Secretary to convene a working 
group to evaluate the restoration of intercity rail passenger 
service between New Orleans, Louisiana, and Orlando, Florida. 
In July 2017, the Working Group reported that approximately 1/
20th of CSX's estimated required capital investment was needed 
to start service.\37\ Following the conclusion of legal 
proceedings before the Surface Transportation Board (STB), 
Amtrak is expected to resume service later this year.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ SRC, Our Mission, available at https://
www.southernrailcommission.org/mission.
    \37\ Gulf Coast Working Group, Gulf Coast Working Group Report to 
Congress, Final Report, (July 2017), at 7, available at https://
railroads.dot.gov/elibrary/gulf-coast-working-group-report-congress.
    \38\ See Application of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 
Under 49 U.S.C. 24308(e)--CSX Transportation, Inc., and Norfolk 
Southern Railway Company, 87 Fed. Reg. 6644 (Feb. 4, 2022) available at 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-02-04/pdf/2022-02416.pdf; 
see also John Sharp, Mobile's train stop `key element' for Amtrak's 
return to Gulf Coast, AL.com, (Apr. 3, 2023), available at https://
www.al.com/news/2023/04/mobiles-train-stop-key-element-for-amtraks-
return-to-gulf-coast.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            VI. WITNESS LIST

     Mr. Stephen Gardner, CEO, Amtrak
     Mr. Mitch Warren, Executive Director, Northeast 
Corridor Commission

 
   AMTRAK OPERATIONS: EXAMINING THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR 
                    IMPROVING EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous 
                                         Materials,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in 
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Troy E. Nehls 
(Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Mr. Nehls. The Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and 
Hazardous Materials will come to order.
    I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to 
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the Members not on the 
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at 
today's hearing and ask questions.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    And as a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document 
into the record, email me.
    I now recognize myself for the purposes of an opening 
statement for 5 minutes.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TROY E. NEHLS OF TEXAS, CHAIRMAN, 
 SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

    Mr. Nehls. Today's hearing examines the current and future 
state of Amtrak. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or 
IIJA, gave historic funding to railroads, with a large portion 
of that money going to Amtrak.
    Amtrak is a federally chartered corporation with the 
Federal Government as the majority stakeholder. Its Board of 
Directors is appointed by the President and confirmed by the 
Senate. Amtrak's funding largely comes from the Federal 
Government versus from ticket revenue. Without significant 
taxpayer support, we all know that Amtrak could not operate.
    Since its creation in 1971, Amtrak has never made a profit. 
Since 1971, Amtrak has never made a profit. Despite the funding 
provided in IIJA, Amtrak predicts it will lose roughly $1 
billion, with a ``B,'' per year, with those losses largely 
covered by the taxpayers.
    My Democratic colleagues like to note that highways and 
airlines also rely on Government subsidies to operate. While 
those modes receive Federal support, they are also essential 
forms of transportation in high use and high demand by the 
American people. Unlike Amtrak, Americans could not travel and 
function as they do without the use of highways and airplanes.
    And during the COVID-19 pandemic, Amtrak ridership and 
revenues plummeted as commuters stayed home or chose to use 
other modes of transportation. Ultimately, Amtrak received 
billions of extra dollars in COVID relief to operate largely 
empty trains for several months.
    Today, we will examine the state of Amtrak's post-COVID 
recovery. While Amtrak has regained some ridership in recent 
months, we will hear about Amtrak's plans to continue boosting 
demand and ticket revenue.
    Amtrak's losses arise mostly entirely from its national 
network and long-distance routes. Rather than focusing on 
attracting riders to existing routes, Amtrak now seeks to 
expand this network, risking a greater expense to the taxpayer. 
Some of these new routes will even require the States to cover 
costs and losses.
    And in fairness to Amtrak, prior to the pandemic, it was on 
a path to achieve profitability for the first time in roughly 
50 years. This turnaround came as a result of tough decisions 
by its leaders that prioritized service and shared sacrifices 
with Amtrak employees.
    While growth is a positive trend for a company, Amtrak must 
prioritize improving its current network, including important 
system maintenance and upgrades, and improving safety, 
security, and customer satisfaction issues that have plagued 
Amtrak for years over expansion ambitions.
    In addition to spending and revenue issues, this committee 
has questioned Amtrak about its compliance with the Americans 
with Disabilities Act, rising crime in its stations and trains, 
the potential transport of illegal migrants from the southern 
border on its trains, and generous executive bonuses despite 
losses and service problems.
    Amtrak must work to attract customers and revenue and 
operate as a reasonable steward of the taxpayers' dollars. It 
should ensure that its network is safe and secure. Further, it 
is necessary for Amtrak to strengthen its relationship with the 
States, including through the development of a transparent and 
fair cost allocation policy for State-supported Amtrak routes.
    Finally, any potential expansion of Amtrak's system must 
allow for freight railroads to provide input--to provide 
input--on capacity and track sharing issues. The recent supply 
chain crisis further emphasizes the value of freight railroads 
in efficiently moving goods across the Nation. Amtrak's 
passenger expansion efforts should not be allowed to obstruct 
the critical movement of freight railroads.
    [Mr. Nehls' prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Hon. Troy E. Nehls, a Representative in Congress 
   from the State of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Railroads, 
                   Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
    Today's hearing examines the current and future state of Amtrak. 
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) gave historic funding 
to railroads, with a large portion of that money going to Amtrak.
    Amtrak is a federally chartered corporation with the federal 
government as the majority stakeholder. Its Board of Directors is 
appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Amtrak's 
funding largely comes from the federal government, versus from ticket 
revenue. Without significant taxpayer support, Amtrak could not 
operate.
    Since its creation in 1971, Amtrak has never made a profit. Despite 
the funding provided in IIJA, Amtrak predicts it will lose roughly $1 
billion per year, with those losses largely covered by the taxpayers.
    My Democrat colleagues like to note that highways and airlines also 
rely on government subsidies to operate. While those modes receive 
federal support, they are also essential forms of transportation, in 
high use and high demand by the American people. Unlike Amtrak, 
Americans could not travel and function as they do without the use of 
highways and airplanes.
    During the COVID-19 pandemic, Amtrak ridership and revenues 
plummeted as commuters stayed home or chose to use other modes of 
transportation. Ultimately, Amtrak received billions of extra dollars 
in COVID relief to operate largely empty trains for several months.
    Today, we will examine the state of Amtrak's post-COVID recovery. 
While Amtrak has regained some ridership in recent months, we will hear 
about Amtrak's plans to continue boosting demand and ticket revenue.
    Amtrak's losses arise almost entirely from its National Network and 
long-distance routes. Rather than focusing on attracting riders to 
existing routes, Amtrak now seeks to expand this network, risking a 
greater expense to the taxpayer. Some of these new routes will even 
require the states to cover costs and losses.
    In fairness to Amtrak, prior to the pandemic, it was on a path to 
achieve profitability for the first time in roughly 50 years. This 
turnaround came as the result of tough decisions by its leaders that 
prioritized service and shared sacrifices with Amtrak employees.
    While growth is a positive trend for a company, Amtrak must 
prioritize improving its current network, including important system 
maintenance and upgrades, and improving safety, security and customer 
satisfaction issues that have plagued Amtrak for years over expansion 
ambitions.
    In addition to spending and revenue issues, this Committee has 
questioned Amtrak about its compliance with the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, rising crime in its stations and trains, the 
potential transport of illegal migrants from the southern border on its 
trains, and generous executive bonuses despite losses and service 
problems.
    Amtrak must work to attract customers and revenue and operate as a 
responsible steward of taxpayer dollars. It should ensure its network 
is safe and secure. Further, it is necessary for Amtrak to strengthen 
its relationships with the states, including through the development of 
a transparent and fair cost allocation policy for state-supported 
Amtrak routes.
    Finally, any potential expansion of Amtrak's system must allow for 
freight railroads to provide input on capacity and track sharing 
issues. The recent supply chain crisis further emphasizes the value of 
freight railroads in efficiently moving goods across the Nation. 
Amtrak's passenger expansion efforts should not be allowed to obstruct 
the critical movement of freight railroads.

    Mr. Nehls. I now recognize Ranking Member Payne for 5 
minutes for an opening statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., OF NEW JERSEY, 
   RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND 
                      HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

    Mr. Payne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to one of the major 
points that you made, if there is an example of a passenger 
entity somewhere in the world that is profitable on its own, 
please, the committee would love to know.
    So, with that, I want to thank you, Chairman Nehls, 
Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, and our two witnesses, 
for being here today.
    We are here today during an exciting time for Amtrak, and 
more broadly, intercity passenger rail across the country.
    For the first time, this mode of transportation has 
guaranteed funding for multiple years. The value of this 
certainty is not to be understated. This is akin to the 
beginning of the Interstate Highway System, which we continue 
to support.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, signed by President 
Biden in November 2021, provides $22 billion in funding to 
Amtrak through fiscal year 2026, $16 billion of which is to be 
invested in the national network, while the remaining $6 
billion goes towards infrastructure, and that is along the 
Northeast Corridor. Another $19 billion is authorized for 
Amtrak's capital investments nationwide.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law further invests $36 
billion in the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity 
Passenger Rail Program, with $24 billion allocated explicitly 
to the Northeast Corridor. Another $7.5 billion in funding is 
also authorized for this grant program.
    Amtrak recently submitted grant applications for multiple 
projects through this program totaling roughly $9 billion. 
Together, these projects will assist in increasing rail 
capacity while reducing service interruptions.
    Projects like the Gateway Program in my home State of New 
Jersey will improve the passenger experience along the 
Northeast Corridor by digging a pair of new tunnels under the 
Hudson River and replacing the Portal Bridge. Both of these 
chokepoints are over 100 years old, and maintenance problems 
here often cause delays for passengers riding Amtrak and New 
Jersey Transit.
    Other projects along the Northeast Corridor, such as the 
Frederick Douglass Tunnel in Baltimore, need restoration. This 
tunnel is 150 years old, the oldest along the corridor. Water 
damage and tight curves force Acela trains to slow down to 30 
miles an hour, adding precious minutes to trips for travelers 
across Maryland and the rest of the corridor.
    Similarly, there is much work to be done on intercity rail 
projects across the country, including bringing stations into 
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, refreshing 
Amtrak's fleet of aging railcars and locomotives, and replacing 
older rail bridges like the 100-year-old San Luis Rey River 
Bridge in San Diego County, California.
    I look forward to new and improved corridors that can be 
advanced with this funding.
    The Federal Railroad Administration recently received 
numerous proposals for the Corridor ID Program. This will be 
the template for passenger rail expansion in the coming years.
    Established corridors in North Carolina and California will 
finally have a consistent Federal partner. New corridors are 
ripe for development in Texas, Nevada, and the gulf coast.
    I look forward to the Federal Railroad Administration's 
project pipeline that will identify the capital projects needed 
to develop these and other corridors.
    All of this funding, all of these projects, and all the 
benefits that future generations will enjoy would not be 
possible without our efforts in the 117th Congress when it 
passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in this Chamber and 
sent it to President Biden for signature.
    The $100 billion in funding for rail projects included in 
this monumental law is a game changer for communities 
nationwide. I look forward to diving into some of the details 
with our witnesses shortly.
    And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    [Mr. Payne's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr., a Representative in 
Congress from the State of New Jersey, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee 
            on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
    Good morning.
    Thank you, Chairman Nehls, Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, 
and our two witnesses for being with us today.
    We are here today during an exciting time for Amtrak and, more 
broadly, intercity passenger rail across the country.
    For the first time, this mode of transportation has guaranteed 
funding for multiple years. The value of this certainty is not to be 
understated. This is akin to the beginning of the interstate highway 
system, which we continue to support.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, signed by President Biden in 
November 2021, provides $22 billion in funding to Amtrak through Fiscal 
Year 2026, $16 billion of which is to be invested in the national 
network while the remaining $6 billion goes towards infrastructure 
improvements along the Northeast Corridor. Another $19 billion is 
authorized for Amtrak's capital investments nationwide.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law further invests $36 billion in 
the Federal State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Program, 
with $24 billion allocated explicitly to the Northeast Corridor. 
Another $7.5 billion in funding is also authorized for this grant 
program.
    Amtrak recently submitted grant applications for multiple projects 
through this program totaling roughly $9 billion. Together, these 
projects will assist in increasing rail capacity while reducing service 
interruptions.
    Projects like the Gateway Program in my home state of New Jersey 
will improve the passenger experience along the Northeast corridor by 
digging a new pair of tunnels under the Hudson River and replacing 
Portal Bridge. Both of these chokepoints are over one hundred years 
old, and maintenance problems here often cause delays for passengers 
riding Amtrak and NJ Transit.
    Other projects along the Northeast Corridor, such as the Frederick 
Douglass tunnel in Baltimore, need restoration. This tunnel is 150 
years old, the oldest along the corridor. Water damage, and tight 
curves, force Acela trains to slow down to thirty miles per hour, 
adding precious minutes to trips for travelers across Maryland and the 
rest of the corridor.
    Similarly, there is much work to be done on intercity rail projects 
across the country including bringing stations into compliance with the 
Americans with Disabilities Act, refreshing Amtrak's fleet of aging 
railcars and locomotives, and replacing older rail bridges like the 
100-year-old San Luis Rey River Bridge in San Diego County, California.
    I look forward to new and improved corridors that can be advanced 
with this funding. The Federal Railroad Administration recently 
received numerous proposals for the Corridor ID program. This will be 
the template for passenger rail expansion in the coming years.
    Established corridors in North Carolina and California will finally 
have a consistent federal partner. New corridors are ripe for 
development in Texas, Nevada, and along the Gulf Coast.
    I also look forward to the Federal Railroad Administration's 
project pipeline that will identify the capital projects needed to 
develop these, and other, corridors.
    All of this funding, all of these projects, and all the benefits 
that future generations will enjoy would not be possible without our 
efforts in the 117th Congress when we passed the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law in this chamber and sent it to President Biden for 
his signature.
    The $100 billion in funding for rail projects included in this 
monumental law is a game changer for communities nationwide. I look 
forward to diving into some details with our witnesses shortly.
    I yield back.

    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Payne yields.
    I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee, 
Mr. Larsen, for 5 minutes for an opening statement.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING 
     MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chairman Nehls and 
Ranking Member Payne, for holding today's hearing on improving 
Amtrak operations across the country.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was a monumental 
achievement that supercharged our Nation's investment in rail 
with $100 billion in funding. The BIL provided bold, long-term 
investments across transportation systems and infrastructure 
that are creating jobs and benefiting our economy. Just last 
week, the Bureau of Labor Stats reported that the economy added 
339,000 jobs in May, including 25,000 construction jobs and 
24,000 transportation and warehousing jobs, a sign that the 
economy is on the move.
    For intercity passenger rail specifically, the BIL 
guaranteed multiyear funding for state-of-good-repair 
investments and development. It makes possible, for the first 
time ever, dedicated, reliable Federal funding, disbursed over 
the next few years, to improve and expand intercity passenger 
rail.
    Just this week, the first round of competitive rail grant 
funding from BIL was announced, and among the recipients was 
the city of Burlington, Washington, in the Second Congressional 
District, which was awarded a $2 million planning grant to 
remove a grade crossing, which will, in turn, increase mobility 
for all rail traffic.
    Burlington Mayor Steve Sexton brought this idea to me 
nearly a decade ago, and I am pleased to see this project 
awarded the funding it needs to improve safety and reduce 
congestion.
    Projects like this are improving the quality of life and 
creating jobs, and Washington State has led the way in 
executing BIL funding so far. And I expect great results for 
our communities that will come from this grant and the 
additional rail funding to come, as well.
    Amtrak and the FRA can now enact long-term plans for 
passenger rail expansion and improvement, secure in the 
knowledge that the funding will be there in future years. The 
bipartisan budget agreement protected BIL funding from cuts, 
including this vital rail funding, and demonstrated support on 
both sides of the aisle to maintain these investments.
    I look forward to hearing from both of our witnesses today 
about the difference this budget certainty has made for them in 
developing and sustaining programs, and how this will 
ultimately improve service for rail passengers.
    I want to apologize for Mr. Warren for missing our meeting 
yesterday. It was an airplane issue and not a rail issue that 
prevented me from getting here on time, so . . .
    However, this funding is not only intended to improve rail 
service, but to expand it. The demand for more frequent, more 
reliable passenger rail service is real. Cities and counties 
across the Nation want increased access to the national 
passenger rail network. They know this will help their towns 
grow and thrive and provide a greener way to move people. The 
communities that have rail service want better service. The 
communities that do not have service want service to start.
    Communities in my district were frustrated that the COVID 
pandemic shuttered State-supported Amtrak routes like the 
Amtrak Cascades which connects communities like Everett, 
Edmonds, Stanwood, Mount Vernon, and Bellingham in my district 
to cities like Seattle, Spokane, Portland, Eugene, and 
Vancouver, British Columbia. I celebrate the return of the 
service and note, though, that it took 3 years to restore.
    Mr. Payne referred to the gulf coast, where it took 17 
years to get an agreement there to restart service after 
Hurricane Katrina. To my colleagues on this committee 
representing gulf communities, I share the frustration you and 
your constituents have undoubtedly experienced.
    As we did in fighting for rail funding in the BIL, this 
committee is committed to helping communities get regular and 
reliable passenger rail service.
    Now, of the $100 billion provided for rail in the BIL, $66 
billion was provided in the form of advance appropriations. The 
remaining $34 billion is subject to future appropriations. So, 
I think we should continue to push for Congress to fully fund 
its intercity passenger rail commitments to create more jobs, 
grow regional economies, reduce congestion and carbon 
emissions, and build a cleaner, greener, safer, and more 
accessible transportation network.
    The BIL is also an investment in the workforce. This 
funding will be used to grow a well-trained, diverse workforce 
to build, operate, and maintain a national intercity passenger 
rail network.
    The transformational investment in the BIL is a great 
start, but Congress needs to build on this by securing a 
reliable funding stream for intercity passenger rail. Highways, 
transit, airports, and harbors all have access to trust funds 
enabling them to fund their long-term major capital projects 
without having to wait for annual appropriations process. It is 
past time to do this for rail.
    This committee will have the opportunity today to hear from 
two witnesses who are on the front lines, turning these 
historic investments into tangible improvements to rail service 
that our communities can rely on.
    We will also have the opportunity to specifically examine 
Amtrak's plans for service improvements and growth, and to hear 
from one of Amtrak's key partners, the Northeast Corridor 
Commission, on how the BIL will improve passenger rail in that 
region.
    So, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about 
their vision for the future of passenger rail.
    And with that, I yield back.
    [Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress 
    from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chairman Nehls and Ranking Member Payne, for holding 
today's hearing on improving Amtrak operations across the country.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) was a monumental 
achievement that supercharged our nation's investment in rail with $100 
billion in funding.
    The BIL provided bold, long-term investments across transportation 
systems and infrastructure that are creating jobs and benefiting our 
economy.
    Just last week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the 
economy added 339,000 jobs in May, including 25,000 construction jobs 
and 24,000 transportation and warehousing jobs--a sign that the economy 
is on the move.
    For intercity passenger rail specifically, the BIL guaranteed 
multi-year funding for state of good repair investments and 
development.
    It makes possible, for the first time ever, dedicated, reliable 
federal funding--disbursed over the next few years--to improve and 
expand intercity passenger rail.
    Just this week, the first round of competitive rail grant funding 
from the BIL was announced.
    Among the recipients was the City of Burlington, in Washington's 
Second District, which was awarded a $2 million planning grant to 
remove a grade crossing, which will in turn increase mobility for all 
rail traffic.
    Burlington Mayor Steve Sexton brought this idea to me nearly a 
decade ago, and I am pleased to see the project awarded the funding it 
needs to improve safety and reduce congestion.
    Projects like this are improving quality of life and creating jobs, 
and Washington state has led the way in executing BIL funding so far.
    I expect great results for communities will come from this grant 
and the additional rail funding to come, as well.
    Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration can now enact long-
term plans for passenger rail expansion and improvement, secure in the 
knowledge that the funding will be there in future years.
    The Bipartisan Budget Agreement protected BIL funding from cuts, 
including this vital rail funding, and demonstrated support on both 
sides of the aisle to maintain these investments.
    I'm looking forward to hearing from both our witnesses today about 
the difference this budget certainty has made for them in developing 
and sustaining programs, and how this will ultimately improve service 
for rail passengers.
    However, the funding is not only intended to improve rail service, 
but to expand it. The demand for more frequent and more reliable 
passenger rail is real. Cities and counties across the nation want 
increased access to the national passenger rail network.
    They know that this will help their towns grow and thrive and 
provide a greener way to move people.
    The communities that have rail service want better service. The 
communities that do not, want service to start.
    Communities in my district were frustrated that the COVID pandemic 
shuttered state-supported Amtrak routes like Cascades, which connects 
communities like Everett, Edmonds, Stanwood, Mount Vernon and 
Bellingham in my district to cities like Seattle, Spokane, Portland, 
Eugene, and Vancouver, British Columbia. I celebrate the return of this 
service--and note that it took three years to restore.
    Mr. Payne referred to the Gulf Coast--it took 17 years to get 
agreement there to restart service after Hurricane Katrina.
    To my colleagues on this Committee representing Gulf communities, I 
share the frustration you and your constituents have undoubtedly 
experienced.
    As we did in fighting for rail funding in the BIL, this Committee 
is committed to helping communities get regular and reliable passenger 
rail service.
    Of the $100 billion provided for rail in the BIL, $66 billion was 
provided in the form of advance appropriations. The remaining $34 
billion is subject to future appropriations legislation. I think we 
should continue to push for Congress to fully fund its intercity 
passenger rail commitments to create more jobs, grow regional 
economies, reduce congestion and carbon emissions, and build a cleaner, 
greener, safer and more accessible transportation network.
    The BIL is also an investment in our workforce. The funding will be 
used to grow a well-trained, diverse workforce to build, operate and 
maintain a national intercity passenger rail network.
    The transformational investment in the BIL is a great start, but 
Congress needs to build on this by securing a reliable funding stream 
for intercity passenger rail.
    Highways, transit, airports and harbors all have access to trust 
funds, enabling them to fund their long-term major capital projects 
without having to wait for the annual appropriations process.
    It's past time that intercity passenger rail was brought into 
parity with the other modes.
    Today, this Committee will have the opportunity to hear from two 
witnesses who are on the front lines, turning historic investment into 
tangible improvements to rail service that communities can rely on.
    We will have the opportunity to specifically examine Amtrak's plans 
for service improvements and growth.
    We will also be able to hear from one of Amtrak's key partners, the 
Northeast Corridor Commission, on how the BIL will improve passenger 
rail nationwide.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about their 
vision for the future of passenger rail.

    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Larsen yields.
    I would like to now welcome our witnesses, and thank you 
for being here. Mr. Gardner, Mr. Warren, I will take a minute 
here to explain our lighting system to you. There are three 
lights. Green means go; obviously, yellow, you are running out 
of time; and then red means pump the brakes.
    I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements 
be included in the record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    And as your written testimony has been made part of the 
record, the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks 
to 5 minutes.
    And with that, Mr. Gardner, you are recognized for those 5 
minutes.

TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN GARDNER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL 
  RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK); AND MITCH WARREN, 
       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST CORRIDOR COMMISSION

TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN GARDNER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL 
            RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)

    Mr. Gardner. Good morning, Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member 
Payne, Ranking Member Larsen, and members of the subcommittee. 
Thanks for having me here today.
    Let me start with a brief update on the strong year Amtrak 
is having so far in fiscal year 2023. Safety is our number one 
priority, and its importance was highlighted this past weekend 
by the tragic accident in India. Our heart goes out to those 
impacted, and it is a solemn reminder that our work is never 
done.
    I am glad to report, however, that through March, Amtrak's 
rate of reportable injuries was 20 percent better than our 
annual goal, and we have not had a single NTSB-investigated 
accident this year.
    I am also proud to say that we have returned service to all 
of our network. While several routes are still with less 
frequency than pre-pandemic, we are progressing our plan to add 
more service over the coming year. We also continue to upgrade 
our customer experience, improve our facilities, and enhance 
our food and beverage offerings.
    Through April, our year-to-date ridership was 84 percent of 
our pre-pandemic levels, and in April, it was 89 percent. By 
next year, we expect to reach our overall fiscal year 2019 
level of 32 million riders again. This is remarkable, and the 
best post-pandemic performance of any U.S. passenger rail 
operator.
    However, ridership does remain impacted by some 
insufficient equipment and reduced business travel. Both have 
affected Acela revenues, in particular, making adequate funding 
for the Northeast Corridor even more vital.
    Speaking of financials, through April of fiscal year 2023, 
our adjusted operating loss was $434 million, which is $53 
million better than our plan, and our fare box recovery has 
risen to 76 percent.
    We are still a ways off from achieving break-even results, 
as we were on track to do in fiscal year 2020, due to the more 
than 3 years of significant cost increases and lost revenue 
growth. But we see a path for our train operations business to 
return there under an apples-to-apples comparison in about 5 
years.
    Let me also mention how the finances of the company have 
changed dramatically due to the large influx in IIJA capital 
funding. Amtrak is no longer simply a passenger rail operator, 
but we are now a major construction company executing a massive 
capital program. This creates additional operating expenses 
that didn't exist before.
    Regarding economics, Congress was clear in the IIJA that 
Amtrak's statutory goal is to maximize public benefits from 
Federal funding, not just minimize our need for them. You can 
be sure we will continue to place a balance on pursuit of 
improved financial performance with our other statutory goals.
    Through the IIJA, for the first time in Amtrak's history, 
Congress and the administration are now investing at the levels 
needed to achieve these goals. Since I last appeared before the 
subcommittee, Amtrak has begun to receive our IIJA funds from 
the FRA and put them to good use.
    With our partners, we have recently applied for about $10 
billion in FRA and DOT grants, and we are advancing many key 
projects, including construction of the new Hudson River Tunnel 
and rehab of our East River Tunnels, both which will begin next 
year; and construction of Portal North Bridge in New Jersey, 
which is about 25 percent complete; advancing our B&P Tunnel 
Replacement Program and vital bridge projects in Maryland and 
Connecticut; manufacturing our new Airo train sets by Siemens 
in Sacramento, California, and our new Acela trains by Alstom 
in upstate New York, with support from hundreds of suppliers 
all across America; procurement of our new fleet of long-
distance trains which we will put out to bid later this year; 
completion of 112 ADA projects in stations all across our 
network over the next 16 months; startup of two new State-
supported services between New Orleans and Mobile, and the Twin 
Cities and Chicago later this year; grant applications to study 
extensions for long-distance service between Meridian, 
Mississippi, and Dallas-Fort Worth, and daily service on the 
Cardinal and Sunset routes; and support for many of the more 
than 90 applications by States and cities from across America 
to the FRA's Corridor ID Program to develop new and enhanced 
services.
    We are excited by this progress, and it is important to 
note, though, that it will take sustained Federal support to 
develop a 21st-century passenger rail network.
    In the near term, we need adequate appropriations to 
maintain and operate our trains. In the long term, we need a 
reliable funding mechanism, like other transportation modes 
have, so we can efficiently plan and deliver our network.
    Lastly, good on-time performance is fundamental to our 
business, and we continue to face challenges with some of our 
host railroad partners. I hope this subcommittee will work with 
us on these issues so we can better serve the whole Nation and 
your constituents.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for your 
time. I look forward to your questions.
    [Mr. Gardner's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
    Prepared Statement of Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, 
            National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
    Good morning, Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Payne, and Members of 
the Subcommittee. My name is Stephen Gardner, and I am the Chief 
Executive Officer of Amtrak. Thank you for inviting me to appear before 
you today to discuss Amtrak's operations, and the challenges we face 
and opportunities we have to improve our efficiency and service.
    This hearing is very timely. The train called Amtrak is emerging 
from the dark tunnel of the COVID-19 pandemic, poised to travel faster 
than before. We are now just over two thirds of the way into Fiscal 
Year 2023, the first year since pre-pandemic 2019 in which our 
operations and demand for our services are finally returning to normal, 
albeit in some respects a new normal. Our ridership, revenues, service 
and workforce have recovered in ways that we could only have dreamed of 
during the darkest hours of the pandemic, when virtually overnight our 
ridership and revenue plunged by 97%.
    Amtrak has come a long way since then. We have restored service to 
all of our routes, are operating nearly all our pre-pandemic 
frequencies, have regained most of our ridership and revenues, have 
attracted many new customers, and have rebuilt our workforce. And for 
the first time in Amtrak's 52-year history, the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, has provided us with substantial, 
multi-year funding that will enable us to launch a new era for 
intercity passenger rail in the United States.
    I'd like to begin by talking about Amtrak's current performance 
during Fiscal Year 2023 to date. I will then describe how we are 
seizing the opportunities IIJA funding has provided, and finally turn 
to the challenges we face and the actions we are taking to address 
them.
                        The State of the Company
    I will start with safety, where I am pleased to report that the 
efforts of our teams across the company are producing extremely strong 
results. We have experienced zero NTSB accidents in Fiscal Year 2023. 
Through April, our rate of FRA reportable employee injuries per 200,000 
hours was at historically low levels and 24% ahead of our FY23 goal.
    I am also pleased to tell you that we have also restored nearly all 
of the service we suspended or reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. 
With the recent resumption of our New York City to Montreal Adirondack 
route and restoration of the second Amtrak Cascades round trip between 
Seattle and Vancouver, British Columbia, we are back to running our 
entire pre-pandemic network and have fully restored cross-border 
service to Canada. All of our long-distance routes have been operating 
at normal service frequency since October of last year and nearly all 
Northeast Regional service on the Northeast Corridor has been restored. 
The few remaining routes where service hasn't returned to full levels 
are our high-speed Acela service on the Northeast Corridor, which is 
still operating a reduced schedule due to equipment challenges, and 
several state-supported routes where we have not restored all pre-
pandemic frequencies, in most cases because of the wishes of our state 
partners.
    Our fiscal-year-to-date total ridership through April was 84% and 
our ticket revenues 95% of pre-pandemic levels. During April, ridership 
was 89% and ticket revenues 96% of April 2019. For the week of May 22, 
we achieved the same level of ridership we had in the same week in FY 
2019. On some routes we are carrying more passengers than before the 
pandemic. We expect to reach a ``normal'' level of ridership--the 32.3 
million passengers we carried in Fiscal Year 2019--next year.
    What is particularly encouraging is that we have achieved this 
level of ridership return even though:
      Ridership on several state-supported routes that carry 
large numbers of work commuters remains significantly below pre-
pandemic levels;
      Our Pacific Surfliner route from San Diego to Los Angeles 
and San Luis Obispo, our highest ridership route outside of the 
Northeast Corridor, pre-pandemic, has been severed twice in recent 
months for extended periods due to erosion impacting tracks along the 
Pacific Coast it follows; and
      Passenger capacity, as measured by available seat miles, 
on all three of our service lines is lower than it was pre-pandemic--
15% lower systemwide during April--due to fewer frequencies and a 
shortage of certain equipment types.

    We are also encouraged by the number of new passengers we are 
seeing. Currently, about 30% of our passengers are new to Amtrak, up 
from roughly 20% pre-pandemic, indicating that many new customers are 
interested in trying the train. Changes in the trip purpose of new 
Acela passengers bear this out. Pre-COVID, about half of them were 
traveling for business. Today, it's only 20%. This illustrates both the 
reduced demand for business travel, which is continuing to negatively 
impact average fare per passenger on Acela, but also a new market of 
leisure passengers willing to pay more for an upgraded experience. We 
are endeavoring to capitalize on that opportunity through new marketing 
and fare strategies, including our Amtrak BidUp program which invites 
passenger who have reserved a coach seat to submit bids to upgrade to a 
premium class of service.
    Our Adjusted Operating Loss in Fiscal Year 2023 through April was 
$433.7 million, $53.5 million better than our plan. When our ridership 
and revenues evaporated in March 2020 at the onset of the COVID-19 
pandemic, Amtrak was ahead of plan for achieving a major accomplishment 
we had sought for three decades and no other U.S. passenger railroad 
has accomplished in generations: break-even results, meaning that 
revenues were set to equal or exceed operating expenses. Achieving 
break-even results or better again for our passenger operations will 
take time, because by the time our ridership and revenues return to 
2019 levels we will have missed out on four years of typical revenue 
growth and incurred a dramatic increase in our cost-base because of the 
pandemic, due to inflation. Additionally, the finances of the company 
are dramatically different because of the large influx in capital 
funding we are receiving through the IIJA. The vital capital work that 
this funding makes possible also comes with new levels of operating 
expenses to support it and therefore, on a consolidated basis, will add 
to our losses on top of the normal costs of running today's network for 
a period of time as we deliver this work. If we exclude these new 
capital-related operating costs, we believe that we can achieve break-
even results for our train operations once again within about five 
years if Amtrak and the relevant FRA grant programs are funded at IIJA-
authorized levels so we can make investments that are necessary to 
improve efficiency, facilitate growth, and improve our financial 
performance.
    Let me be clear, however, that we do not intend to pursue financial 
results at the expense of meeting our other obligations under law. 
Amtrak did that once in the late 1990s in an effort to fulfill an 
unrealistic Congressional mandate, a course of action that contributed 
to the company's near bankruptcy in 2002. Among our most important 
statutory obligations are operating our current long-distance network, 
a responsibility Congress codified in the IIJA; working with states to 
expand Amtrak service on corridors throughout the United States, an 
obligation reinforced by the IIJA; and collaborating with our state and 
commuter partners to carry out the major capital projects included in 
the 15-year CONNECT NEC plan the IIJA requires the NEC Commission to 
develop and update.
    Financial performance is not Amtrak's sole objective. If it were, 
we would do what the Penn Central, the railroad that was the last 
private owner of the Northeast Corridor, did: declare bankruptcy; get 
rid of our obligations to maintain the infrastructure and operate 
passenger trains; and go into the real estate business with the 
property and assets we own along the corridor. Passenger rail is a 
service, not a profit center, as every other country in the world 
acknowledges. The IIJA made that clear by amending Amtrak's goals to 
clarify that Amtrak was to use the federal funding it receives to 
maximize public benefits rather than to minimize our need for federal 
funding at the expense of our mission and goals. The biggest challenge 
we faced when we came out of the pandemic was rebuilding our most 
important asset: our workforce. We did everything we could to keep 
employees on the payroll during the pandemic. We did not furlough a 
single Mechanical or Engineering employee; we offered incentives to 
employees already eligible to retire so that we could keep paying our 
lower seniority workers--our workforce of the future--and we recalled 
all furloughed employees, over 90% of whom returned, once we received 
the funding we needed to pay them. Nonetheless, by the time we were 
able to begin hiring and offering in-person training classes again, our 
headcount was well below the level required even for our pre-pandemic 
operations, to say nothing of what was needed to carry out projects 
funded by the IIJA.
    Rebuilding our workforce during a time of record low unemployment 
was a major challenge--but we have met it. We hired 4,000 new employees 
during Fiscal Year 2022 and have hired 2,700 more during the first 
seven months of Fiscal Year 2023. We will continue our accelerated 
hiring efforts until we have enough employees to ensure that we can 
operate all of our trains at required staffing levels, maintain and 
repair our equipment, perform work on major infrastructure projects and 
meet our obligations to partners. Of particular importance is having 
enough Amtrak employees to manage major capital projects so that we 
don't have to rely on high-priced consultants.
    We are also working to improve our customers' experience. We are 
adding additional agents to minimize wait times for passengers who call 
our contact center or communicate with us virtually. We are enhancing 
food service on a number of routes. Coach passengers on our western 
long-distance trains now have access to the dining car for meal 
service; traditional dining is being introduced on our Silver Star and 
Silver Meteor between New York City and Miami; and we have launched new 
menus for First Class customers on our Acela trains in collaboration 
with an award-winning restaurant group. The Food and Beverage Working 
Group created by the IIJA, whose membership included representatives of 
our employees, state partners, passenger rail users and Amtrak, 
recently issued its report. We are reviewing its recommendations and 
will report to you later this year on our response to them, as 
contemplated by the IIJA.
         Capitalizing on the Opportunities Provided by the IIJA
    The IIJA provides the funding Amtrak, its partners and stakeholders 
have long sought to make vital, once-in-a-generation investments in our 
infrastructure along the Northeast Corridor; in Chicago, the hub of our 
National Network; and on other Amtrak-owned infrastructure. I'm pleased 
to report that, in the eight months since I last appeared before this 
Subcommittee, Amtrak and its state and commuter railroad partners have 
been making significant progress in advancing many major infrastructure 
projects.
    Construction on the Hudson Tunnel Project, the most important 
component of the New York/New Jersey Gateway Program, is expected to 
begin next year following execution of a full funding grant agreement. 
We expect to begin construction this year on section 3 of the Hudson 
Yards Concrete Casing that will preserve the underground right-of-way 
for the tunnel, which was awarded a $292 million Mega grant in January. 
The Portal North Bridge over the Hackensack River is now 25% complete.
    We are also moving towards construction of two vital bridge 
projects, the replacement of the 117-year-old Susquehanna River Bridge 
in Maryland and the 116-year-old Connecticut River Bridge between Old 
Saybrook and Old Lyme, Connecticut. We recently initiated a procurement 
for a Construction Manager at Risk for the Susquehanna River Bridge and 
issued a Request for Qualifications for a Construction Contractor for 
the Connecticut River Bridge. We have submitted applications for 
Federal-State Partnership grants for both projects and expect to begin 
early work on the Susquehanna River Bridge Project and construction of 
the Connecticut River Bridge during 2024.
    The IIJA will also allow Amtrak to advance projects that will 
increase speeds and reduce trip times. Amtrak has submitted Federal-
State Partnership grant applications for a New Haven to Providence 
Capacity Planning Study and an Infrastructure Renewal and Speed 
Improvement Program (IRSIP) Planning Study for the portion of the 
Northeast Corridor between Northern New Jersey and Washington, D.C. 
These studies will develop and evaluate alternatives to grow rail 
capacity and improve performance on both segments of the Northeast 
Corridor, including the potential creation of new rail alignment 
segments on which trains could operate at higher speeds.
    The biggest improvements in trip time and operational efficiency 
often come from eliminating bottlenecks through which trains travel at 
very slow speeds and are frequently delayed due to deteriorated 
infrastructure condition and capacity limitations. Many of our major 
NEC projects will do that. For example, the new Frederick Douglass 
Tunnel in Baltimore, for which we began early construction activities 
in March, will have triple the capacity of the 150-year-old B&P Tunnel, 
the biggest bottleneck on the Northeast Corridor that it will replace. 
Trains traveling through the new tunnel will reach speeds of over 100 
miles per hour, more than three times faster than the 30 miles per hour 
at which they crawl through the B&P Tunnel today. This will reduce trip 
time between Washington to Baltimore to less than 30 minutes.
    Because of the IIJA, Amtrak is no longer just a passenger rail 
operator and infrastructure maintainer. We are also a major 
construction company executing one of the largest capital programs in 
the history of the United States. The investments we are making are 
every bit as ambitious as the Pennsylvania Railroad's construction 
during the first third of the 20th Century of the Northeast Corridor 
stations, tunnels, bridges and electrification system we continue to 
rely upon 100 years later.
    To ensure we deliver on the construction program IIJA funding has 
jumpstarted, we created a new Capital Delivery department in early 2022 
that is responsible for the planning, design and construction of 
Amtrak's critical infrastructure projects. That department has 
attracted leading experts in rail infrastructure and transportation 
project management from around the country who are excited to take part 
in the most important U.S. railroad infrastructure construction project 
in many generations. We're also hiring and training hundreds of 
additional union employees in the electric, signal, and track fields to 
work on capital projects.
    We are not constructing these projects by ourselves. Rather, we are 
working alongside our state and commuter rail partners and the railroad 
supply industry to deliver these projects while maintaining Amtrak, 
commuter and freight rail service on the Northeast Corridor, the 
busiest and most complex rail corridor in the United States. This 
requires close collaboration and planning, not only for projects Amtrak 
is leading but also those led by our partners.
    We are also moving forward with procurements for new equipment. The 
new trainsets we are acquiring for operation in Northeast Regional 
service along the Northeast Corridor and on many state-supported 
routes, which we recently announced will be called Airo, are under 
construction at the Siemens plant in Sacramento, California. The first 
carshell has recently been completed. Last December, Amtrak issued a 
Request for Information (RFI) to potential suppliers for the long 
needed reequipping of our long-distance fleet. That procurement, for 
which we expect to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) later this year 
and enter into a contract in 2024, represents the largest U.S. order 
for long-distance equipment since the New York Central Railroad's 
purchase of 721 passenger cars in the late 1940s.
    We are making investments in stations throughout our network. One 
of our most important station projects--the Washington Union Station 
Expansion Project--achieved an important milestone last month with 
FRA's issuance of a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement. 
We are continuing to progress our program to bring into compliance with 
the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, all stations for which we 
have ADA responsibility. We expect to spend over $1.3 billion in IIJA 
funding to complete that task. During the remainder of Fiscal Year 2023 
and in Fiscal Year 2024, we plan to complete ADA compliance work at 112 
stations, most located on long-distance and state-supported routes.
    We are also expanding our service with new state-supported trains. 
Last November, we reached a tentative agreement with our host railroads 
that will allow initiation of the two planned daily round trips between 
New Orleans and Mobile. We are currently working with our state 
partner, the Southern Rail Commission, and our host railroads on 
preparations for initiating service and to secure IIJA funding for 
capital investments. We have begun operating non-revenue trains over 
the route to qualify engineers and conductors on its physical 
characteristics.
    I am particularly excited by the new New Orleans-to-Mobile service 
because the only current Amtrak service in the Gulf Coast Region is 
provided by three long-distance trains, one of which operates only 
three days a week. We are also collaborating with our state partners to 
advance plans for other new Amtrak services in that region. Last year, 
I joined Louisiana's governor on an inspection train between New 
Orleans and Baton Rouge, a route on which we are working with the 
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development to develop 
service and have reached an agreement with the principal host railroad 
that will enable us to operate it.
    The IIJA also provides, for the first time in decades, 
opportunities to consider increases to long-distance service and the 
funding to potentially make them happen. We are participating in the 
Long Distance Study the IIJA directed FRA to undertake that is 
examining increases in long-distance service frequency and routes. We 
recently submitted a joint application with the Southern Rail 
Commission for a Federal-State Partnership grant to develop plans for a 
Meridian, Mississippi to Dallas/Fort Worth extension of the New York-
to-New Orleans Crescent. We have also applied for planning grants under 
FRA's Corridor ID program for increasing service frequency on our two 
tri-weekly routes, the Cardinal and Sunset Limited, to daily.
    We are seeking, in some cases jointly with state partners, seven 
Federal-State Partnership grants to improve our long-distance services. 
These grants would fund track improvements on the Empire Builder route 
in Montana and the Silver Meteor, Silver Star and Palmetto routes in 
South Carolina; a new signal system on the Southwest Chief's route in 
New Mexico; planning and engineering work for track upgrades to 
increase speeds and reduce trip time on the Cardinal route between 
Chicago and Indianapolis; and planning for station improvements in 
Florida and the return of Amtrak service to Phoenix.
                 Amtrak's Relevance Depends Upon Growth
    Amtrak's goal is to double ridership by 2040. It's an ambitious 
goal because it took us 35 years to double our ridership for the first 
time, and now we're proposing to do it again in barely half the time. 
It's also an essential goal if we are to become more relevant and more 
efficient.
    Growth is the key to making Amtrak more relevant. Amtrak is very 
relevant along the Northeast Corridor. We play an important role in 
meeting intercity transportation needs in a number of other regions and 
states, as well as many individual communities. But in most of the 
country we have barely begun to tap the potential of intercity 
passenger rail.
    Our route map looks little different than it did when we started 
service in 1971. Where Amtrak service has increased since then, that 
has been due to the willingness of individual states to provide funding 
for Amtrak, in most cases without the federal match they would have 
received had they chosen to invest in highway or transit projects. As a 
result, Amtrak has little service in the many of the states and regions 
that have grown fastest since 1971 and will continue to account for 
most U.S. population growth in the years to come.
    Many of the 46 states we serve have minimal Amtrak service. Half of 
them, including some of our largest states like Florida, Ohio and 
Arizona and entire regions such as the Mountain West and Gulf Coast, 
are served only by long distance trains that provide one round trip a 
day, and on two routes only three round trips a week. The only Amtrak 
service in many large cities, including Atlanta, Minneapolis/St. Paul, 
Denver and Houston, is a single Amtrak long-distance train, while 
others such as Nashville, Columbus, Phoenix and Las Vegas have no 
Amtrak service at all.
    Long-distance trains serve many passengers for whom flying or 
driving is not an option. They are incredibly important to many 
communities throughout the United States in which they provide a vital, 
and in many cases the only, intercity public transportation service. 
But long-distance trains' overnight schedules, designed to provide 
daytime arrivals and departures at endpoints and facilitate connections 
to other Amtrak trains, mean that they serve many intermediate points 
in the middle of the night. Their once-a-day at best service and often 
unreliable on-time performance doesn't meet the needs of most 
passengers, particularly those who are making short trips that account 
for the vast majority of intercity travel.
    Attracting more riders will require providing more service at times 
when people want to travel, both along the routes we serve today and 
along new routes in the regions and states where we presently have 
little or no service. Most of the new riders we need to attract are 
people who would otherwise drive, since driving accounts for the vast 
majority of intercity trips under 400 miles for which rail is most 
competitive with other modes.
    The ``Amtrak Connects US'' report we released in 2021 described our 
vision for expanding Amtrak service along unserved and underserved 
corridors throughout the United States. The FRA-led Corridor ID program 
created by the IIJA, in which Amtrak is actively participating, 
provides a much-needed process for guiding and shaping an expanded 
network to bring new and improved service, including high speed rail in 
appropriate markets, to places where there is unmet demand for 
intercity passenger rail. We are actively working with many state and 
local partners throughout the country to help make the vision of 
expanded and improved Amtrak service a reality.
    So far, we are seeing unprecedented interest in developing new 
Amtrak service in states that do not currently have Amtrak state-
supported services such as Colorado, Georgia, Idaho and Ohio, to name 
just a few. Later this year, we plan to initiate a daily round-trip 
between Chicago and St. Paul, Minnesota, to be called the Great River, 
thanks to funding support from a current state partner, Wisconsin, and 
a new state partner, Minnesota. Both houses of the Minnesota 
legislature recently approved $195 million in state funding for multi-
frequency Amtrak service between Minneapolis and Duluth for which they 
intend to seek IIJA grants.
                 Growth Will Make Amtrak More Efficient
    For Amtrak to become more efficient, we must grow ridership and 
increase service. It's a very simple equation: investments in intercity 
passenger rail that improve service and increase ridership make the 
service more efficient and enable it to produce more economic and 
public benefits for each dollar of public investment.
    Let me give you one example. Our state-supported Piedmont service 
along the Piedmont Corridor between Raleigh and Charlotte, North 
Carolina began in 1995 with one round trip a day. The trip took three 
hours and 45 minutes, and during the first full year of service the 
route carried only 29,000 passengers. Since then, the Piedmont Corridor 
and the Amtrak service operating over it have been transformed as a 
result of the investments North Carolina has made and the federal 
grants the Corridor has received.
      Piedmont ridership has increased tenfold to approximately 
300,000 passengers annually.
      Track and signal improvements have increased speeds and 
reduced trip times, while adding capacity and improving reliability for 
both Amtrak and freight operations.
      Piedmont service has been increased to three round trips, 
and a fourth round trip will be added in July. When that happens there 
will be departures throughout the day, with one train in each direction 
making the trip in less than three hours.
      Safety has been enhanced through the creation of a sealed 
corridor with state-of-the-art grade crossing warning devices.
      Historic stations have been restored, and a new station 
built in Raleigh that has sparked redevelopment in the surrounding 
neighborhood. A new station planned in Charlotte will bring trains into 
the city's downtown where connections with multiple local transit 
services are available.
      In addition to attracting more passengers, increased 
train frequency service and shorter trip times have made the service 
more efficient. Equipment utilization is 33% higher than at the 
service's start because some trainsets can now make more than one round 
trip a day. Adding trains also means that infrastructure and station 
investments benefit more trains carrying many more passengers.

    More improvements and more service are planned along the Piedmont 
Corridor and rail lines not presently served by Amtrak with which it 
connects.
      North Carolina is using a federal grant to acquire new 
equipment that will be more energy efficient, increase passenger 
capacity and provide an enhanced customer experience that will attract 
new riders.
      North Carolina is also planning new routes that would 
connect with the Piedmont Corridor, including Wilmington to Raleigh and 
Salisbury to Asheville, and has submitted applications for their 
inclusion in FRA's Corridor ID program.
      When the ``S Line''--the direct, rail line from Raleigh 
to Petersburg, Virginia on which trains will operate up to 110 miles 
per hour--is restored to service, the Piedmont Corridor and Virginia's 
Petersburg-Richmond-Washington corridor will become part of a 
continuous, fast, high-capacity passenger rail corridor from Charlotte 
to Boston.
           Capacity Is the Biggest Challenge to Amtrak Growth
    Growing Amtrak ridership will require more equipment that will 
allow us to carry more passengers. Equipment capacity is the biggest 
challenge we face, both in the near term and in the future as we 
approach 2040, the target year for our goal of doubling ridership.
    Most of our current passenger car fleet--the Amfleet I cars we 
operate on the Northeast Corridor and on many state-supported routes, 
and the Amfleet II and Superliner I cars we use on long-distance 
trains--was built between 1975 and 1983. Like old automobiles, 40- to 
50-year-old passenger railcars are more likely to experience mechanical 
problems as they age and require constant maintenance.
    Our ridership grew 45% from 2003 to 2019, during which time we 
added approximately ten million annual passengers. But our equipment 
fleet didn't grow to accommodate them. Due to inadequate funding, we 
acquired virtually no new equipment with passenger capacity during that 
16-year period. By 2020, we had a very old equipment fleet with 
inadequate capacity. And in March of that year, the pandemic hit and 
made things much worse.
    The urgent need to reduce expenses during the first year of the 
pandemic, when Amtrak was experiencing huge financial losses with no 
end in sight, had no idea when ridership and revenues would return, and 
did not know whether it would receive additional COVID relief funding, 
required us to reduce our headcount and the number of federally-
mandated overhauls performed at our maintenance facilities. After we 
received additional COVID funding, it took time to hire and train new 
employees.
    We have rebuilt our Mechanical workforce: we now have approximately 
250 more Mechanical employees than we did before the pandemic. We are 
taking steps to increase our capacity to perform equipment overhauls 
and have resumed making major repairs on damaged railcars. Nonetheless, 
we are still catching up on work we were unable to do during the 
pandemic. The resulting equipment shortage has meant we are operating 
some amount of reduced capacity on all three of our service lines.
    Our equipment shortage has been exacerbated by delays in delivery 
and acceptance of the new Venture cars our state partners in the 
Midwest and California are acquiring for their state-supported services 
and the 28 high-speed trainsets that will replace the original Acela 
trainsets. The Venture cars are currently entering service on 
Midwestern routes, which will free up enough Horizon cars to allow us 
to add two additional Amtrak Cascades frequencies between Seattle and 
Portland later this year. We now anticipate the new Acela trainsets 
will enter service in 2024, subject to the manufacturer's completion of 
modeling and testing required by FRA regulations to demonstrate the 
trainsets' ability to operate safely on the Northeast Corridor.
    Delivery and acceptance of all of the Venture cars and the new 
Acela trainsets will alleviate somewhat the equipment constraints on 
our Northeast Corridor and State-Supported Services. Restoring 
equipment capacity on our long-distance trains, particularly those 
equipped with bi-level Superliner cars that operate primarily on our 
western trains, will continue to be our biggest equipment challenge. 
Since 2020, approximately 30 Superliner cars have been taken out of 
service due to incidents in which they incurred significant damage, 
including a 2021 derailment in Montana and a 2022 grade crossing 
collision and derailment in Missouri in which 16 Superliner cars were 
severely damaged. As I will discuss next, there are no off-the-shelf 
replacements for this unique fleet of trains that Amtrak can access, so 
losses like these will impair our capacity until new equipment can be 
ordered and manufactured domestically.
    As I mentioned, construction of new Airo trainsets for our 
Northeast Regional and state-supported services is underway, and the 
funding provide by the IIJA has allowed us to finally initiate the 
procurement for new long-distance cars we began last year. 
Unfortunately, one difference between old automobiles and old passenger 
railcars is that you can't just go out and buy new passenger railcars 
for these types of service from the dealer's lot when they need to be 
replaced. The U.S. market for passenger rail vehicles is tiny compared 
to the international market, and the number of passenger railcar 
manufacturers with U.S. plants where equipment that complies with 
stringent Buy America and U.S. safety requirements can be built is 
limited. Designing, procuring and manufacturing passenger railcars, and 
testing them before they enter revenue service, takes many years.
    In the meantime, we are doing everything we can to maximize the 
number of passengers we carry and attract new riders despite the 
capacity constraints we face. We are increasing our capacity to perform 
Superliner overhauls and major repairs at our Beech Grove, Indiana 
shops by moving overhauls of other equipment previously performed there 
to other facilities. In order to fill more available seats on off-peak 
Northeast Corridor trains, we recently introduced ``Night Owl Fares'' 
of just $5 to $20 for trips within the Northeast Corridor on trains 
departing from a passenger's station after 7pm or during very early 
morning hours. We see this as a way not only to grow ridership but also 
to encourage cost-conscious travelers to try our service.
    The good news is that the new equipment we are acquiring will 
increase capacity and enhance our efficiency in many respects when it 
arrives. The new Acela trainsets will have about 25% more seats than 
the trainsets they replace. The Airo trainsets we are buying for 
Northeast Regional and state-supported services will be double-ended, 
allowing them to reverse direction on the station platform between 
trips rather than having to travel to a yard or a ``wye'' track so that 
the train can be turned to position the locomotive in front.
    Most of the Airo trainsets will also have dual-mode capability that 
will allow them to utilize electric power while operating over the 
Northeast Corridor from, for example, Boston to Washington, where they 
can seamlessly switch to diesel mode for the remainder of their journey 
to a final destination in Virginia. This will allow us to remove the 
extra time built into schedules for engine changes, reducing trip time; 
reduce congestion on the limited number of through tracks on the lower 
level of Washington Union Station; and eliminate delays that can occur 
when changing engines.
 Operating an Efficient Amtrak Service Depends Upon Our Host Railroads
    Another major challenge to improving the efficiency of Amtrak 
operations is the delays we encounter when railroads fail to give 
preference to Amtrak trains, as required by law. That problem has been 
compounded by the adoption by many railroads of an operating philosophy 
called, often euphemistically, ``Precision Scheduled Railroading'' that 
has led them to operate very long freight trains on routes that lack 
the capacity to accommodate them.
    Freight railroads have operated long trains, not uncommonly trains 
of approximately 8,000 feet, for some time. But what has changed in the 
last few years is that most railroads are now operating very long 
trains: trains that are over two and in some cases as much as three 
miles long. These trains are too long to fit in passing sidings on 
single track lines that allow trains traveling in opposite directions 
to pass each other or faster passenger trains to overtake slower 
freight trains. They often also too long to fit between grade 
crossings. When they stop to allow another train to pass, or because of 
congestion ahead or mechanical problems, they block every grade 
crossing for miles.
    Amtrak believes that one possible solution is to require freight 
railroads operating very long trains to develop long-train operating 
plans similar to the plans the FRA required railroads to develop during 
the successful nationwide implementation of Positive Train Control. In 
these plans, which would be developed with input from affected 
communities, Amtrak, and other stakeholders and submitted to FRA for 
approval, railroads would be required to demonstrate that there is 
adequate infrastructure on the rail lines over which very long trains 
operate to accommodate them, and that they have a plan for operating 
those trains without causing delays to Amtrak trains or requiring 
stopped freight trains to block grade crossings for extended periods.
    Last December, we filed a petition with the Surface Transportation 
Board, or STB, asking it to initiate an investigation into the 
substandard on-time performance (OTP) of Amtrak's New Orleans-to-Los 
Angeles Sunset Limited. During the 12-month period preceding the filing 
of Amtrak's petition, more than four out of every five Sunset Limited 
passengers arrived at their destination late, due primarily to freight 
train interference. On average, each Sunset Limited train experienced 
15 instances of freight train interference per trip on just the Union 
Pacific Railroad's portion of the Sunset Limited's route, resulting in 
more than four hours of delay per trip. We hope the STB will initiate 
an investigation soon as we continue to evaluate other routes that fail 
to meet FRA's OTP metrics and standards.
    For Amtrak to fulfill its statutory obligation to provide high 
quality, efficient service over the host railroad-owned and dispatched 
rail lines that account for 95% of our route network, freight railroads 
must fulfill their statutory obligation to give Amtrak trains priority 
over freight trains. When they do not, Amtrak must have available a 
remedy that provides prompt, effective relief to Amtrak and its 
passengers, such as the right to bring an action in federal district 
court to obtain an injunction against a host railroad's unlawful 
violations of the preference statute.
  Intercity Passenger Rail Needs Adequate, Assured, Multi-Year Funding
    We are very grateful for the $58 billion in advance appropriations 
for intercity passenger rail and the additional $8 billion for 
passenger and freight rail the IIJA provided to the FRA, Amtrak and 
others in our industry. But if the highway folks want to trade that $66 
billion for the money the Highway Trust Fund gets every year, including 
the $118 billion in the IIJA that brought the total the Highway Trust 
Fund has received in appropriations from general tax revenues since it 
became insolvent in 2008 to $275 billion, we'll take the deal in a 
heartbeat. It is only through sustained and adequate Federal funding 
that our nation--just like every other nation globally--is going to 
develop the passenger rail network we need to support the mobility 
needs of the future.
    Continuing to advance the new era of passenger rail the IIJA has 
jumpstarted depends upon two things. The first is adequate annual 
appropriations, preferably at the full levels authorized in the IIJA. 
The second is the establishment of a funding mechanism, like the 
funding sources enjoyed by other transportation modes, that provides 
adequate, assured, multi-year funding for intercity passenger rail. 
Both of those things are essential if Amtrak is to maintain, improve 
and expand service throughout the United States and provide the 
infrastructure and equipment capacity needed to achieve our goal of 
doubling ridership by 2040. I look forward to working with you to 
achieve those objectives, and I will be happy to answer any questions 
you have.

    Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Mr. Gardner.
    Mr. Warren, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

   TESTIMONY OF MITCH WARREN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST 
                      CORRIDOR COMMISSION

    Mr. Warren. Good morning, Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member 
Payne, Ranking Member Larsen. I am Mitch Warren, executive 
director of the Northeast Corridor Commission. The Commission 
was created by Congress to improve the corridor through better 
coordination among Amtrak, States, commuter rail operators, and 
the Federal Government.
    Thank you for inviting me to discuss our work and the 
renewal of America's oldest and busiest passenger rail system.
    The Northeast Corridor brings hundreds of thousands of 
intercity and commuter passengers to work, business meetings, 
family visits, and leisure activities every day. However, these 
riders rely on infrastructure with tens of billions of dollars 
in state-of-good-repair needs, including 15 major bridges and 
tunnels that are over 100 years old and in need of replacement.
    Given these historic challenges, I cannot overstate what an 
exciting time this is for the Northeast Corridor. After decades 
of underinvestment, the NEC finally has the downpayment it 
needs to rebuild infrastructure that dates back to the period 
between the Civil War and World War II.
    Thanks to the work of Congress and the Biden administration 
on the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the NEC has its 
first ever source of dedicated, multiyear funding, providing 
exactly the kind of predictability needed to efficiently 
deliver a major capital program.
    The Commission's decade-long efforts to build a foundation 
of trust, transparency, collaboration, and accountability have 
put our members in position to invest this historic funding.
    The Commission's 18 voting members represent USDOT, Amtrak, 
Northeast States, and the District of Columbia. The Commission 
was authorized in recognition of the complexities of a corridor 
that has multiple right-of-way owners and rail operators and 
which supports over 2,000 trains a day, including high-speed 
Acela trains, Northeast regional and long-distance trains, 
commuter trains, and freight trains.
    In 2021, the Commission approved CONNECT NEC 2035, a 
collaborative effort to define the corridor's state-of-good-
repair and improvement needs, and stage and sequence those 
infrastructure investments over 15 years. CONNECT NEC, which 
will be updated every 2 years, is the plan to rebuild and grow 
the corridor.
    Thanks to the funding provided through the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, these critical projects suddenly have a 
path forward, promising more reliable, more frequent, and 
faster service for the workers, travelers, and businesses that 
depend on the corridor.
    The Commission is now looking at the challenges our members 
face in delivering these critical projects. To this end, we are 
developing an Implementation Coordination Program that will 
bring the project delivery the same kind of transparency, 
collaboration, and accountability that the Commission has 
brought to cost-sharing and planning.
    This program will focus on improving the interagency 
coordination needed among our members as they partner to 
deliver projects. The ICP will track project progress and 
provide an early warning system when projects threaten to go 
off schedule due to coordination issues.
    The challenges in front of us are formidable, but success 
is critical to the region's vitality and growth. Essential to 
this success is what it took to build the Interstate Highway 
System and what the BIL delivered for passenger rail: a 
dedicated multiyear funding source providing the predictability 
needed to efficiently deliver a major capital program.
    In fact, even more funding is necessary over the longer 
term to address all of the corridor's state-of-good-repair and 
improvement needs. The Federal Railroad Administration's NEC 
project inventory includes projects that total over $100 
billion. Notwithstanding these significant future funding 
needs, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is a game changer for 
the corridor.
    After decades of falling further behind when it comes to 
replacing aging infrastructure, a brighter future lies ahead. 
We thank Congress and President Biden for this historic 
investment that will benefit travelers for generations to come. 
The Commission's members are eager to deliver these critical 
rail projects that will generate meaningful economic, 
transportation, and environmental benefits to the region and to 
the Nation.
    Thank you for inviting me to speak today on behalf of the 
Commission. I look forward to answering your questions.
    [Mr. Warren's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Mitch Warren, Executive Director, Northeast 
                          Corridor Commission
    Good morning, Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Payne, Chairman 
Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, and members of the Committee.
    I am Mitch Warren, Executive Director of the Northeast Corridor 
Commission. Congress created the Commission to bring together Amtrak, 
states, commuter rail operators, and the federal government. Kevin 
Corbett, President of New Jersey Transit, and Federal Rail 
Administrator Amit Bose are the Commission's Co-Chairs. My fellow 
witness, Stephen Gardner, serves as its Vice-Chair.
    Thank you for inviting me to discuss our work and the future of 
America's busiest passenger rail system.
    The Northeast Corridor brings hundreds of thousands of intercity 
and commuter passengers to work, business meetings, family visits, and 
leisure activities every day. However, these riders rely on 
infrastructure with tens of billions of dollars in state-of-good-repair 
needs, including 15 major bridges and tunnels that are over 100 years 
old, beyond their useful life, and in need of replacement or major 
rehabilitation.
    Given these historic challenges, I cannot overstate what an 
exciting time it is for the Northeast Corridor. After decades of false 
starts, the NEC finally has the downpayment it needs to rebuild 
infrastructure that dates back to the period between the Civil War and 
World War II.
    Thanks to the work of Congress and the Biden Administration on the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the NEC has its first-ever 
source of dedicated, multi-year funding, providing exactly the kind of 
predictability needed to efficiently deliver a major capital program.
    Part of what makes the NEC ready to invest this historic funding is 
the work the Commission has done over the last decade to lay a 
foundation of trust, transparency, collaboration, and accountability 
among its members.
    The Commission held its first meeting in 2010 and has eighteen 
voting members: five representing USDOT, four from Amtrak, and nine 
from Northeast Corridor states and the District of Columbia. The 
Commission was authorized in recognition of the complexities of a 
corridor that has four different right-of-way owners, passes through 
eight states and the District of Columbia, has nine passenger rail 
operators, and supports over 2,000 trains a day including high-speed 
Acela trains, Northeast Regional and long-distance trains, commuter 
trains, and freight trains.
    Our small staff pulls together these various stakeholders to help 
them row in the same direction and achieve outcomes greater than the 
sum of their parts.
    Our first statutory mandate was to create a formula to allocate 
shared costs on the corridor. After four years of negotiations, the 
Commission approved the first Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity 
Rail Cost Allocation Policy in 2015. This Policy now allocates over 
$1.3 billion per year in shared operating and normalized replacement 
capital costs. In addition, the Commission has a project-based cost 
allocation policy that provides guidance for allocating costs 
associated with individual projects.
    The Policy also includes provisions to ensure more collaboration 
and accountability among Commission members on the planning and 
delivery of capital programs.
    In 2019, the Commission initiated CONNECT NEC 2035, an intensely 
collaborative effort to define members' state-of-good-repair and 
improvement needs, and stage and sequence those infrastructure 
investments over 15 years. CONNECT NEC is the plan to rebuild and grow 
the NEC for the future. The Commission unanimously approved this $117 
billion plan in June 2021.
    Thanks to the funding provided to the Federal-State Partnership for 
Intercity Passenger Rail program, Amtrak's NEC Account, and numerous 
other grant programs through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, these 
critical projects suddenly have a path forward, giving the workers, 
travelers, and businesses that depend on the corridor hope for a future 
that promises more reliable, more frequent, and faster service.
    While continuing its work on cost sharing and collaborative 
planning, the Commission is now also turning its attention to the 
challenges our members face in delivering these critical projects.
    To this end, we are developing an Implementation Coordination 
Program that will bring to project delivery the same kind of 
transparency, collaboration, and accountability that the Commission 
brings to cost sharing and planning.
    This program will focus on improving the interagency coordination 
needed between our members as they partner on projects, a frequent 
occurrence on a corridor as complex as the NEC. We will track project 
progress and provide an early warning system when projects threaten to 
go off-schedule due to coordination issues such as delayed design 
reviews, stalled project agreements, and differences over resource 
allocation.
    The challenges in front of us are formidable, but success is 
essential. In addition to the need for effective coordination between 
the corridor's owners, operators, project sponsors, and funders, our 
members face workforce constraints, material and equipment needs, 
rising costs, and organizational changes.
    An essential prerequisite to solving these challenges is what it 
took to build the Interstate Highway System and what IIJA delivered for 
passenger rail: a dedicated, multi-year funding source providing the 
predictability needed to efficiently deliver a major capital program.
    The reality is that even more funding is required over the longer-
term to address all of the corridor's state-of-good-repair and 
improvement needs. The total cost of projects included in the Federal 
Railroad Administration's NEC Project Inventory exceeds $100 billion, 
with $40 billion of that for major backlog projects alone.
    Despite these significant future funding needs, the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law is a game-changer for the corridor.
    After decades of falling further behind when it comes to replacing 
aging infrastructure, a better future lies ahead. We thank Congress and 
President Biden for this historic investment that will benefit riders 
for generations to come. The Commission's members are eager to get to 
work to deliver these critical rail projects that will generate 
significant economic, transportation, and environmental benefits to the 
region and to the nation.
    Thank you for inviting me to speak today on behalf of the 
Commission. I look forward to answering your questions.

    Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Mr. Warren.
    I now ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the 
following letters: from the Association of American Railroads 
and the Coalition for the Northeast Corridor, as well as a 
letter from the Rail Passengers Association CEO.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
  Statement of Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Association of American Railroads, Submitted for the Record by Hon. 
                             Troy E. Nehls
                              Introduction
    On behalf of the members of the Association of American Railroads 
(AAR), thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony.
    AAR's freight railroad members include the six U.S. Class I 
railroads and approximately 200 U.S. short line and regional railroads 
that together form the best freight rail system in the world. America's 
privately-owned freight railroads operate almost exclusively on 
infrastructure they own, build, maintain, and pay for themselves. Over 
the last 15 years, freight railroads have invested, on average, $23.9 
billion of their own capital into improving and maintaining their 
networks every year. To put this in perspective, that is $1 billion 
more than the historic investments Congress made this year in rail and 
multimodal programs in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
(IIJA). America relies on best-in-the-world freight railroads to 
prosper in the intensely competitive global marketplace.
    Amtrak is also a member of AAR, as are several commuter railroads 
that account for more than 70 percent of U.S. commuter rail trips. Like 
freight railroads, passenger railroads play a key role in alleviating 
highway and airport congestion, decreasing dependence on foreign oil, 
reducing pollution, and enhancing mobility.
    America can, and should, have a safe, efficient passenger rail 
network and a safe, productive freight rail system. Mutual success for 
passenger and freight railroads requires cooperation between 
stakeholders and a recognition of the challenges that railroads face. 
Policymakers should continue to recognize the country's need to move 
both people and goods safely and efficiently.
     Freight and Passenger Rail Partnerships: Decades in the Making
    Well into the 20th century, railroads were the primary means to 
transport people and freight throughout the United States. However, by 
the late 1950s, the dramatic expansion of America's highway system and 
the development of commercial aviation meant private railroads were 
losing $750 million per year (about $5.8 billion in today's dollars) on 
passenger service.\1\ At the time, a noted transportation scholar 
wrote,``[I]t is no exaggeration to say that by 1958 railroad passenger 
service had demonstrated itself to be the most uneconomic activity ever 
carried on by private firms for a prolonged period.'' \2\ These massive 
losses continued for many years largely because government regulators 
made it extremely difficult for railroads to discontinue unprofitable 
passenger rail service. The losses drained a rail system that was also 
facing unrelenting pressure on its freight side from subsidized trucks 
and barges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Interstate Commerce Commission, ``Railroad Passenger Train 
Deficit, Report Proposed by Howard Hosmer, Hearing Examiner, Assisted 
by Robert A. Berrien, Fred A. Christoph, and Raymond C. Smith, attorney 
advisers,'' Docket No. 31954, 1958.
    \2\ George W. Hilton, The Transportation Act of 1958, Indiana 
University Press, 1969, p. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1970, Congress passed, and President Richard Nixon signed into 
law, the Rail Passenger Service Act (RPSA), which created Amtrak. RPSA 
aimed to preserve a basic level of intercity passenger rail service 
while relieving private railroads of the obligation to provide money-
losing passenger service that threatened the viability of freight 
railroading.
    Given the huge financial drain of passenger rail, railroads 
generally welcomed the opportunity to exit the business while providing 
the backbone of the newly-formed Amtrak system. Freight railroads 
initially helped capitalize Amtrak by providing cash, equipment, and 
services; these payments to Amtrak totaled around $1.2 billion in 
today's dollars. Freight railroads were also required to provide 
``preference'' to Amtrak service on their lines, a right that exists to 
this day but in a fundamentally different freight and passenger rail 
landscape, as discussed below.
    In turn, Amtrak was required to pay only incremental costs when 
operating on a host railroad's tracks, with no requirement to support 
capital investment for improving and expanding infrastructure 
capacity.\3\ To this day, Amtrak's low track usage fees are a major 
indirect subsidy provided by freight railroads rather than by taxpayers 
or Amtrak riders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Provisions in agreements between Amtrak and freight railroads 
(discussed below) pertaining to financial incentives related to 
performance can also count as being compensatory to the host freight 
railroad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Today, freight railroads still provide the foundation for most 
passenger rail. Amtrak owns 623 route-miles (primarily in the 
Northeast) and operates, maintains, and dispatches another 229 route-
miles in Michigan and New York. The vast majority of the remaining 96% 
of Amtrak's more than 21,400-mile system consists of tracks owned and 
maintained by freight railroads. More than 70% of the miles traveled by 
Amtrak trains are on tracks owned by other railroads.



    Approximately half of the nation's commuter rail systems also 
operate at least partially on tracks owned by freight railroads, and 
most of the higher speed and intercity passenger rail projects under 
consideration nationwide rely on freight railroad-owned facilities.
    Principles to Guide Passenger Rail Operations on Freight-Owned 
                               Corridors
    While each project involving passenger and freight railroads should 
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, certain overarching principles 
must be followed to ensure both the long-term success of passenger rail 
and a healthy freight rail system that shippers all over the country 
can rely on every day.
    First and foremost, safety is the industry's number one priority. 
Railroads are an extremely safe way to move people and freight, and 
freight railroads today utilize advanced technologies to maintain the 
safest railroad network. Railroads are proud of their safety record. 
The train accident rate in 2022 was down 26 percent from 2000, and the 
employee injury was down 48 percent. Passenger rail projects must be 
designed and executed around this first priority.
    Second, current and future capacity needs of both freight and 
passenger railroads must be properly protected. Today, freight 
railroads carry far more freight on far fewer miles of track than they 
did when Amtrak was created. This volume growth is the result of 
significant investment--on average more than $23 billion per year over 
the last 15 years--the freight railroads have poured back into their 
networks. Rail capacity is not unlimited, and in some places, it is 
tightly constrained. Plans to expand passenger railroad use of freight 
rail corridors must be balanced with the needs of freight railroads to 
provide safe, reliable, and cost-effective freight service to present 
and future customers.
    To ensure this balance, host freight railroads must be part of the 
planning process for new or expanded passenger services from the very 
beginning. This principle is especially important when considering 
programs to identify and plan new intercity passenger rail corridors, 
like the Corridor Identification and Development Program (CIDP) created 
by the IIJA. Congress recognized the importance of including freight 
railroads in the process and stipulated that consultation with host 
railroads be considered when awarding grants under CIDP. In subsequent 
notifications about the program, however, the Federal Railroad 
Administration (FRA) did not include consultation with host railroads 
in its initial plans. Thankfully, through productive conversations with 
the FRA, going forward freight railroads expect to be more involved in 
the planning and development of these new corridors, ensuring that the 
program works for freight and passenger railroads and the communities 
they serve.
    Third, proper funding is necessary, especially as Amtrak looks to 
improve or expand service offerings. The process of expanding existing 
passenger service, or improving existing passenger service reliability, 
is complex and requires detailed planning and significant additional 
infrastructure capacity investment. Freight railroads should not be 
expected to bear the costs of infrastructure necessary for additional 
passenger trains. Nor is it reasonable to expect Amtrak to plan, build, 
and maintain a network that provides optimal transportation mobility 
and connectivity when it faces excessive uncertainty regarding its 
funding from one year to the next. The IIJA includes $66 billion in 
rail funding, the vast majority of which is for passenger rail and 
Amtrak. This funding will go a long way to ensuring Amtrak can operate 
safely and effectively. It is crucial that this funding be spent where 
it has the largest positive impact, and freight railroads are committed 
to working with Amtrak, state agencies, government officials, and 
others to meet that goal.
    Fourth, all parties must recognize that the preference given to 
Amtrak's trains over freight trains does not mean delays to Amtrak 
trains will never happen. Just as traveling in the HOV highway lane 
does not guarantee you won't experience traffic, delays due to weather, 
unexpectedly high freight volumes, or other issues throughout the 
network may result in delays.
    This is not an exhaustive list of principles that should be applied 
to consideration of passenger rail projects; for example, liability and 
tax issues will also come into play. However, as policymakers and 
stakeholders consider the expansion and improvement of passenger rail 
service on freight rail-owned infrastructure, it is important to keep 
these priorities and issues in mind.
                   On-Time Performance (OTP) Metrics
    Since its creation, Amtrak and freight railroads have worked 
together to establish and implement the rules and procedures governing 
how passenger and freight railroads interact. Most of these rules and 
procedures are spelled out in formal bilateral operating agreements 
negotiated between Amtrak and its host railroads. These agreements 
often provide incentives and penalties for freight railroads to ensure 
that Amtrak trains meet specified on-time targets. Some of these basic 
operating agreements were entered into more than two decades ago, 
making them outdated and, in some cases, no longer appropriate.
    More specifically, some Amtrak long distance train schedules have 
not been properly adjusted in response to the tremendous growth in the 
U.S. economy and related freight volumes or other changes in the 
operating environment. Outdated schedules that do not reflect or 
respond to changing conditions (e.g., seasonality, necessary track 
work, and ridership patterns or needs) can result in misleading 
performance measurements or unrealistic expectations for on-time 
performance.
    AAR has long been a participant in the FRA's efforts to develop 
appropriate metrics and standards for measuring Amtrak's performance. 
This cooperative process was specifically envisioned in FRA's November 
2020 final rule on metrics and minimum standards for measuring the 
performance and service quality of intercity passenger train 
operations. The rule established a customer OTP metric and customer OTP 
standard, which are measured against published train schedules. The 
rule also recognized that Amtrak's current schedules are not aligned 
with the new metric or standard. FRA stated that, historically, 
Amtrak's published train schedules have not been designed with a 
customer OTP metric in mind, and that alignment may require additional 
time as schedules will need to be adjusted. While many schedules have 
been aligned with the new customer OTP metric, for those that are not, 
it is crucial that Amtrak, host railroads, and other key stakeholders 
work in good faith to design schedules that are realistic and 
achievable and resolve differences to meet the shared goal of timely 
service based on achievable schedules.
    Keeping Amtrak, commuter, and freight trains running on time is 
tremendously complex. When Amtrak was created, freight railroads had 
significant excess capacity. Since then, the excess capacity has 
disappeared, and the freight rail industry has invested over $780 
billion of its own money to maintain and add new capacity in response 
to that growth. While capital investments may be necessary to add 
passenger capacity, improving on-time performance also will require 
modifying Amtrak's schedules. Freight railroads and Amtrak, working 
together, are in the best position to determine how these operating 
agreements should be structured and evolve over time.
    The day-to-day reality of safely operating and maintaining freight 
railroads' nearly 140,000-mile network can also impact OTP. For 
example, freight railroads temporarily reduce operating speeds on a 
stretch of track when conditions call for it. These ``slow orders'' are 
absolutely necessary for safety and can delay trains of all types, 
including Amtrak trains. Similarly, necessary track and signal 
maintenance may result in unavoidable, short-term delays for freight 
and passenger trains but improves service reliability and enhances 
safety in the long term. The application of OTP standards should not 
make it more difficult or expensive for freight railroads to perform 
necessary maintenance or take appropriate steps to ensure the safety of 
crews and communities where they operate.
    A one-size-fits-all solution will not work on a network as complex 
and as crucial as our nation's rail system. Host railroads and Amtrak 
must undertake periodic reviews of reasonable and realistic schedules 
and of meaningful OTP metrics while complying with private, bilateral 
contracts that consider the unique circumstances of particular routes.
                               Conclusion
    Having safe, effective passenger railroads alongside safe, 
productive freight railroads remains our shared goal, and we look 
forward to working with policymakers and other stakeholders to achieve 
it. I am confident that, together, freight railroads and Amtrak can 
find common ground that benefits all parties.

                                 
    Letter of May 30, 2023, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, U.S. 
  Department of Transportation, from the Coalition for the Northeast 
        Corridor, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
                                                      May 30, 2023.
The Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
Secretary,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 
        Washington, DC 20590.
    Dear Secretary Buttigieg,
    We are writing on behalf of the Coalition for the Northeast 
Corridor (CNEC), a group of organizations dedicated to promoting and 
improving rail infrastructure along the Northeast Corridor. We want to 
express our support of your efforts to improve the nineteenth-century 
infrastructure on the Northeast Corridor. We believe the bi-partisan 
efforts to increase funding through the Federal-State Partnership for 
Intercity Passenger Rail grant program is sound policy, as it 
appropriately directs funds to the region of the country most in need 
and would ultimately yield the greatest cost-benefit following 
investment.
    While it is true that the heavily trafficked Northeast Corridor has 
historically received a larger share of federal funding for passenger 
rail service than other regions, this is due to the unique challenges 
and demands of the corridor. We believe the grant program's stated 
purpose and goal, to provide funding to states for the development and 
improvement of intercity passenger rail service across the country, 
should not only focus on location but where there is the greatest need.
    The Northeast Corridor region is home to more than 51 million 
people (almost one in six Americans) and four of the ten largest 
metropolitan areas in the United States. It spans from D.C. to Boston 
and includes Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York, among other largely 
populated areas, defined by the 2021 Census as a ``Megalopolis''. The 
Northeast Corridor is the busiest and most heavily traveled rail route 
in the country, responsible for moving a workforce that contributes 
more than $50 billion annually to the national economy, and where its 
residents use public transportation more often than the rest of the 
U.S.
    It is important to note that this highly utilized rail corridor, 
responsible for an average of 800,000 daily trips pre-pandemic, is also 
home to some of the oldest and most-used rail infrastructure in the 
country, which requires significant investment to both maintain and 
modernize for safety purposes. According to the Northeast Corridor 
Commission, the loss of the NEC for a single day could cost the country 
$100 million in added congestion, productivity losses, and other 
transportation impacts. It is crucial that we maintain levels of 
investment in the Northeast rail corridor in order to prevent a 
catastrophic economic collapse that would impact not only the 
communities spanning from D.C. to Boston but the entire U.S. economy. 
The critical needs and demands of the Corridor are why the Fed-State 
program was split and why a separate account was created for the 
Northeast Corridor in the first place.
    In conclusion, we urge you to continue to prioritize the 
development and improvement of passenger rail service across the 
country, including the Northeast Corridor, to support economic growth 
and reduce congestion for all Americans.
    Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
            Sincerely,
                  The Coalition for the Northeast Corridor.

                                 
 Statement of Jim Mathews, President and Chief Executive Officer, Rail 
 Passengers Association, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
                              Introduction
    We are pleased to submit this statement on behalf of the Rail 
Passengers Association, a nonprofit organization established in 1967 to 
preserve, improve, and expand intercity and regional passenger train 
services, support higher speed rail initiatives, increase connectivity 
among all forms of transportation and advocate for the safety of train 
passengers. On behalf of our tens of thousands of members from all 
across the United States, we would like to thank Chairman Nehls, 
Ranking Member Payne, and the entire Subcommittee on Railroads, 
Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials for holding this hearing at such a 
crucial time, and for allowing us the opportunity to share the views of 
America's passengers.
    In many ways, the state of the American passenger is the same as it 
was the last time I was asked to appear before this panel in 2019. 
Fare-paying taxpayers face unprecedented challenges at the level of our 
National Network of trains, but also see the promising early stages of 
a passenger rail renaissance--the first since the ascendancy of the 
federal highway program more than a half-century ago.
    Rail Passengers Association strongly supports Amtrak's FY22-23 
applications to the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger 
Rail and Corridor Identification Programs. Amtrak's applications 
include 16 proposed National Network projects worth $716 million and 14 
proposed Northeast Corridor projects worth $7.3 billion. These projects 
are vital and long-overdue investments in a connected America that 
would produce immediate and noticeable benefits for passengers across 
the U.S.
                        ``National or Nothing''
    When facing down cuts to Amtrak's National Network, former Senator 
Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas famously rallied her Republican 
colleagues with the motto ``National or Nothing''. Thanks to strong 
Congressional leadership and the long-term policy and financial 
commitment expressed in the Investment in Infrastructure and Jobs Act 
(IIJA), leaders from both sides of the aisle have outlined a vision for 
growing our passenger rail network and ensuring this growth does not 
require one American getting better service at the expense of another 
American's train.
    Congress has finally provided enough funds to do more than simply 
study improvements. They wisely structured those rail investments to 
ensure that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the states 
are able to partner with Amtrak to meet locally identified needs. We 
believe this will also ensure that Amtrak is focused on improving 
efficiency and service in ways that states and localities believe is 
best.
    The need for more robust rail infrastructure is real. We have seen 
an unprecedented response from local governments to the FRA's request 
for submissions to the Corridor Identification Program--from coast to 
coast, from America's Heartland, from Red States and Blue States. We 
are particularly heartened by the response from the Southeastern U.S. 
and Sunbelt, which has seen a disproportionate level of population 
growth over the past 50 years. Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia, Florida, North 
Carolina, and the Commonwealth of Virginia have all been active 
participants in the IIJA's passenger rail programs, to name just a few. 
Passenger trains have an important role to play in helping these 
metropolitan regions accommodate economic and population growth, while 
simultaneously ensuring that rural Americans continue to have access to 
essential services.
    Amtrak was conceived as a service to the nation, not just a train 
in one part of the country. This is why Amtrak's National Network, with 
its 15 long-distance routes connecting a series of state-supported 
services, is such an essential transportation service to the 40 percent 
of the nation's small and rural communities that it serves, 
establishing a vital link between Small Town and Big City America.
                     Essential Economic Connection
    Over 62 million Americans live in what many derogatorily refer to 
as ``flyover country,'' a quarter of whom are veterans, while another 
quarter are senior citizens over the age 65. With few alternatives, 
driving plays an outsized role, and it does so at a cost: despite 
making up only 19% of the population, accidents on rural road networks 
account for 49% of the total number of traffic fatalities nationwide.
    Intercity rail plays an important role in these rural communities; 
almost one-fifth of Amtrak's passengers travel to or from a rural 
station with no access to air service, and private-sector airlines are 
abandoning huge parts of the U.S. that include those communities, 
making these citizens even more reliant on the service that Amtrak 
provides.
    That reliance makes Amtrak essential, not optional. Passenger rail 
service is an economic engine in the communities it serves, returning 
many multiples of what is spent on it back to the cities, counties, and 
states where the trains run. This ``return on taxpayer's equity'' 
represents the true value of our national investment in Amtrak, and 
that steady stream of returns is tangible to rural communities who rely 
on not just the train but on the wealth it creates.
    Just one example of a relatively simple improvement in the pipeline 
made possible by the IIJA's vision and commitment: increasing service 
from the current three times weekly to a daily train on the route of 
the Sunset Limited and Texas Eagle between California and Illinois. 
This simple step is among several Amtrak is proposing in the first 
round of IIJA-enabled service improvements, and our economic-benefits 
modeling suggests just including those additional trains could generate 
as much as $2.4 billion over 10 years in visitor spending in hotels, 
restaurants, and retail, avoided road maintenance, and supported jobs--
$144 million each year in Texas alone, and some $239 million each year 
to the eight states served. That's at least four times as much as we 
would spend each year to operate it.

     Fig. 1: Annual Economic Benefits of Daily Sunset/Eagle Service


            \*\ includes Labor Income and Value Added values

  Source: Rail Passengers Railway Benefits Calculator, IMPLAN Economic 
                             Modeling Tool

   Fig. 2: Annual Tax Revenues Created By Daily Sunset/Eagle Service


  Source: Rail Passengers Railway Benefits Calculator, IMPLAN Economic 
                             Modeling Tool

                  The Need for a Growing Rail Network
    For the past two decades, the U.S. rail network has been doing more 
with less. In 2019, the year before the pandemic hit, Amtrak carried 
32.5 million passenger trips nationwide, a record ridership year for 
the railroad. Amtrak was able to do this with minimal public investment 
and in an operating environment that featured a steadily shrinking 
freight railroad network combined with longer freight trains.
    Railroads are the safest, most energy efficient surface 
transportation mode. U.S. freight railroads can move one ton of freight 
nearly 500 miles per gallon of fuel. When looking at freight accidents 
per 10 billion ton-miles, fatal accidents involving freight rail take 
place at less than one third the rate of truck accidents. Moving more 
freight to rail will reduce shipping costs for consumers and help 
reduce the more than 42,700 deaths that occur on U.S. highways each 
year.
    Rail Passengers Association believes that IIJA investment provides 
a solution to improve both the passenger and freight rail network in 
the U.S. By leveraging public dollars to upgrade freight-owned rail 
corridors, we can create a more productive transportation network for 
passengers and shippers.
    Thank you again for your work on this important issue. We stand 
ready to work with Congress to advance these exciting programs.

    Mr. Nehls. I would like to thank you all, thank you both 
for your testimony. We will now turn to questions from the 
panel, and I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate you, Mr. Gardner. It is good to see you. I see 
you got the chief behind you there. Thank you for coming.
    I want to bring to your attention--I am sure you are 
familiar with the Office of the Inspector General--this report 
that talked a little bit about ``Safety and Security: Amtrak 
Has Opportunities To Strengthen Controls Over High-Security 
Keys.''
    Are both you gentlemen familiar with this report?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Warren, familiar with the report?
    Mr. Warren. I have not had a chance to read it yet.
    Mr. Nehls. OK. Mr. Gardner is familiar with the report.
    I am trying to read this, and there are so many redactions. 
I am trying to put this puzzle together, but they obviously 
redacted so much here. Obviously, some type of a safety or 
security concern.
    Can you assure the members of this committee that Amtrak is 
doing everything it possibly can with the employees that are 
authorized to have a key or employees that are no longer 
working, either resigned or terminated, that they don't keep 
their keys, to some of these high-risk security areas? What are 
you doing to make sure that we can protect Amtrak?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, absolutely. We, 
as a result of the good work of the inspector general, we are 
revamping our key control process. I can tell you, for a long 
time, these kind of switch keys have been around in sort of 
collectors' hands, and when I was on the freight railroad side 
as a switchman, had access to many of them. Those days are over 
now. We are controlling these tightly, and we appreciate the 
OIG's work there.
    Mr. Nehls. Well, I think it is--obviously it is very 
damaging, in my humble opinion. I think the gentleman sitting 
behind you, between you two, maybe he will be able to help you 
with that, trying to get some of these keys back from 
individuals that no longer should have them.
    And I believe there was a report out there that some 
knucklehead or former employee was selling these things, 
putting them on the internet. It could become a big, big 
problem for all of us.
    Mr. Gardner, how much money will Amtrak receive through 
IIJA over the next 5 years? How much money?
    Mr. Gardner. Mr. Chairman, it is--$22 billion is the 
advance appropriation funding to Amtrak directly. The other 
portions go to the Department of Transportation.
    Mr. Nehls. $22 billion. That is a lot of money.
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. All right. I want to spend just a moment here 
and talk a little bit about CRISI and CRISI grants. With the 
enormous amount of money that Amtrak is getting from the 
American taxpayers, I am recommending suggesting that Amtrak 
should not be allowed any more CRISI grant funding over the 
next 5 years while you are receiving tens of billions of 
dollars over the next 5 years.
    I mean, when you look at the CRISI grants, I think in 2022 
it was about $1.4 billion. For those of you that don't know 
what CRISI stands for, it is Consolidated Rail Infrastructure 
and Safety Improvements Program.
    And by hearing the testimony from the minority and hearing 
testimony, you are getting billions and billions of dollars to 
help with your infrastructure, your improvements. And CRISI 
grant funding, in my humble opinion, should be set aside for 
the Class II's and the Class III's.
    So, I am just letting you know that it would be my intent, 
while you are receiving billions and billions of taxpayer 
dollars over the next 5 years, that Amtrak should not be 
allowed to participate in the CRISI grant program.
    You stated that security in 2023--and I appreciate the fact 
84 percent ridership. I think you are going to get to 89. And, 
eventually, maybe by the end of the year, you will get to the 
2019 levels, which would be 30-something million passengers.
    Mr. Gardner. Next year, we will achieve 32 million riders.
    Mr. Nehls. Fantastic. I think that is great. And I think, 
while you did state that safety is your number one priority, I 
can certainly appreciate that.
    Mr. Warren, I have had the chief in my office before. We 
were talking a little bit about safety on traveling on a train. 
I mean, I was an old law man for several years. Understand a 
little bit about safety and security.
    And I was always puzzled by the fact that I can jump on 
that train outside of Washington, DC, here. I can go up and buy 
a ticket. I don't have to provide any ID. I can pay for cash. 
You can take that ticket, give it to the guy, and he could give 
it to someone else.
    There is no matching bags or anything. You can just carry a 
couple suitcases on a train, right? You don't have any 
detectors or anything to go through to get on that train.
    How is Amtrak--what are you doing to make sure that you 
don't get some individual that has bad intentions, someone 
carrying a firearm from getting on a train, when you--I mean, I 
can't get on an airplane with a bottle of water. I can't get on 
an airplane even having a glass of water.
    But it appears to me that to get on an Amtrak train, you 
don't have to have any ID. Your bags don't have to match the 
manifest. They are not inspected. You've got puppies out there 
sniffing. I support all that, but what are you doing in the 
rural areas to make sure that you can keep those passengers as 
safe as possible?
    Mr. Warren. Certainly for each of our individual railroads, 
safety and security are the foundation of everything. You can't 
have riders if you are not promising and guaranteeing their 
safety and security.
    As a Commission, we have focused on the infrastructure, so, 
it is an issue more for our individual members than we have 
addressed as a Commission. When we were created, there was 
actually a separate safety committee that was created separate 
from us that was to look at those issues, and we were to focus 
on the infrastructure, cost-sharing, and coordinated planning.
    So, those are critical issues for our members and our 
riders, but as a Commission itself, it is not something that we 
have addressed directly.
    Mr. Nehls. Well, I just--I find it kind of disturbing in 
many ways that this is public transportation, billions of 
dollars going to it. Obviously we had tragedies on 9/11 with an 
aircraft, right? And look at what we did. We created a whole 
new organization and put billions of dollars into it, still 
today, to make sure that the people traveling on airplanes 
across the country are safe.
    And then you look at Amtrak's operations. And I know the 
chief behind you, he is eyeballing me right now. He is 
thinking, I am doing everything I can. But you have billions of 
dollars now. I think you need to try to, not convince me, but 
show me that safety--safety, Mr. Gardner--is an actual 
priority, that you are doing everything you possibly can.
    I am going to finish it up with this, and that is, I read 
some stuff here about the board meetings. You have these board 
meetings. I don't think those board meetings are open to the 
public. I don't think they are part of the public record. I 
think transparency is so important, and bonuses.
    Mr. Gardner, would you care to share with me what your 
salary is every year? What is your salary, your annual salary?
    Mr. Gardner. The annual salary is a matter of record. We 
have disclosed it. Currently, for my position, it is a little 
bit less than $500,000 a year.
    Mr. Nehls. $500,000. And I appreciate you just willing to 
share that. I think the American people have a right to know. 
It is the taxpayers paying it. I will tell you what mine is, 
$174,000, just with everybody else up here, too. I can tell you 
every salary of every person serving in our United States 
military. I mean, it is pretty much public record.
    So, it is an annual salary of $500,000.
    And so, when you have these meetings and they are not 
accessed--they are not open to the public when it talks about 
bonuses--did you receive a bonus last year? Did you take a 
bonus?
    Mr. Gardner. For fiscal year 2022, yes.
    Mr. Nehls. Can I ask you how much that bonus was?
    Mr. Gardner. I would have to get you the specific numbers, 
but it is a portion of the salary based on the company's 
performance. So, as I am sure you know, the Congress had passed 
a law encouraging us to develop a pay-for-performance system. 
The inspector general recommended, the GAO recommended one.
    We use this in order to entice great employees to the 
company and retain them. The salaries that we provide at Amtrak 
pale in comparison to our freight railroad counterparts from 
which many of our employees come. It is essential that we have 
the best employees to be doing the public's work and delivering 
on this incredible investment plan. We use this as a retention 
tool, and it is very consistent with the private sector, 
business everywhere.
    Mr. Nehls. I appreciate that. I am just saying, Mr. 
Gardner, I think when it is taxpayers' money, I think 
transparency is so important. It should be transparent, and 
there should be no reason why you wouldn't be willing to share 
with--and you did share your salary----
    Mr. Gardner [interposing]. Absolutely.
    Mr. Nehls [continuing]. But the bonus, whether it is 25 
percent or 50 percent, I think the American taxpayer has a 
right to know what they are paying their leaders at Amtrak.
    Mr. Gardner. Understood.
    Mr. Nehls. With that, sir, I will now yield 5 minutes to 
Ranking Member Larsen for his questions--oh, wait--oh, Mr. 
Payne. I am sorry. Mr. Payne.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    In reference to the question asked of Mr. Gardner in terms 
of his salary and bonuses, I think it pales in comparison to 
freight rail's compensation on the other side, which is not 
open to the public. So, we know that their compensation over 
the past several years has been in the millions. So, I think 
we--thank you, Mr. Gardner, for working at a bargain basement 
salary.
    And, Mr. Gardner, while some parts of the country are 
slowly recovering from COVID in intercity rail ridership, 
others have almost fully recovered. An excellent example can be 
found in the ridership numbers and investments made in North 
Carolina and Virginia.
    Please tell us what the State transportation agencies are 
doing differently to drive an increase in the intercity rail 
passengers and what Amtrak is doing to assist these State 
transportation agencies in fulfilling these goals.
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member 
Payne. You are right, North Carolina and Virginia service is 
really exceptional, and I think the key is really three things. 
One, a sustained program of investment and leadership within 
the State. The States have excellent rail departments that 
really focus on their programs in partnership with us and with 
their host railroads. And they have been willing to invest 
significantly.
    While I agree with the chairman that our focus has to be on 
improving the network we have and rebuilding our assets, and 
that is what the IIJA funds allows us to do, recapitalize our 
assets. What it doesn't allow us to do necessarily is focus on 
improvements in different areas, and that is why other funding 
is necessary.
    But the dollars here that are provided for the State 
expansion are really coming from the State. And Virginia has 
invested over roughly $4 billion to upgrade the infrastructure 
between Washington and Richmond in partnership with CSX and 
with Amtrak.
    So, that investment has been critical. Their leadership at 
the State level has been critical, and their focus on 
connecting markets and building station investments that 
support connectivity to rail. So, there is a great new station 
in Raleigh, a new station coming in Charlotte, and a real focus 
on providing frequency.
    For instance, North Carolina is about to add a fourth 
Piedmont frequency. So, creating enough utilities so that 
passengers have trains they can take at the right times of day, 
at the right trip time, to connect to those markets.
    So, we see Virginia, through its service to the south in 
Roanoke, Newport News, Norfolk, and Richmond, really exceeding 
their goals in terms of ridership growth, coming back from the 
pandemic, and a great opportunity long term to further connect 
the Northeast Corridor to the Southeast and really build a 
coastal connection of high-quality frequent service.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you. Thank you.
    Mr. Warren, one of the many benefits of the rail service 
across the Northeast Corridor is getting cars off the roads and 
preventing additional air traffic in our already congested 
airspace. Can you please elaborate on how proposed 
infrastructure projects across the Northeast Corridor and the 
goal to reduce the state-of-good-repair backlog will benefit 
the communities in the region economically and how these 
impacts will impact the global fight against climate change?
    Mr. Warren. Yes, thank you. Transportation is the sector 
that emits the highest level of greenhouse gases, so, the more 
we can do to attract riders to Northeast Corridor trains, most 
of which are electrified, the more we can reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions.
    It also has the added benefit of reducing automobile 
congestion. I just rode down much of the corridor from Vermont, 
Massachusetts, Connecticut, through New York, New Jersey, 
Delaware, this weekend, and I sure wish more people, including 
myself, were taking the train for that trip.
    So, a lot of the work we are doing to create more reliable 
service, more frequent service, faster service, is going to 
bring more riders, and it is going to take riders from 
automobiles, take riders from airplanes, both of which emit 
significantly more greenhouse gas emissions and also add to 
congestion on our roads, I-95 and other roads, and the aviation 
system.
    So, the more we can implement our CONNECT NEC plan, bring 
more riders to the Amtrak and commuter trains on the corridor, 
the better off we will be both from a congestion perspective 
and a climate perspective.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you. The few times that I don't use Amtrak 
to come to work, I drive down, and I have to leave between 
midnight and 4 o'clock in the morning in order to bypass all 
that traffic between New Jersey and Washington, DC. So, thank 
you for that.
    This question is for both of our witnesses. I will continue 
to work on the disadvantaged business enterprise requirement 
for the FRA funding, but in the meantime, could you share what 
efforts you are making to ensure contracts are going to help 
create a level playing field for small businesses owned and 
controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged 
individuals?
    Mr. Gardner. Ranking Member Payne, I am pleased to report 
we have made a lot of progress on supplier diversity and DBEs. 
As you know, we have got a supplier diversity program which 
includes minority- and women-owned business enterprises, 
veterans and service-disabled veteran-owned businesses, 
disadvantaged business enterprises, small businesses, et 
cetera. And we set a goal of 15 percent of our contracting and 
procurement from these entities. And in 2022, in fiscal year 
2022, we exceeded that goal, achieving 25 percent, roughly $484 
million in spend with diverse suppliers. So, we have been 
working really hard to do that. In 2023 so far, we are at 27.8 
percent of our spend through diverse suppliers.
    And we have a new upgraded supplier diversity office which 
is doing 27 outreach events throughout this year, and a new 
small business resource center, because there are many small 
businesses of all types that are out there that have important 
capabilities to offer at Amtrak and the rail industry, 
particularly as we are growing, and we are working hard to 
create a bigger supply base, both so we can get better quality 
but also better pricing and ensure redundancy in terms of 
supply. Because as we all saw during the pandemic, supply chain 
challenges certainly impacted us, and we want to make sure we 
have a robust base of potential suppliers.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    Mr. Gardner. So, this is good business to invest in a 
diverse range of suppliers who can meet our needs from all 
across America and really allow us to succeed.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    Mr. Warren?
    Mr. Warren. The Commission doesn't do contracting. Our 
members contract for the major construction projects. They are 
the project managers. One related opportunity I might point out 
is just in workforce development.
    The workforce needs along the corridor are tremendous to 
try and invest these new funds, and we need to go out and find 
new workers, not the traditional workers we have always had; we 
have to go out and do more job training and do this in 
nontraditional places.
    So, I think that is a major potential opportunity to 
diversify the workforce, expand the workforce. It creates jobs, 
it creates equitable jobs, and it helps us deliver----
    Mr. Payne [interrupting]. Thank you.
    Mr. Warren [continuing]. These significant projects that 
need to be delivered.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your consideration. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Payne yields.
    I now recognize my colleague from the great State of Texas, 
Mr. Babin, for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And I appreciate you, Mr. Gardner and Mr. Warren, for being 
here today.
    The chairman, to follow up some of his line of questioning 
a while ago, is it legal to carry a firearm or any weapon on 
Amtrak by passengers?
    Mr. Gardner. No, Congressman. So, we do not permit firearms 
on board, other than in a locked--you can transport your 
firearm. We carry it in a locked facility.
    Dr. Babin. Even if you have got a permit for the States it 
is traveling through?
    Mr. Gardner. I am sorry, I didn't hear you.
    Dr. Babin. Even if you have a permit to carry it through 
the States you are traveling on?
    Mr. Gardner. That is right, yes, we do not allow firearms 
on board.
    Dr. Babin. OK. Well, passenger screening protections on 
Amtrak are nothing like on air travel or even what the public 
must go through to enter into this very building here.
    The Brightline intercity passenger rail system in Florida 
has implemented screening technologies to help prevent persons 
from bringing dangerous weapons on its trains. It is not as 
comprehensive as the airport technology, but it is better than 
nothing. And if you are sitting there and someone has broken 
the law and has a weapon and you are totally defenseless, you 
are pretty much up the creek.
    So, why hasn't Amtrak invested in similar screening 
technologies to protect the passengers of Amtrak?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you for your question. So, we take 
security very seriously, and we are using a multilayered system 
to protect our passengers and broadly have very good results. 
Incidents are quite rare on Amtrak. But I share your concern 
that, as we continue, opportunities to increase security are 
really important.
    First, a couple of things that we do today already. We have 
random screening together with TSA. We have a large fleet of 
trained dogs for both explosives and other interdiction. We 
partner with DHS for our VIPR teams to do inspection and then 
response. Federal Air Marshals, we are in partnership with them 
to be able to be part of our security forces on our trains. We 
have increased our APD workforce, and we have put many more 
officers on trains in the field.
    We are looking at the kind of technology that you discussed 
that Brightline is using, Smithsonian similarly, and many 
stadiums and others are using, relatively unintrusive but 
potentially effective materials and methods to further screen. 
And as you mentioned, we have a big network, about 500 stations 
across America, some huge, handling hundreds of thousands of 
people, including commuter passengers, and some quite small. 
Trying to think about how we can embed technology into our 
trains, in addition at stations, to increase security.
    One thing I will note is that Amtrak receives relatively 
little funding from TSA, and TSA's own program has relatively 
very little. So, for us to increase significantly in this, we 
do need and will need greater partnerships and support. But we 
are interested in this and taking it very seriously because we 
agree we need to strengthen.
    Dr. Babin. Well, I certainly hope so, because if you are 
not allowing private, law-abiding citizen passengers to protect 
themselves, then you have to protect them, and keep bad actors 
from bringing weapons aboard.
    Last Congress, the infrastructure law gave Amtrak a 
tremendous amount of funding. In addition to that, Amtrak may 
apply, itself, for other Federal funding programs and grants, 
including CRISI grants that the chairman mentioned and Federal-
State partnerships.
    CRISI grants are well oversubscribed already, and countless 
more rail safety projects are in need of funding. There are 
already over 95 applications for the Fed-State program, but 
only 30 or so will be funded.
    In Amtrak's annual legislative report, you seek to get 
greater permission to use Federal funds that you receive from 
the IIJA to serve as your matching contribution for these other 
grants. Do you feel that it is appropriate for other 
stakeholders, such as State and local governments or short line 
railroads, to have to compete against Amtrak for these very 
limited funds?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, first, Congressman, let me say, we 
certainly support the CRISI Program. We support our Class II 
and Class III partners and the broad eligibility of CRISI. It 
is, I think, important to understand that the dollars that have 
come to Amtrak are for a very specific set of purposes. We 
can't use them for many of the activities that we might need to 
for improving the railroad. They are focused on really state-
of-good-repair/replacement activities for our fleet and our 
stations and our infrastructure. So, those dollars aren't 
eligible for every activity.
    And the safety focus of CRISI is really unique. That is 
what we fundamentally seek to partner almost always with host 
railroads, States, and localities, other carriers, to find 
opportunities for improvement. For instance, further 
investments in our Positive Train Control system where if the 
system is not required but where we think it is appropriate, 
track upgrades with host railroads where the track is falling 
below standards for Amtrak service.
    So, these are things that we think are good uses of 
dollars, they are not things we could use our funds from the 
IIJA to otherwise accomplish, and Amtrak is a relatively small 
portion of the total CRISI pot. Most of the dollars are going 
to freight railroads and for safety programs, and we support 
that.
    Dr. Babin. I am out of time. Thank you, and I yield back, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Babin yields.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Larsen for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Gardner, we had our last hearing on the topic in 
December of 2021 just after the BIL had passed. One of the 
challenges raised was making sure there were enough people 
hired to implement the funding, both at FRA and at Amtrak.
    Can you update us on what your people plan looks like and 
where you are in achieving that?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, sir, Ranking Member Larsen. Appreciate 
the question.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Sir is fine, but, yes.
    Mr. Gardner. We have had great results so far in our hiring 
efforts. As you say, we are really changing the whole scale of 
the company, and last year, we hired about 3,700 people. 
Already this year, we have hired 2,700 folks. By the end of the 
year, we will have hired about 5,000 additional employees. Some 
of that is to fill attrition, the normal retirements and so 
forth, and some of it is to create more capacity.
    And those jobs are across America. We have a 46-State, 3-
Province network, and focused all across our different 
functions. So, a significant portion of those are craft hires, 
folks who are out there running the trains, maintaining the 
infrastructure. But we have also really invested in our program 
management, design capacity, all of the really professionals 
that are out there to help us build new projects and update our 
infrastructure and procure this new fleet.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Are there areas during the 
pandemic where you lost people proportionally in a function and 
you are having to build that back up in particular?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes. Notably, our mechanical forces--and I am 
glad to say we are well above now some of our levels that we 
had even pre-pandemic to create the capacity we need to 
maintain our equipment. And that is mostly driven by the fact 
that there is huge demand for skilled workers in this area--
electricians, welders, machinists--massive demand, and being 
competitive has been hard for us in certain regions of the 
country. So, we have really worked hard.
    We have also created a new apprenticeship program, and this 
is a program that is supported through grant funds with our 
various unions, and they are rolling out across our mechanical 
facilities so that we can train folks and give them the 
capabilities they need to serve Amtrak but also lifelong 
skills. So, it has really been a good partnership.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. So, BIL was a historic investment 
in passenger rail, but it really means a historic investment in 
hiring people in order to have passenger rail, it seems.
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely. We are doing hiring that Amtrak 
would do in a year now that we would take a half a decade to 
have done previously because of this new capacity we need to 
build. And it is a chance to build a whole new generation of 
rail workers. It is one of the most exciting things, I think, 
about this time, is we are building a new generation of skilled 
employees who are here to contribute to the mission.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thanks.
    Mr. Warren, at the Commission, you mentioned you focus on 
infrastructure. Do you have--even with your partners, do you 
have a similar set of issues in hiring people to make these 
projects work--to make these projects happen? I apologize.
    Mr. Warren. Yes. One of the biggest challenges to 
implementing all of these projects, spending the money from the 
infrastructure bill, is hiring workers. Every one of our 
members--and Stephen talked about the hiring they are doing. It 
is critical, and it is not easy. It is a tight labor market. 
But that hiring has to be done. It is creating a lot of good 
jobs, but it is essential if these projects are going to move 
forward.
    There is a lot of work that needs to be done on the 
corridor and nationwide, but our focus is certainly the 
corridor, and you have to have the workforce, both management 
and labor, to make it happen.
    And without the funding certainty of the infrastructure 
bill, Amtrak wouldn't be hiring as much as it is right now. The 
funding certainty is critical to giving our members the 
confidence to go out and hire and train, because everyone you 
hire, you are training sometimes for a year or more.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, thanks. A second point I 
wanted to make, I made in my opening statement, was that 
passengers and States want more rail service.
    And maybe, Mr. Gardner, this is not for you to say how 
great Washington State and the Northwest is. We tend to be more 
ahead than other areas in the State-supported system, but who 
is in second place and who is in last generally? What kind of 
work needs to take place in different areas of the country to 
get caught up on the State-supported systems?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you, sir. We have generally 
restored frequencies to all of our routes across the United 
States, but you are right that we have a strong program in the 
Pacific Northwest. The Cascades service and Washington State's 
leadership there has been tremendous.
    The goal later this fall will be to introduce a fifth and 
sixth round trip, so to increase service still, and I know this 
is very important to you that we were able to go back to 
Vancouver and have two round trips there.
    And when you look at the current State-supported system, we 
have seen really a lot of enthusiasm from all over. I think it 
is really important to note that this drive to grow and improve 
service has really stayed community driven. Amtrak is their 
partner, but fundamentally this is the decision that States 
make to decide to expand or invest in service.
    Part of the big challenge for the current network----
    Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. You have to wrap 
up and go on--for the record.
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. Is that we have a lot of places 
that don't have passenger rail service today at the levels that 
exist like in the Cascades--the Southeast, the Mountain West--
and we see a lot of interest from communities there right now.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. OK. Thanks a lot.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Larsen yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Stauber for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Gardner, I want to talk about safety and security. 
Between 2019 and 2021, the Amtrak Police Department received 
over 400,000 emergency calls annually. This is over double what 
APD received in previous years. What is the current size of the 
Amtrak police force?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you for the question, sir. And our 
current workforce is about 406, 407 APD----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. Would you consider that fully 
staffed?
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. Officers.
    Our goal to be fully staffed is 431, which we believe we 
will achieve by the end of this fiscal year. We have a lot of 
folks in training. And as you know, it is a competitive 
environment to get qualified law enforcement folks. So, we are 
working to achieve that.
    Mr. Stauber. You had mentioned--I am very glad you said 
this in your opening statement--safety is the number one 
priority at Amtrak. APD strategic plan suggests that you are, 
quote, ``restructuring and modernizing,'' end quote, training.
    What does that restructuring and modernized training look 
like?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, I think that the core of our strategy is 
to deploy our resources across our network where they can be 
most effective. So, we are a very data-driven organization. And 
the chief who is behind me here leads our efforts to prioritize 
our response across the network, make sure we have the right 
assets in the right space.
    And then, to create the right sort of modern training 
methods and the right force philosophy so that we can serve our 
communities well. That, of course, means right now more riders, 
more train rides----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. Did you say force philosophy? 
Force?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes. The----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. What does that mean?
    Mr. Gardner. I mean our APD force.
    Mr. Stauber. OK.
    Mr. Gardner. The policing philosophy and how we integrate 
with our partners. As you know, we are across the Nation, and 
we have to partner with local police forces plus the FBI and 
TSA and others. And that is a key to the way that we ensure 
security is by this relationship of partners across the 
network.
    Mr. Stauber. All right. And APD is a priority for Amtrak, 
correct?
    Mr. Gardner. APD is an absolute priority for Amtrak.
    Mr. Stauber. I want to get back to what Chairman Nehls was 
talking about. Your salary is $500,000, and you received a 
bonus. And you said to keep, in your words, great employees and 
retain them, you need bonuses.
    Did any members of the APD receive bonuses?
    Mr. Gardner. Our management workforce is part of our 
program. The----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. Yes, sir. No. Did the Amtrak 
police force, did any Amtrak police force members on the line, 
did they receive bonuses equivalent to your percentage of a 
bonus?
    Mr. Gardner. Those management employees who are not 
agreement employees in the APD force did. The other employees 
are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, which we 
negotiate.
    Mr. Stauber. Did they receive bonuses?
    Mr. Gardner. No, not per their contract. Yes.
    Mr. Stauber. And moments ago, you said that it is a high 
priority, and to give bonuses, you want to--you need--in order 
to keep great employees and retain them, bonuses were part of 
that.
    So, it seems at this moment, APD, those boots on the ground 
or boots on the train that keep the passengers safe, which is 
your priority, they didn't receive a dime. Nothing extra. 
Nothing extra. And you had executives that received bonuses of 
$200,000 a year, paid primarily by the American taxpayer.
    Mr. Gardner, I represent the Eighth Congressional District 
of Minnesota. The median income there is $55,000. You received 
a bonus almost four times what the hard-working men and women 
that I represent, and some of that tax money went to your 
bonus.
    Do you think that is fair?
    Mr. Gardner. So, I would say that the representative 
members of the APD receive a variety of benefits associated 
with their collective bargaining agreement. So, we negotiate 
that, as we do with all of our unions.
    And in the Amtrak management case, we traded off a pension 
about 10 years ago almost, and put less compensation as 
guaranteed for employees and made it at----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. With just 15 seconds left, I am 
just concerned that Amtrak is prioritizing growth over customer 
safety. Those police officers see that you are getting bonuses, 
and your executive board are getting bonuses, primarily paid by 
the American taxpayer, and you can't help those police 
officers? As a former police officer, I find that extremely 
offensive.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Stauber yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Moulton for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Moulton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Gardner, if the Amtrak police officers want to 
negotiate for bonuses in their contract, are they allowed to 
take that into the next collective bargaining negotiations?
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely, Congressman Moulton.
    Mr. Moulton. Thank you very much.
    I would just like to get back to a conversation that you 
and I have had about efforts to decrease trip times. We talk a 
lot about speeds in the railroad industry. We probably don't 
focus enough on how we get people faster to where they need to 
go.
    You recently raised speeds on the Chicago to St. Louis 
corridor by 20 miles per hour to 110 miles per hour. Why did it 
take so long to get to 110 miles per hour?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you, Congressman, for the 
question. And trip time is a very important key piece of what 
is attractive about rails when we can be competitive with 
driving.
    This was a program led by the Illinois State DOT, together 
with Union Pacific, and funded by the FRA. So, Amtrak was a 
supporter, but it is a State-led project.
    And it took a long time to rebuild the railway, which is 
what was essentially necessary, and upgrade the signal system 
there to handle 110-miles-an-hour service. It is great that we 
have achieved it, and it is an important outcome, and it is 
going to be a big game changer for service in Illinois.
    Mr. Moulton. So, back in the 1930s, we had a lot of trains 
in America going 100 miles an hour. This is a 10-mile-per-hour 
improvement over what was fairly common in the 1930s.
    Are there any plans to get Chicago to St. Louis to standard 
international high-speed standards, like 200 miles per hour? In 
other words, about twice as fast as trains are going on that 
corridor today?
    Mr. Gardner. Currently, the plan is 110 miles an hour. To 
go above 110 miles an hour, you need to have a sealed corridor, 
a corridor in which all the grade crossings are eliminated. And 
there would need to be changes probably in the alignment on 
some of those routes.
    So, in certain corridors, those kind of investments I think 
are appropriate. What I think we have achieved here in 
Illinois, what Illinois has achieved is to really achieve the 
kind of standard level of intercity service we should be aiming 
for, 110-miles-an-hour service, which does allow trip time 
competitiveness. And where there is demand and opportunity, I 
think pursuing high speed does make sense on top of that base.
    Mr. Moulton. I would just point out that regular old 
commuters just taking trains in and out of London have been 
going 125 miles per hour for a few decades now. So, I just 
think we could set our sights a bit higher.
    With regards to trip time, checking the Amtrak website 
yesterday, it looks like the trip times haven't decreased 
despite the increase in speed.
    Mr. Gardner. Well currently, we are in the production 
season of the major capital work that is occurring on the 
Northeast Corridor. So, we have added some time to certain 
trains to reflect the fact that there likely----
    Mr. Moulton [interrupting]. Specific to Chicago to St. 
Louis.
    Mr. Gardner. Oh, in the Chicago-St. Louis, sir, the 
schedule change has not yet taken place. So, we are in testing 
of the new speeds, but the upcoming schedule change will occur 
here soon.
    So, even though the trains are operating faster, the 
schedules remain at the current speeds until we have validated 
everything, and that will happen soon.
    Mr. Moulton. So, there are a lot of places on the Northeast 
Corridor where we also have to straighten curves to improve 
trip times and speeds. We have talked about this in the past. I 
sent a letter in August of 2022 on this issue.
    Have we made any improvements in trip times on the 
Northeast Corridor?
    Mr. Gardner. We have a lot of work underway, Congressman, 
to do that. These major capital programs that we have discussed 
are going to be the way that we can change some of the trip 
time. It is the constraints. For instance, the Baltimore and 
Potomac Tunnel, as we will advance that program, will take a 
railroad that today is constrained to 30 miles an hour and make 
that 100-mile-an-hour alignment. As you know, a number of 
bridges also, as we replace them, will give us faster speeds.
    And as we bundle with those improvements upgrades to our 
infrastructure, we are looking to shorten curves to create 
faster speeds as we also replace the overhead electric lines. 
So, we put the newer lines in the right alignment to maximize 
speed.
    Our goal is to get 160 miles an hour everywhere the 
railroad permits it today with the geometry and upgrade the 
infrastructure to support that, both signal and power.
    Mr. Moulton. Mr. Warren, when do you think we can actually 
see timetables improve on the Northeast Corridor?
    Mr. Warren. The CONNECT NEC plan that we are working on 
updating, we are very focused on improving trip time with 
projects within the existing right-of-way that you can do while 
you are doing basic state of good repair and modernization. You 
can straighten curves. You can replace signal systems. You can 
replace the overhead----
    Mr. Moulton [interrupting]. I just want to know the next 
time I go to New York, it's faster than it is today. When is 
that going to happen?
    Mr. Warren. Unfortunately, it is going to take some time 
for--each of these things----
    Mr. Moulton [interrupting]. Are we talking about a year, 2 
years, 5 years?
    Mr. Warren [continuing]. It's seconds here and there. I 
couldn't give you an exact trip time, but it will take a number 
of years for these to start to add up. When you get the 3 
minutes from B&P Tunnel, you get 30 seconds here, 30 seconds 
there.
    There are also studies that are going to be going on to 
look at new right-of-way, where you can get significant trip 
time improvements. Those are, obviously, longer term projects.
    Mr. Moulton. I am out of time, but I think the American 
people want to see those returns so we can actually say, we 
invested billions of dollars here, and this is what we got.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Moulton yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Burchett for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members.
    Amtrak has awarded six-figure executive bonuses despite 
huge losses. You have attempted to take over Union Station's 
lease at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars with respect 
to benefits returns. You have forced unwanted routes on your 
national network with questionable customer demands and 
guaranteed annual losses.
    What is your all's projected annual operating loss, Mr. 
Gardner?
    Mr. Gardner. For this year, a little bit more than $800 
million. That is down significantly from the prior year and the 
year before.
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir. According to Amtrak's 5-year plan 
for fiscal years 2022 through 2027, Amtrak expects to lose at 
least $1 billion per year.
    Do you think Amtrak will be cutting expenses or increasing 
ticket prices to address its operating losses?
    Mr. Gardner. We have been doing both. So, already, our 5-
year plan has been updated for 2023. And you can see where 
almost, anticipating a little bit more than $800 million. So, 
we have significantly improved those numbers since our 2022 5-
year plan.
    And we are doing it on both ends, as you suggest. We have 
got to maintain and reduce costs where we can. That is 
difficult in this high inflationary environment. We are about 
30 percent higher in prices than we were in 2019. So, as we 
come back to revenues of 2019, you can see there is a big gap.
    At the same time, we are trying to build revenues and are 
doing quite a good job at that. But we are still just about to 
get to 2019 revenue levels. And it is going to take a 
combination of both to maintain improving trajectory.
    As I said, our hope is on the train operation side of the 
business, to get back to that break-even process. I have been 
at Amtrak for 14 years. It took us a lot of work to get to 
break-even in 2020 before the pandemic. I know we can do it 
again, but it is going to take a while to overcome this 
complete----
    Mr. Burchett [interrupting]. When you say break even, 
though, that is with the influx of tax dollars, correct?
    Mr. Gardner. So, yes----
    Mr. Burchett [interrupting]. Yes or no, that is fine. I 
mean, I am not--you don't need to--I appreciate it. I am going 
to run out of time.
    In your written testimony, you stated that you all expect 
additional losses the next few years due to the capital-related 
operating cost. Projected funds by the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act.
    How much do you expect these capital-related operating 
costs to be?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, several hundred million dollars, because 
we have to train the workforce and hire the workforce that is 
necessary to implement this program. There is a whole series of 
costs that are associated with the capital work that we have to 
bear as upfront expense. Particularly all of the training cost 
we cannot capitalize, and they hit the P&L.
    So, we have to double the amount of workers, for instance, 
on the Northeast Corridor that are rebuilding track and 
signals. To go from about 4,000 employees to about 8,000 
employees takes up to 2 years to train those folks. And while 
we are training them, they are expense, not capital. And so, 
those are the kind of extraordinary costs we have to take for a 
bit that are in support of the capital work.
    Mr. Burchett. It is not in my notes, but memory serves me 
that there has been several, I guess, exposes or whatever. I 
don't really like that term, because you never know what is 
behind it. But your commissary continues to lose money. Is that 
still a problem?
    Mr. Gardner. Did you say commissary, sir?
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Gardner. So, the food and beverage. Food and beverage--
--
    Mr. Burchett [interrupting]. I could have said food and 
beverage.
    Mr. Gardner. No, absolutely. I know what you mean. The food 
and beverage service is an important part of the Amtrak 
product. The IIJA require the establishment of a new Food and 
Beverage Working Group, and we just received their report. We 
owe Congress back our response to the food and beverage report 
here this fall.
    In general, the food service is there as a part of the 
amenities that we offer. So, much of the ticket price is 
covering the cost. And then people also fund through cash 
purchases, depending on which level of service.
    We are continuing to upgrade quality. We certainly have 
heard from many Members that they want to see better quality, 
and we have heard that from our customers in terms of the food 
offerings on board. So, we are focused on doing that, but doing 
that in a way that is fiscally responsible.
    Mr. Burchett. I would hope that you would be fiscally 
responsible. By that, I mean at least paying for the food. I 
think that would be a fiscally responsible move, and I think 
Congress would probably smile upon that if we were able to 
smile.
    I have got no time left. I am just going to yield.
    Mr. Cohen. Would the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Burchett. I would yield to Congressman Cohen if I 
could, please, because he is my spiritual mentor in this 
committee. Go ahead.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you.
    I would just like to ask you a question. I am sure you 
heard about his salary being $500,000. Compared to the TVA 
chairman's salary, isn't it cheap?
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, I would gladly pay our TVA chairman 
about a half a million dollars----
    Mr. Cohen [interposing]. Thank you.
    Mr. Burchett [continuing]. Over his $8 million plus bonus. 
But I am not bitter about that nor are you, Mr. Cohen.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Burchett yields.
    I now recognize Ms. Strickland for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you, Chairman Nehls and Ranking 
Member Payne.
    My home State of Washington has been a long-time supporter 
and investor in intercity passenger rail. During my time as 
mayor of Tacoma from 2010 to 2017, I was proud to play an 
integral role in the development of a new Tacoma station in our 
region.
    Because of that experience, I know how critical it is to 
ensure that local, State, and Federal governments all work 
together to put these critical investments into improving our 
Nation's rail infrastructure, building up our workforce. And I 
am pleased to hear about the work that you all are doing at 
Amtrak.
    I look forward to strengthening this Federal partnership 
and making sure that when we put these dollars to use in 
communities that they are doing exactly what they intended.
    Mr. Gardner, I know that Ranking Member Larsen touched on 
the strong Pacific Northwest network, and I would like to start 
there. As you know, the Washington State Department of 
Transportation and Amtrak are currently working on the Amtrak 
Cascades Service Development Plan with improving service over 
20 years, and specifically adding two more routes--adding two 
more times that they are going to go between Seattle and 
Portland.
    Can you talk more about this timeline and when you think we 
can expect these two frequencies--that is the word I was 
looking for--to become available to the public?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you for the question, and 
congratulations on the great station in Tacoma. It is 
fantastic. As part of the bypass, it is a real improvement.
    And you are right, the Cascades is a great service. We 
anticipate two additional frequencies in October of this year. 
Again, the States dictate when we bring service in and how much 
service we upgrade and the pricing philosophy, and so, we work 
with our partners in Washington and Oregon on that schedule.
    Ms. Strickland. Excellent. And then can you talk about some 
of the challenges you may face in making this reality, 
including equipment shortages, delivery delays, and acquiring 
the Venture cars that you need by California and the Midwest to 
State-supported services.
    You had also stated that adding these two new frequencies 
between Seattle and Portland is going to depend on having 
enough cars available as those are being phased out. So, talk a 
bit about some of the challenges we face in making this a 
reality with the supply chain.
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you. And this is a major topic for 
us. As you I am sure know, the Cascades service retired the--we 
retired the Talgo VI train sets that were in service there and 
we replaced those with a fleet of cars from Amtrak's national 
pool, our Horizon and Amfleet equipment.
    And as you mentioned, the additional cars necessary for the 
service, for the additional frequencies, are coming from our 
Midwest pool that are, in fact, waiting on the delivery of the 
Siemens Venture cars to the States.
    So, there, the States procured equipment directly, with 
funding from the Federal Government. And Amtrak is the operator 
of that equipment, but it is a delivery between Siemens and the 
States.
    We were supposed to start this year with 60 new cars as 
part of this program in service, but, in fact, those were 
delayed. And they are still coming into service now. I think we 
have about 50 in service.
    Our goal, again, is to have 60 in service. So, we are 
making good progress. And the manufacturer and the State are 
working well together to deliver this equipment and get it in 
service. But that is why we have had a shortage of equipment in 
the Midwest, and that has cascaded across the rest of the 
network.
    So, we are anxious to continue those deliveries, get the 
equipment into service, and then be able to deploy equipment to 
support the additional frequencies in Washington and Oregon.
    Ms. Strickland. Is there anything else that my colleagues 
and I can do in the Northwest to better support your efforts to 
expand this service?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, as you said, the leadership in 
Washington and Oregon and the long-term relationship and 
planning activities really have set the service up for success, 
because there is a strong vision of the service and how it can 
progress.
    Certainly, partnership with the two host railroads there, 
the primary host railroads, Burlington Northern Santa Fe and 
Union Pacific, are key. And working with them to get better on-
time performance, and to continue the opportunities to expand 
cooperatively with the host railroads is key. I think that is 
the main challenge in addition to equipment.
    I will say that our new Airo trains, the first place that 
they arrive is the Cascades service. So, we are excited for 
those, and Cascades will be really the testbed for our new 
trains, and it is going to be a great experience, I think.
    Ms. Strickland. All right. Thank you. And just as editorial 
here, as we look at passenger rail service, with an aging 
population, fewer people wanting to drive, and a growing 
population, we know that eventually, these things will become 
more highly used, more ridership and, therefore, more revenue. 
But it is going to take time, because the United States is not 
as densely populated as some of the other places where they 
have more frequent service and more ridership.
    Thank you very much for being here today.
    Mr. Nehls. Ms. Strickland yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Yakym for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to our 
witnesses for being here today.
    Mr. Gardner, I appreciate that you are constantly 
evaluating new routes and new service options for Amtrak and 
for your riders, but it has come to my attention that Amtrak is 
eyeing the use of the South Shore Line in my district, which 
runs through north central and then ultimately over to the west 
and northwest Indiana.
    It is a well-established and recently upgraded commuter 
rail service line that is going through a double-track addition 
right now with the Michigan City area in order to speed up the 
rail line service between South Bend and Chicago.
    One of the things that I am concerned about is if Amtrak 
were to assert authority and come in on that line, what I would 
like to know from you and my real question is, would you commit 
to working with the South Shore to ensure that it would not 
face any undue scheduling or burden cost should you come in and 
use that line?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you for the question, Congressman. And 
you are right, we are looking at a variety of options. No 
decision is made yet about how we improve our service from 
Chicago south of the lake. This is vital to our service to 
Michigan, vital for our long-distance trains, vital for the 
number of trains that we hope in the future can operate in the 
Midwest.
    So, the South Shore route is one potential route. As you 
said, it is recently double-tracked, gone through a 
comprehensive upgrading, and is a great passenger-controlled 
route. We run into significant problems on the freight lines 
that are parallel to the South Shore, and it impacts on-time 
performance for all these trains. Certainly, we would do so 
cooperatively with the South Shore.
    Our conversations with them have always been about looking 
to see if there is an opportunity for a partnership. The 
frequency per hour is relatively low. I mean, for instance, we 
have 24 trains an hour on a two-track railroad in the 
Northeast. I think there is lots of capacity there, but we 
would have to make sure it can be utilized in a way that 
doesn't take away from the South Shore's business and I think 
would be actually a net benefit, because you would have another 
railroad that could come.
    We would contribute as necessary, as we do under our access 
rights under law, and be able to be a partner for the South 
Shore and to serve the communities that are today served by the 
South Shore with intercity service, which today they aren't 
all.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Gardner. And my hope is that it 
would be collaborative in a way that doesn't negatively affect 
the times of the South Shore or put any undue cost burden on 
them. So, thank you for that commitment, and I will be 
continuing to watch this as we go forward.
    I want to shift gears and understand how Amtrak makes 
decisions on new service. You indicated in your opening 
statement that Amtrak is starting the new Great River route 
this year. It is a daily trip between Chicago and Saint Paul, 
Minnesota.
    Can you tell us how long will it take for that train? What 
is the total commute time between Chicago and Minneapolis--
excuse me, Saint Paul?
    Mr. Gardner. If my memory serves me, it is about 6 hours on 
the current route of the Empire Builder. So, this is a service 
we have today, a long-distance train that goes from Chicago to 
Seattle and Portland.
    And what we are able to do with this service, a partnership 
between the three States involved here--Minnesota, Wisconsin, 
and Illinois--is take an existing frequency of the Hiawatha 
Service, which goes to Milwaukee, and run that service west 
across the current route to the Twin Cities. So, it adds a 
second----
    Mr. Yakym [interrupting]. On this new service route, I am 
showing--my data shows that you are looking at about 7\1/2\ 
hours of total time between Chicago and Saint Paul along that 
route.
    I would like to unpack the financials a little bit. How 
much Federal and taxpayer subsidies do you expect on an annual 
basis for this route to get it up and running?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, the Federal taxpayer subsidy will be 
fairly limited. As you probably know----
    Mr. Yakym [interrupting]. Total taxpayer money.
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. The State-supported services--
yes, I would have to get back to you on the specifics for this 
route, but the States pay the operating subsidy. That is sort 
of the deal under this State-supported partnership.
    Mr. Yakym. Which is still taxpayer money.
    Mr. Gardner. It is.
    Mr. Yakym. So, the total number here is about $7 million 
per year to get that route up and running. And so, on 7\1/2\-
hour commute, you can drive it in 6 hours.
    We also checked flights going from Chicago up to 
Minneapolis. And we just picked a random day, August 8th. We 
found that there are 18 nonstop flights per day between Chicago 
and the Minneapolis-Saint Paul area, and those run from 6 a.m. 
all the way through 10 p.m., at a cost of--the lowest cost of 
$84 per ticket on just picking a random day.
    And so, what we are trying to understand is--what I am 
trying to understand is, how is this a good business and 
financial decision for Amtrak, given those facts and $7 million 
a year of taxpayer money?
    Mr. Gardner. So, again, the primary financial costs are 
borne by the States, and they elect to do this because they see 
value. Today, the origin-destination pair between the Twin 
Cities and Chicago is one of our strongest pairs on the Empire 
Builder.
    But, of course, this is a train that comes once a day. 
There are many travelers who don't find the schedule convenient 
for the Empire Builder. So, this provides a second frequency at 
a different time of day that allows folks to use the train.
    We see people like the train all the time for many reasons. 
Many are too old to drive or they dislike driving. Air service, 
of course, is not always reliable, particularly in bad weather. 
And this creates redundancy in the modes and gives us more 
options and more folks a chance to travel. So, we anticipate 
strong demand.
    Mr. Nehls. The gentleman's time is expired.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Gardner.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you.
    I now recognize Mrs. Napolitano for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Gentlemen, I have several comments and I have a question, 
so, bear with me.
    I have served in the California Transportation Commission 
and my years here. I have never found that rail completely pays 
for itself. It is almost always subsidized. Is that true?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Well, for how long has Amtrak been 
requesting funding for state of good repair and infrastructure 
due to deterioration of the infrastructure and the major 
backlogged projects?
    Mr. Gardner. Congresswoman, essentially, our entire history 
has been a source to try and upgrade the old assets that we 
inherited in 1971.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Well, Mr. Warren, I see in your report 
that you say there the total cost of projects included in the 
Federal Railroad Administration's NEC Project Inventory exceeds 
$100 billion, with $40 billion just for major backlog. Is that 
true?
    Mr. Warren. That is correct. The $40 billion is just for 
the 15 major backlog projects, bridges and tunnels----
    Mrs. Napolitano [interrupting]. And we have only given you 
$22 billion?
    Mr. Warren. Excuse me?
    Mrs. Napolitano. We have only given Amtrak $22 billion?
    Mr. Warren. That is correct.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Not quite make sense.
    I have been on trains in China and France, and they have 
up-to-date equipment. So, somehow, we have got to speed up our 
system so that we can provide essentially good service since we 
have the best Nation in the world. Am I correct?
    Mr. Warren. Absolutely. The foundation for all the service 
is having a modern reliable infrastructure, and you can't do 
that with bridges and tunnels that were built when Teddy 
Roosevelt was President and Ulysses S. Grant was President and 
William Howard Taft was President.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Very good. Now, how are you increasing 
ridership, Mr. Gardner?
    Mr. Gardner. We are working really hard to increase 
ridership. And we are seeing some great response. In fact, 
about one-third of all of our passengers on Amtrak today are 
new passengers, riders who have never ridden Amtrak before.
    There is strong demand for leisure travel in particular. 
Business travel is down about 30 percent, and with it, 
revenues. But we are able to backfill a lot of that demand by 
creating a reliable product and really using fare in promotions 
and price to get new passengers to take a chance on the train.
    Mrs. Napolitano. The question I would have is, how is the 
cost to travel on Amtrak, and how are you attracting new 
ridership in California specifically?
    Mr. Gardner. So, in California, really the State leads the 
program. The three JPAs establish the fare policy and the 
approach to how we market those services, how they market the 
services.
    And I think, as you know, I am sure, unfortunately, the 
LOSSAN Corridor and Pacific Surfliner has been very 
significantly impacted by now three different events. A 
blocking event yesterday severed the route. So, that has been a 
major impact and really disconnecting San Diego from Los 
Angeles, but we are working hard with the host railroads who 
are responsible for maintaining that to bring the service back.
    And I think when you do, there is still a lot of frequency 
in California, and part of this needs to adjust the service to 
the new demands in terms of work from home, but we think there 
is a really strong future.
    Mrs. Napolitano. How about the cost?
    Mr. Gardner. The cost as it relates to passengers, the 
State's policy is to keep the fares very affordable on the 
State-supported service so that more people can use the train. 
The philosophy there is----
    Mrs. Napolitano [interrupting]. How many people know that?
    Mr. Gardner. Pardon me?
    Mrs. Napolitano. How many people know that?
    Mr. Warren. Well, in the State I think it is a pretty well-
known bargain, but I do think that there is--and, in fact, you 
see lots of demand in various corridors, but I think there is 
even more we can do to get the word out.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Well, also time delay affected by the 
railroad's preferential treatment not given you, where does 
that play in California specifically?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, we work closely with our host partners 
all over America to try and achieve great results for the 
passenger trains, respecting the freight railroad's duty to 
serve shippers.
    And we see some difficulties, though, particularly in 
California on our route of the Sunset--this is the route going 
east and then across the Southwest--and in our service both 
from Sacramento north and between the bay area and Los Angeles 
on the coastline.
    So, those are areas where we have had some delays. Some are 
infrastructure-related and some are related to congestion from 
the freight railroads.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Mrs. Napolitano yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Burlison for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Gardner, I was an investment adviser prior to joining 
this circus. But I wanted to ask you, if I were your adviser 
and I brought forward a business that I wanted to recommend 
investing in, and that business lost $1 billion every year 
since its inception--which you guys are older than I have been 
alive. Has your company ever made a profit in any single year?
    Mr. Gardner. No.
    Mr. Burlison. OK. So, if I brought that turd of an 
investment to you, would you consider me a good investment 
adviser?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, I think the purpose of 
Amtrak's creation was not to create a dividend for the Treasury 
or to create sort of an investment vehicle. It was to maintain 
and enhance passenger rail service as a fundamental piece of 
the mobility picture in the United States.
    And so, I think Congress has been pretty clear that it is a 
service that requires investment, just like public transit 
service everywhere or rural roads. These are things that need 
to exist to support commerce, to support our culture, support 
connectivity.
    Mr. Burlison. Right. OK. I am going to get back some of my 
time here.
    The question I think most Americans ask and I think people 
in my district, as has been said before, is that when you have 
a business that cannot operate and operates at a deficit such 
as yours, how do you justify giving bonuses in the amount of 
$200,000 to yourself and other executives?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, again, I would say that Amtrak's mission 
is to connect America. Congress has been quite clear about 
their expectations about our route service, about all the 
operations that we made. And we do so trying to balance the 
need of service and our finances and be good stewards of the 
taxpayer money. To do that, we have to have an excellent----
    Mr. Burlison [interrupting]. Who owns most of the rails 
that Amtrak uses?
    Mr. Gardner. Ninety-seven percent of our route-miles are 
owned by another railway. We are a tenant.
    Mr. Burlison. So, you are a tenant. Do you pay them?
    Mr. Gardner. We do.
    Mr. Burlison. How much?
    Mr. Gardner. Incremental cost by statute. So, it depends on 
the route. But this is set by----
    Mr. Burlison [interrupting]. And they are required to have 
you as a tenant?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, because, remember, they have the 
obligation to run passenger trains by law. And the Government 
relieved them of that obligation and created a Federal 
corporation to take it on.
    Mr. Burlison. If I were to ask them if they were here, with 
you as a client, are you a net loser for them? Are you a 
liability?
    Mr. Gardner. No. We have an incremental cost structure, 
which means we pay for the incremental cost associated with our 
use. Our trains are very light. We use very little of the sort 
of consumables of a railroad. And then we provide incentives 
for good on-time performance.
    So, some carriers view us as a source of profit and are 
very focused on getting the incentive pay for good performance.
    Mr. Burlison. So, one of the questions I have is, we just 
went through this pandemic. And one of the key issues for my 
constituents coming up here was: Do something about the supply 
chain. Your trains, on average, what percentage are they full?
    Mr. Gardner. Right now, we are in the--we have load factors 
in the high sixties. So, it is quite good. So, 60 percent. I 
mean----
    Mr. Burlison. So, about a little over half full.
    Mr. Gardner. Yes. But at peak periods, somewhere in the 90 
percent. So, in those segments--again, it is very different 
than an airline because we are serving many communities.
    Mr. Burlison. Let me ask this question: When my 
constituents are trying to get goods and services timely into 
my district, do those freight trains have to give preference to 
these 50 percent or 60 percent occupied passenger trains?
    Mr. Gardner. By law, they have to give preference. But I 
should say that we run a triweekly train across various parts 
of our network. One train a day, seven cars, ten cars, these 
are not in a position to being able to deliver freight service.
    I am a former train dispatcher. I certainly know that there 
is ample capacity, and you can run an efficient freight 
operation with passenger trains.
    Mr. Burlison. I just want to impress on you the impact that 
you have on the taxpayers. When I calculate per taxpayer in my 
district your impact, just your deficit alone costs every 
taxpayer in my district at least $7, OK?
    Now, that may not be a lot of money to you, but to people 
back home, they debate whether or not they are going to have 
Netflix or Amazon Prime or if they are going to pay the cable 
bill, right?
    And you are draining from every taxpayer $7 for a service 
that most of them, the vast majority of them, will never use. 
And so, I am asking you to reconsider your operation and try to 
become at least somewhat profitable.
    Mr. Gardner. Congressman, I appreciate that. We take very 
seriously our role and the stewardship of Federal funds. We 
recognize that all of America pays for this service, as it does 
a variety of things the Federal Government invests in.
    We are looking to achieve, again, break-even. We were at 
break-even, essentially, in 2020. We would have ended with a 
net surplus had the pandemic not occurred. It is going to take 
a while to get back there, but we are focused on improving the 
financials and giving the most value for the Federal investment 
that we get, and that Congress sets in terms of our route 
network.
    Mr. Nehls. The gentleman's time is expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Menendez for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member Payne, 
my fellow New Jerseyan who cares about rail and is a great 
advocate, as well. Thank you both for coming in. You can 
imagine, serving the Eighth Congressional District in New 
Jersey, this is an important issue for me.
    I appreciate what you are doing to bring Amtrak Northeast 
Corridor into the 21st century, continuing to find ways to 
bring Amtrak to new riders, to create greater capacity, 
ridership, and do things that continue to grow Amtrak.
    I mean, we have talked about how there is an increased 
demand for funding, demand outpacing supply. I can tell you 
that at the consumer level, that is the same case. People want 
more options for rail, definitely in New Jersey, definitely in 
the Greater tristate region, and along the entire Northeast 
Corridor. And I imagine when people have access to Amtrak, to 
rail in other parts of the country, that demand is going to 
quickly increase there as well in addition to the trends that 
you are already seeing. So, I thank you for that.
    Mr. Gardner, your testimony describes some of the key 
projects for which the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has 
provided funding. Specifically, your testimony highlights 
several critical pieces of the Gateway Project in my district, 
New Jersey's Eighth. I want to take a moment to highlight the 
importance of these projects for my district and the entire 
region.
    About how many passenger trips pass through the 10-mile 
stretch between Newark, New Jersey, and Penn Station in New 
York City just on an annual basis?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, thank you for the question 
and for your interest in this program. Pre-pandemic, it was 
about 200,000 trips a day between New Jersey Transit and 
Amtrak.
    The majority of those trips, of course, were New Jersey 
transit commuters. And it is a vital lifeline, both for the 
region but also for our whole system, because this is the 
linchpin between New York and points north and west and all of 
our service to the south and southwest.
    Mr. Menendez. Well, I appreciate that. About 200,000. I 
agree it is the linchpin. How many tracks does this stretch 
have?
    Mr. Gardner. Two tracks, Congressman. And between Newark 
and the interlocking at Penn Station, which is where it opens 
up to the station tracks.
    Mr. Menendez. Right. And that compares to the rest of the 
Northeast Corridor how?
    Mr. Gardner. Most of the Northeast Corridor is three 
tracks, four tracks. So, it is somewhat of a contradiction. It 
is the place where we have our most number of trains coming 
together, and, in fact, from Newark proceed from five tracks 
down to three, and then two.
    So, we have to funnel 24 trains an hour in each direction 
across this segment of railroad, and I believe it is the 
busiest mainline in North America by far.
    Mr. Menendez. Absolutely, extremely complicated. And what 
would happen if the Hudson Tunnel closes?
    Mr. Gardner. Traffic meltdown. I think there is no doubt 
that if we were to lose this connection--and when disruptions, 
unfortunately, occasionally happen today, you can see this in 
real life. There are huge impacts across the region, because 
there is insufficient tunnel and bridge capacity, as you know 
well, to get into New York City and to cross the Hudson, and 
many, many residents and travelers rely on this connection.
    Mr. Menendez. And the tunnel was severely impacted by 
Superstorm Sandy. Is that correct?
    Mr. Gardner. That is correct. The North River Tubes, which 
is the name of the current Hudson River Tunnel that was built 
well over 100 years ago now, were impacted in Sandy. There were 
about 3 million gallons of brackish water that got into the 
tunnels, having flooded in from the Hudson River.
    And while they were able to, obviously, remove all of the 
water, they have left a collection of chlorides and salts that 
are degrading both the concrete and metal elements of the 
interior of the tunnel.
    Mr. Menendez. So, the integrity of an old asset was further 
diminished because of Superstorm Sandy, which gets to my next 
question: How important is the Gateway Project to ensure future 
viability of the Northeast Corridor?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, it is essential to the future of the 
Northeast Corridor, future rail transportation for passengers 
really across the entire east coast and our connections to the 
west. So, it is essential.
    And, as you said, the core element here is to build a new 
tunnel which allows us to repair and rehabilitate the existing 
tunnel and gives us redundancy and resiliency into this vital 
connection.
    Mr. Menendez. Exactly right. So, we would be strengthening/
expanding the linchpin to the entire Northeast Corridor, and 
that is why this project is so important. And I appreciate 
Amtrak's leadership in making sure that we continue to make 
progress on this vitally important project.
    That is one of the most important, if not the most 
important, infrastructure projects in the country. I assure 
you, you have my support, Ranking Member Payne's support, the 
entire delegation's support. We want to get this done and look 
forward to working with you a long time to support Amtrak.
    Thank you so much for coming here today.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Menendez yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Kean for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today. 
This is a crucial hearing because many of my constituents and 
all New Jerseyans understand that Amtrak service is critical to 
our economy and to our livelihood. It plays a critical role in 
connecting communities and driving economic growth in the 
Northeast region and beyond.
    With the outline of CONNECT NEC 2023 in place, my 
constituents are enthusiastic about the Hunter Flyover that 
constructs a flyover south of Newark Penn Station, to eliminate 
at-grade crossings to reduce conflicts between trains and to 
increase capacity for NJ Transit and Amtrak, enabling NJ 
Transit to improve the Raritan Valley Line service.
    That is why I introduced the One-Seat-Ride Act, to direct 
the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a cost-benefit 
analysis of a one-seat-ride trip versus a transfer trip option 
during peak hours on New Jersey Transit's Raritan Valley Line.
    I am eager to hear from our two witnesses and to gain 
insight into the challenges and the opportunities facing our 
passenger rail system. And I will remain ready, willing, and 
able to make sure that Amtrak is a reliable and efficient mode 
of transportation for all, and I am supportive of all of your 
funding requests.
    Mr. Gardner, it is good to see you again, both at the State 
level as well as now at the Federal level. As you know, the 
Hunter Flyover is extraordinarily important, and there is 
actually not now a space reserved for it.
    Can I, again, have your commitment in public that that 
space is reserved for that flyover to hit at pace so we can 
ensure that the one-seat-ride is successful on the Raritan 
Valley Line?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, Congressman. And I appreciate your 
leadership, both at the State level in New Jersey advocating 
for a strong Northeast Corridor, and now here in Congress.
    We are supportive of this program. New Jersey Transit is 
taking a lead and working hard to seek funding and advance the 
program. And we are preserving the right-of-way capabilities so 
that the flyover can be built.
    As you and I have discussed, it does create opportunity for 
one-seat-ride for the Raritan Valley passengers, and it ensures 
that we deconflict the crossing on the Northeast Corridor so it 
doesn't interfere with other New Jersey Transit and Amtrak 
service at that junction.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you. One of the other things 
that I have talked to you about is both Trenton and Metropark. 
While neither are in my district, the fact that I believe right 
now there is no Acela service into Trenton, New Jersey's State 
capital, at all, as well as infrequent stops at Metropark, can 
you please talk to me about how we are going to have more 
opportunities into both Trenton as well as Metropark for not 
only access to our State's capital, but also the innovation 
centers and communities around Metropark as well?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, Congressman. And you are right that we 
have reduced some service at Metropark and Trenton, in part 
primarily because there has been reduction in ridership in 
those stations post-pandemic, and we are working to rebuild 
ridership there.
    We do know we need to add more service there. As you know, 
we are a little bit down in our Acela capacity with our current 
train sets, which are quite old, and we are keeping them in 
service.
    As we receive our new train sets and are able to expand the 
fleet of Acela, we will be able to ramp up service across the 
corridor and include more service there. We know it is 
important to Metropark and Trenton both.
    And we will be looking--and I will follow up with you on 
our schedule for being able to potentially reintroduce service 
there for Acela. We continue to have lots of regional service 
at both stops.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. It just seems to me that if people 
know there was predictable and efficient service at both those 
stops more frequently, obviously more people would come and 
utilize those services as opposed to looking to alternate 
routes and things that add time and inconvenience to commuters 
and families and businesses alike.
    One of the other issues that many people are commuting 
north and south, it seems to me for the last 15, 20 years, the 
cell service always goes out in certain parts of the line. Can 
you talk to me about how--it should seem an easy thing to fix 
over the course of a line and over the course of 1\1/2\ decades 
of service there. Can you walk me through why that is not 
happening?
    Mr. Gardner. Sure. Thanks, Congressman. So, the cellular 
service along the route is really the responsibility of the 
various cell carriers. We have been working with the various 
carriers to give them the data so that they can see the demand 
needs across the route.
    And we are in active conversations with them. We have had 
some carriers improve or increase capacity along the route in 
certain dead spots. And you are right, there are still some 
remainders out there. We are also partnering to increase 
capacity in the tunnels from another carrier, but this is an 
area where we could use support.
    In some countries, it is a requirement that the cellular 
carriers provide adequate coverage for rail routes. We don't 
have that here, and we would like to see----
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey [interrupting]. If I may also--if I 
may for one quick second, Mr. Chairman, with your support, I 
also want to emphasize my strong support for the Gateway 
Program. It is the most efficient, effective for New Jersey, 
New York.
    It is a time-sensitive and important project. Anything that 
I can do to ensure that that project is completed on time and 
with full funding, I am an ally. Thank you.
    Mr. Nehls. The gentleman's time is expired.
    I now recognize Mr. DeSaulnier for 5 minutes.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both, 
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, for this hearing.
    And to both of you, as someone from a long way away, a 
district a long way away from the Northeast Corridor, although 
I am a native of Massachusetts, your success is so important 
for the whole country.
    The San Francisco Bay area, where I have been involved in 
transportation for a long time, sometimes we compete for 
Federal funds with you and California, but we know how 
important it is that you are successful.
    So, in that context, first I want to talk, Mr. Gardner, 
about this investment is the largest investment since the 
Eisenhower administration for transportation and 
infrastructure. The Biden administration has been very 
focused--and I appreciate this as a member of this committee 
and as a senior member of the Education and the Workforce 
Committee--on expanding the middle class.
    We have the largest disparity between wealth inequality in 
the history of this country right now, at least competitive. 
This investment is the single biggest thing economists tell us 
we can do to expand the middle class and give opportunity to 
poor people to move up.
    So, you doing a good job--sorry to put more responsibility 
on, but given the comments about compensation--is extremely 
important.
    You mentioned Siemens in Sacramento. We have some 
challenges with Siemens in California, because they are 
manufacturing product for the Capitol Corridor and Amtrak on 
the west coast as well as here. They have a long history of 
being very successful in procurement, but also an unfortunate 
history about pushing limits.
    They were part of the largest settlement with the U.S. and 
the EU on foreign corruption charges not that long ago. They 
are aggressive when it comes to global market. They are being 
aggressive right now in California about the procurement 
requirements under the infrastructure bill to make sure that 
there is a livable wage.
    I wonder if you could speak to that to make sure that we 
have people who are going to make money--and we value them 
competing for it--strictly adhere to the requirements in this 
law, and starting in Sacramento, that middle-class Americans 
and working Americans benefit from this infrastructure, and we 
are very careful about adhering to the requirement for a 
livable wage when they build this product.
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Congressman, for your remarks and 
for your support. As you say, this is not just an investment in 
mobility. It is really an investment in a new generation of 
worker skills and a new workforce. So, we are really focused on 
creating that capacity to serve the needs of the Nation and to 
serve the needs of our network.
    And, as you rightfully say, this is a big increase in 
available funding for Amtrak and our other partners, State 
partners, et cetera, and we are all gearing up with greater 
expertise to be able to manage the dollars well. Part of that 
is managing our contracts well, being able to oversee those 
many, many private-sector partners.
    And to be clear, the vast majority of the dollars here 
spent are going to go from Amtrak to a private-sector partner, 
to a big construction firm or to a manufacturer who are going 
to build or deliver great things for us. And so, a key aspect 
of our capacity is creating the expertise, the knowledge to be 
able to effectively manage our contractors, ensure we get good 
value out of them.
    So, I can assure you, we are working very hard to pass on 
all the requirements that we receive from the Federal funding 
and the requirements that Amtrak ourselves have both in policy 
and in law and make sure that we get good followthrough and 
compliance from all of our entities. And we will do that.
    I can assure you we are about to go into the market again. 
It will be the first time we are purchasing since the IIJA has 
been impacted--or been enacted, excuse me--for our big fleet of 
long-distance equipment. This is going to be the largest order 
of passenger equipment since the 1940s acquisition by the New 
York Central. So, it is a huge opportunity, and we are going to 
be working really hard to make sure we get good value.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. So, I am going to hold you to that, 
specifically on the issue in California. We need you to make 
sure that that investment goes back to the people it was 
intended to--working Americans--not to companies with 
questionable track records, in terms of ethics, and to their 
investors offshore.
    Mr. Warren, just the importance of connectivity, you have a 
lot of MPOs and other governing agencies. We know in successful 
countries like Japan, the connectivity between intercity 
transit, and intracity and commuter.
    Talk to your challenges briefly about working with your 
partners along the corridor.
    Mr. Warren. Thank you, Congressman. One of the reasons we 
were created was because of the complexity, the fact that there 
are so many different owners and operators on the corridor in 
the intercity and the commuter services, a lot of tension, 
natural tension between priorities that Amtrak might have for 
intercity service, and priorities commuter railroads might have 
for commuter service.
    So, it has been an important forum to be able to bring 
people together to work through those issues, to determine how 
to share costs. We share about $1.3 billion a year in operating 
and capital costs, and we have a formula that does it. We have 
a policy that does it. And it saves Amtrak from doing a lot of 
one-off negotiations with every different railroad and to make 
sure all those railroads are on an equal fair footing when it 
comes to paying their shared cost for the use of the corridor.
    So, it has been very valuable, both in getting everybody on 
the same page when it comes to planning and paying for the 
corridor, because there is just a lot of natural tension when 
you have commuter and intercity----
    Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Williams for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Williams of New York. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    You may have noticed that we have had a recent discussion 
about spending in this country. And looking at the numbers, it 
looks like that Amtrak relies on the credit card of the 
American taxpayers in order to stay in business, and that seems 
like increasingly an unviable path.
    The Amtrak Board awarded millions of dollars in performance 
bonuses to yourselves and others in fiscal year 2021. These 
bonuses were paid despite Amtrak losing more than $1 billion in 
fiscal year 2021 and is projected to lose $1 billion a year for 
the foreseeable future. That is a lot of credit card debt.
    The head of the Transport Workers Union even described 
these bonuses as an affront to Amtrak workers, and further 
stated that every taxpayer should be livid. And based on the 
conversation that we had in the House floor last week, I think 
taxpayers are livid. And the credit card days are coming to an 
end.
    You mentioned in your testimony to take seriously the use 
of public funds, and yet, you continue to pay out what the New 
York Post calls a gravy train of performance bonuses.
    Mr. Gardner, have you ever worked in the private sector?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Williams of New York. In what capacity, please, and 
what timeframe?
    Mr. Gardner. So, as a railroader, I worked a variety of 
functions: trackman, brakeman, train dispatcher.
    Mr. Williams of New York. And when was that?
    Mr. Gardner. This was in the late nineties. And prior to 
that, I had a number of retail jobs, other things throughout my 
history.
    Mr. Williams of New York. In the last 25 years, and I 
suspect before that, there is a strong correlation in the 
private sector between actual financial performance and bonuses 
paid to the people responsible for that financial performance.
    And I find it unacceptable that your organization is paying 
out these lavish bonuses even in the face and to the criticism 
of your own workforce. Many other Members have pointed out that 
the operating losses, customer satisfaction, and overall 
service is not doing so well. And I live in the Northeast 
Corridor. I actually like traveling on Amtrak, but I do find 
that this is unsustainable.
    Going forward, do you think executives in companies that 
operate at a severe loss and declining customer satisfaction 
should or would typically receive bonuses in our economy?
    Mr. Gardner. Congressman, so, first off, the incentive 
program, again, encouraged by Congress and all the entities 
that provided us guidance here, the GAO, the OIG, are triggered 
to improvements. So, we are improving financial performance. We 
are improving customer service scores and improving Amtrak-
controlled delays. That is how we achieve benefits.
    And in fact, just, again, our losses are coming down 
compared to the numbers you quoted. We worked over a decade to 
achieve a break-even result, something the company had never 
been able to do for 50 years, but I and my colleagues worked 
hard to do this. And we did that, in part, because we used 
incentives to align the workforce and achieve improved 
financial performance, which is what I think companies do all 
over America. And, in fact, sort of our peer group of 
railroads, absolutely.
    So, I think that it has been working to get better 
performance. Our customer satisfaction numbers are actually 
quite good compared to pre-pandemic, and we are achieving 
better financial results this year than planned, in part, 
because we are using tools to keep us all aligned and to make 
sure we have the high-quality talent available.
    Again, professional railroads, we are a 21,000-mile 
network, similar size of any of the freight railroads, several 
of the freight railroads, and the same kind of basic number 
employees. We are competing against them for talent. We need to 
be able to provide reasonable compensation and incentives. We 
can't give stock----
    Mr. Williams of New York [interrupting]. It sounds like a 
really attractive job, because, as I understand by your 
criteria, that so long as you tried, you received your bonuses.
    And going back to my original question about working in the 
private sector, talking about 10 years of efforts to achieve 
break-even and mentioning the 50 years of loss before that, I 
can assure you, having been in the private sector, that that is 
not how bonuses are paid. That is not how other workers are 
measured. And just trying is not enough. The credit card is 
coming to an end. Thank you for your time.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Williams yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Carson for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carson. Thank you, Chairman. I represent Beech Grove, 
Indiana, which is one of the most important rail maintenance 
facilities in the country. Now, unfortunately, there have been 
some efforts to downsize, or even outsource, the work at Beech 
Grove, which has caused some concern amongst Hoosiers.
    I think if we are going to improve our supply chain in rail 
service, we have to expand opportunities for talented workers 
and experienced rail maintenance personnel to build up the 
quality of service and safety.
    Do you think it is important to strengthen our rail yards 
and maintenance facilities? If so, what does this look like?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Congressman Carson. I know Beech 
Grove is an important facility to you, and it is, of course, 
important to Amtrak. It is the vital hub for the maintenance of 
much of our long-distance fleet and locomotive fleet. So, it is 
a critical location at Amtrak.
    One of the really great things that is coming as a result 
of the IIJA investments is that we now have the dollars to 
invest in state-of-good-repair needs at some of our major 
facilities. And we are, of course, as I mentioned, doing lots 
of hiring in the mechanical shop.
    So, building up that workforce in Beech Grove is something 
we have been doing. There is lots of work underway. And it is a 
critical facility for Amtrak. Similarly, facilities in other 
parts of the country are also going to receive investment and 
are having more workers there, because we have got to get all 
our equipment back in shape and keep it maintained.
    Mr. Carson. Secondly, I am a big supporter of Amtrak's 
national network, especially the Cardinal line, which connects 
Northeastern cities like New York to Midwestern cities like 
Indianapolis and Chicago. And, unfortunately, with the loss of 
the Hoosier State line, we lost daily service from Indianapolis 
to Chicago, which was critically important, though slow. These 
important connections, I think they need to be restored to 
daily service and made more consistent and reliably on 
schedule.
    Mr. Gardner, is Amtrak under your leadership, sir, 
committed to strengthening long-distance service on the 
national network? And are you committed, sir, to improving the 
Cardinal line's reliability and restoring daily service from 
Chi-town to Naptown?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you for the question, Congressman. 
I actually just rode the Cardinal 3 weeks ago, it was a great 
trip. And we do believe there is an opportunity for two things.
    One is potentially providing daily service on the Cardinal 
between the Northeast via West Virginia and Ohio and Indiana, 
and also to work with the State on opportunities for corridor 
service between Indianapolis and Chicago. And there is, of 
course, service potential to the east, to Cincinnati, et 
cetera. So, those are going to be decisions that are driven by 
the State.
    As I have mentioned a couple times today, the growth of 
this network is a decision that State partners make together 
with the USDOT and the FRA funding. Similarly, long distance is 
really a network we operate on your behalf. It is a network 
that Congress and the administration essentially set for us and 
set for us in the IIJA.
    And as part of the IIJA, the FRA has been charged with 
undertaking a study to look at expansions and improvements and 
restorations to the long-distance network. So, this is a great 
process that the FRA is leading. Amtrak is certainly involved 
and will be providing information and input.
    So, the work we have applied for funding to look at daily 
service on the Cardinal and also daily service on the Sunset 
Limited, which goes between New Orleans via Houston, all the 
way to Los Angeles, and that would allow us to do some 
preparatory work. And then the FRA will ultimately decide what 
the future of the long-distance network could be, and 
recommend, I believe, to Congress, what those changes would 
need to be.
    We really operate that service, again, on your behalf, and 
so, it is the FRA's role to look at those options and then 
Congress to consider them.
    Mr. Carson. Thank you.
    I yield back, Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Molinaro for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Molinaro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Gardner, could you tell me how much the average Amtrak 
ticket is subsidized?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, it depends on the----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. How about we use----
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. Route, but in--for instance, on 
the Northeast Corridor, there is about a net operating surplus 
of about $10 per passenger. On State-supported, it is a subsidy 
of about $16 per passenger, and on long distance, it is about 
$148 per passenger.
    Mr. Molinaro. And so, I just want to offer, in 2019 on a 
per-passenger mile, it is 35.6 cents--35.6 cents--subsidized. I 
am not familiar with many of those freight industries, freight 
rails, that are equally subsidized by taxpayers.
    But, Mr. Gardner, I am going to quote a New York Times 
article that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the 
record and seek unanimous consent to enter into the record.
    Mr. Nehls. No problem. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
 Article entitled, ``G.O.P. Lawmakers Question Amtrak Over Six-Figure 
Bonuses,'' by Mark Walker, New York Times, November 4, 2022, Submitted 
               for the Record by Hon. Marcus J. Molinaro
        G.O.P. Lawmakers Question Amtrak Over Six-Figure Bonuses
Two Republicans on the House Transportation Committee asked the rail 
service to explain how it awards bonuses after top executives received 
payouts of more than $200,000 each last year.

by Mark Walker

New York Times, November 4, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/04/us/politics/amtrak-executive-
bonuses.html

Washington.--House Republicans are pressing Amtrak to answer questions 
about six-figure bonuses that top executives received last year despite 
the rail service's poor financial performance and low ridership during 
the coronavirus pandemic.
    In a letter to the chairman of Amtrak's board of directors, two 
Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
asked the company to explain how it awards bonuses, saying that the 
payouts to executives seemed to be ``inappropriate'' and ``wasteful.''
    The letter was sent after a report by The New York Times in August 
revealing that Amtrak paid out $2.3 million in short-term incentive 
bonuses to top executives in the 2021 fiscal year despite reporting its 
lowest revenue and biggest losses in more than a decade. Nine 
executives received bonuses exceeding $200,000.
    The letter, dated on Thursday, was signed by Representatives Sam 
Graves of Missouri, the top Republican on the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, and Rick Crawford of Arkansas, the top 
Republican on the panel's railroads subcommittee.
    Republicans are favored to take back the House in the midterm 
elections on Tuesday, and with it, the party would also gain control of 
committees like the transportation panel. Winning the majority would 
increase the party's power to conduct oversight and investigations, 
including placing new scrutiny on how federal dollars are spent.
    ``Payment of lavish executive bonuses when Amtrak services and 
revenues remain below prepandemic levels, and financial losses appear 
permanent, seem inappropriate, wasteful and disrespectful to Amtrak's 
nonexecutive frontline employees and taxpayers,'' Mr. Graves and Mr. 
Crawford wrote in the letter.
    They noted that Amtrak lost $789 million in the 2020 fiscal year 
and $1 billion the next year, and that ridership fell by nearly 63 
percent from 2019 to 2021, a period that includes the onset of the 
pandemic.
    Christina Leeds, a spokeswoman for Amtrak, said in a statement that 
the company welcomed the opportunity to brief the lawmakers. She said 
that businesses commonly used employee incentive plans and that 
Congress had recommended them to the rail service.
    ``We are pleased to offer these incentives as part of our 
competitive compensation package, helping us attract and retain talent 
who have the amazing opportunity to rebuild and expand passenger 
rail,'' Ms. Leeds said. ``To earn incentives, Amtrak must achieve a 
high level of corporate performance in support of our company's 
strategic plan--and employees must also meet their individual 
performance goals.''
    The Times reported in August that Stephen J. Gardner, an Amtrak 
executive who became the chief executive this year, received more than 
$766,000 in short-term incentive bonuses from 2016 to 2021, more than 
any other executive. Eleanor D. Acheson, the company's general counsel, 
received about $727,000 over that period.
    Amtrak has said that it increased its short-term incentive bonuses 
for managers across the company in 2019 to try to counter retention and 
hiring issues. The company said it created the bonus program in 2013 
after modifying its pension program and closing it off to newly hired 
employees.
    The rail service is still struggling with the effects of the 
pandemic. Its ridership remains below prepandemic levels as it tries to 
find ways to attract new customers. But it stands to benefit from a 
major infusion of federal cash after passage last year of the 
bipartisan infrastructure package, which included $66 billion in new 
spending on rail.

    Mr. Molinaro. ``The Times reported in August that Stephen 
J. Gardner, an Amtrak executive who became the chief executive 
this year, received more than $766,000 in short-term incentive 
bonuses from 2016 to 2021, more than any other executive. 
Eleanor D. Acheson, the company's general counsel, received 
about $727,000 over that period.'' End of quote.
    We have been discussing the bonuses received during this 
hearing. What I would like to know, because you talked about 
metrics and incentivizing, what I would like to know is what 
metrics you are measured against to consistently receive the 
bonuses that Amtrak, subsidized by taxpayers, is giving 
consistent with failure to turn a profit? Where is the New York 
Times wrong?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, first off, just to answer the question 
of consistency, the program, of course, isn't consistent. We 
have not received bonuses many of the years they were available 
because we failed to----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. Yes, but, Mr. Gardner, I am 
speaking about 2016 to 2021. In 2021, during the height of 
COVID, when thousands of families were either unemployed or, 
sadly, lost lives, like mine, what metric would you use to 
determine a $200,000 bonus is sufficiently acceptable for an 
industry subsidized by taxpayers?
    Mr. Gardner. In 2020, we suspended our bonus program. 
Executives like myself took a 22-percent pay cut for the entire 
year to cover----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. And so, your answer is--Mr. 
Gardner, I have 5 minutes. Your answer is, in 2021, since you 
sacrificed in 2020, 2021, $200,000 is sufficient?
    Mr. Gardner. No. The basis for the 2021 award was our 
financial performance which beat our anticipated levels by 
working hard to do that in--and----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. Lowest ridership, lowest point 
of Amtrak's ridership----
    Mr. Gardner [interposing]. Absolutely.
    Mr. Molinaro [continuing]. Massive folks left sitting on 
the sidelines while many of your employees were working damn 
hard. I want to turn, because that, to me, frames my next line 
of questioning.
    Mr. Gardner. OK.
    Mr. Molinaro. In 2022, Amtrak's 2022 ``ADA Progress 
Report,'' Amtrak has fully managed to address its ADA 
responsibility at only 90 of the 387 stations where it is 
responsible for implementation.
    So, as you know, in 1990, the Americans with Disabilities 
Act was established, and established a 20-year timeframe for 
intercity rail stations to be fully accessible for those with 
disabilities. Amtrak is appropriated $275 million for 
accessibility upgrades. And yet in the Northeast Corridor, I 
can tell you my own experience in Dutchess County, Rhinecliff, 
New York, Amtrak should be ashamed of its lack of ADA 
compliance. In Hudson, New York, Northeast Corridor, Amtrak 
should be ashamed of its consistent failure to meet ADA 
compliance. If you think this doesn't frustrate folks like us, 
it does.
    What commitment is Amtrak able to make today to fully 
fulfill the ADA requirement adopted in 1990, knowing that, at 
the very least in the Northeast Corridor, in my part of the 
country, we have, for now, two generations been left with 
individuals in wheelchairs trying to find their way over active 
tracks?
    Mr. Gardner. Congressman, I share your passion for 
compliance with the ADA. We are working----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. But not the outcomes, Mr. 
Gardner.
    Mr. Gardner. We have been working hard, and we have 
achieved significantly more progress than you have noted. So, 
there are 110 fully compliant stations and 69 additional 
compliant stations with the exception of platform work.
    Much of the work that has been done to date was retarded by 
a lack of funding. That is now solved with the IIJA, which 
provides $1.2 billion for us to bring all of the facilities 
that we are responsible for, the roughly 380 you mentioned, 
into compliance. We will do that.
    The last project will begin in 2028. We are working hard to 
achieve really good results. We will have 39 additional 
projects completed by the end of this fiscal year. So, we are 
on path to address this.
    One of the main issues is also the various ownership of 
these stations. We own a very small percentage of the 
stations----
    Mr. Molinaro [interposing]. I understand.
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. And we have to get----
    Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. Sir, I appreciate it. My time 
is up.
    Mr. Chairman, I just would say, I was quoting from your IG 
report, and I would like to see the same kind of commitment to 
achieve the ADA compliance as you suggest.
    Mr. Gardner. OK.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Molinaro yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Cohen for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Gardner, I am a big supporter, as you know, of Amtrak 
and passenger rail service throughout this country, and of 
course I also have an interest in my area, Memphis, which has 
New Orleans and Chicago via City of New Orleans, but also wants 
to expand to Little Rock and/or Nashville.
    Can you give me an assessment of where those possible 
expansions of service out of Memphis stand at the present time?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Congressman, and thanks for your 
support and leadership on passenger rail issues.
    I know that the State has submitted a corridor 
identification application to the Federal Railroad 
Administration for service from Memphis east to Nashville, on 
to Chattanooga and to Atlanta. So, that is a very interesting 
corridor, one that holds a lot of promise. And the process now 
will be for the FRA to consider those applications for the 
Corridor Development Program and to make their selections. And 
then that will provide some initial seed funding to be able to 
begin the planning work. So, that is a great step and one that 
we have supported.
    Mr. Cohen. Could the State do more or is the State doing 
what is necessary?
    Mr. Gardner. I think this is the first critical step, is to 
get in the program, to make the submission and to express their 
interest. And once the FRA has made their decisions, then there 
will be a process to further study and work, of course, with 
host railroads and work with operators like ourselves to plan 
out a service. But this was a critical step that was necessary 
by the State.
    Mr. Cohen. That route could be, I think, very important 
because Ford is opening a major plant about 40 to 50 miles out 
of Memphis. So, rail getting people to and from that facility, 
and also further into middle Tennessee, would be important.
    But the Memphis to Nashville area is not served by air 
transportation--commercial air. There would be, and I have 
heard, a great amount of support in Memphis and Nashville. 
People in Memphis want to go to Nashville, the State capital, 
for all kind of reasons, and people in Nashville have even more 
reasons to leave and come to Memphis. So, there is this great 
synergy of energy there that would be important, so, I would 
urge you to look at that carefully.
    Also, Little Rock. Has the Governor of Arkansas or the 
State of Arkansas done anything to get that Memphis to Little 
Rock route that would go on to Dallas?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, I think there are a lot of 
opportunities. I just was on the City of New Orleans several 
months ago and had a chance to see the great station in Memphis 
and the development happening there, and basically, late at 
night, the amount of demand there is. Similar to Little Rock: I 
was recently on the Texas Eagle at 3:15 a.m., and 30 or 40 
passengers lining up to take the train.
    So, if we could serve those markets during the day with 
reliable service to connect these city pairs, we think there is 
a real opportunity for rail to play a bigger role.
    Mr. Cohen. Is Arkansas doing anything to help that? Because 
the State is real involved. Is it not necessary?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes. So, I think--I am not sure that that 
corridor has been submitted for the Corridor ID Program, but 
the good news is that that is a rolling process, so, there will 
be more opportunities for States to put forward other 
opportunities and interests.
    Mr. Cohen. I presume you heard about it, the Gannett 
newspapers ran a section on summer travel this past weekend, in 
Memphis at least, and one of the highlights was rail. It said 
rail was a great way to go, and it talked about all the routes, 
but there were two criticisms. One was you always have to wait, 
just get used to it, and the other was dining.
    You know that I have been concerned about the dining 
experience which I experienced as a child. I think it is part 
of the romance of train travel. What is going to be done with 
the Amtrak Food and Beverage Working Group report on improving 
dining and making it more available, which enhances the 
consumers' enjoyment of the Amtrak experience?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes. Thanks for that question. So, we have 
worked hard to restore traditional dining and had great results 
as a result of that on our Western trains. We are bringing 
traditional dining back to our Silver service in the East.
    And we are looking at the--as I mentioned, we just got the 
food and beverage recommendations here recently. We are working 
on going through those. Amtrak was a part of that, but it is a 
big group of folks from the culinary world, from our riders, 
from our labor partners, coming together to give us great 
recommendations about how to improve the service.
    So, we will be back to Congress with our take on that 
report and the different efforts that are underway, but we are 
committed to improving the experience, and also making, as we 
have done in certain instances, making the dining car available 
to coach passengers where we have capacity.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you. I look forward to traveling in one of 
those longer trains between Chicago and Los Angeles or Frisco. 
They certainly give you the opportunity to see the country and 
enjoy it.
    Last question--and I don't want to harp on this at all--but 
did Richard Anderson start the bonus program or was it before 
him?
    Mr. Gardner. Say it again, please.
    Mr. Cohen. Richard Anderson, did he start the idea of the 
bonuses at Amtrak or did it predate him?
    Mr. Gardner. No. It began actually under CEO Joe Boardman. 
And, again, it was a response to the PRIIA, Passenger Rail 
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which encouraged that 
Amtrak adopt a program that was performance based. Because 
based on the kind of long history of Amtrak, a lot of the 
compensation was deferred compensation in the form of pension.
    This took away that and actually saved taxpayers hundreds 
of millions, billion dollars of future exposure, and traded 
that for performance-based compensation, so that Amtrak's 
employees would be tied to the goals and metrics that we set. 
And that, as I mentioned, has not been something that simply is 
awarded. It is earned, and oftentimes the company has not 
achieved its goals.
    Mr. Cohen. Thank you very much. I yield back the balance of 
my time, and I look forward to my ham and eggs in Carolina.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. Cohen yields. I now recognize Mr. LaMalfa 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Gardner, first, I want to harken back a little bit to 
when we were talking about the bonuses, then I will leave it 
be. But it is just not a good look when things are going so 
badly for the country during the COVID era that even though 
maybe the expectations of the rail were a little better than 
low-ball hopes, that that shouldn't kick in big bonuses like 
that. It is about as popular as Congress getting pay raises or 
something like that.
    That all said, you had one of your stats here that says 
that ridership has returned to pre-COVID levels. But how can 
that be when ridership in fiscal year 2022 was seen as about 85 
percent overall in the final 6 months, and overall for the year 
was 68 percent? How do we say that we are at pre-COVID levels 
when you can really see it is two-thirds of that?
    Mr. Gardner. Congressman, thanks for the question. So, as 
of April, we were at 89 percent of our pre-pandemic demand, and 
that is essentially on roughly 85 percent of our capacity. So, 
we don't have as many trains in the marketplace, and we don't 
have as long a consist.
    So, we actually have sort of more demand against the 
available capacity than we did in pre-pandemic. We are working 
hard to restore that capacity. We will have--essentially be 
back to capacity levels in 2024. That is why we are confident 
we can reach the 32 million riders we had prior then.
    Mr. LaMalfa. A number like 100 percent in 2024?
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, we anticipate to be back in 2024. About 
28.5 million is our expectation for 2023, and we are 32 million 
for 2024.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Got to keep moving, I am sorry. OK. Has it 
been evenly distributed along the long-distance routes or State 
routes or the Northwest Corridor, or they have different 
performances?
    Mr. Gardner. Different performance. So, we have had some 
routes that have actually exceeded their pre-pandemic levels, 
some routes that are less. I would say that the routes that are 
having less ridership are those routes that are more subject to 
the impact of work from home and were more subject to daily 
commute. Most Amtrak----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. The Northeast Corridor 
specifically----
    Mr. Gardner [interrupting]. Excuse me?
    Mr. LaMalfa. Probably the most important one, my guess, 
would be the Northeast Corridor. What is its number?
    Mr. Gardner. The Northeast Corridor is doing well. We are 
basically back to--when I looked at the last week of April, we 
were at 1 percent below riders for that same week in 2019. So, 
there is plenty of demand on the Northeast Corridor, and our 
long-distance trains. There is really strong demand in a number 
of them, particularly for our sleeping-class product.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Sorry, I have three committees at the same 
time, so, I haven't had the benefit of hearing the whole 
committee today.
    I have a reference here to what was known as the train ride 
from hell in January of this year from Virginia to Florida. A 
normally 17-hour ride from Virginia to Florida added an 
additional 20 hours. I guess there was a derailment. I 
understand that is a problem, big time. But several delays made 
it a really terrible ride for the passengers.
    So, the problem I have with it is that people are not 
allowed to have the options to get off the train and move 
around or maybe just jump off if someone comes to pick them up 
or they get an alternate. Of course, they seemed to run out of 
food during the time on the train, so--and then just a lack of 
knowledge of what is going on so people can maybe exercise 
options.
    So, what is being done--you hear that with airlines 
sometimes too, with not leaving the gate. So, what is being 
done to give passengers a little more respect or options on 
letting them get off the darn train if they need to, just to 
stretch? Is there ability to be able to reverse to the previous 
train station or an appropriate area, even a good crossing, 
people could get off and--what do you think about that?
    Mr. Gardner. So, you are right that this was a very 
difficult trip. We certainly apologized and refunded all our 
customers. This was driven by a grade crossing accident of CSX 
between a CSX freight train and a vehicle that essentially 
blocked the route. And our train--this is a special train. This 
is the auto train, so, this a train where we have a number of 
cars that are carrying passengers and then a number of auto 
racks that are carrying their vehicles. So, it is a very 
unusual train.
    We had already departed the terminal, and because of the 
configuration and length of this train, it was not possible to 
reverse it or to turn it anywhere en route. CSX gave us the 
information--I think the best information they had at the time, 
which was to reroute this train, but it turned out that that 
routing took much, much longer than CSX had expected it, and 
they were required to produce additional crew to help us 
navigate the portion of the route we don't normally use----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. OK. I've got to cut in here.
    Mr. Gardner. Our goal is to let folks get off at stations, 
of course, and to always, if we have a problem, to come to a 
stop at a station and to let folks go. In this case, the 
problem was separating people from their cars----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interposing]. Yes.
    Mr. Gardner [continuing]. Because if we got them off, they 
couldn't get their cars, because the cars would still be stuck, 
and we had to get them to the final station.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK.
    Mr. Gardner. So, it was difficult. We did provide food and 
water throughout the trip. There were times later when 
passengers could get off, but it was in the middle of the 
night. So, it was an unfortunate experience. We are spending a 
lot of time and effort increasing our communication----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. OK, indeed a very tough deal, I 
get you on that. But I guess with the ride of the future, you 
have got to give people opportunities to--and other situations 
and when--I was even involved in one when we went on a trip 
then. You've got to give people options to be able to at least 
get out, move around, and get better service that way.
    So, my time flew by.
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you.
    Mr. LaMalfa. I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Nehls. Mr. LaMalfa yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Carter for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, 
thank you very much.
    Mr. Gardner, for the people of Louisiana who have been very 
patient and waiting for rail between New Orleans, Baton Rouge, 
and Mobile, here is your shot. Give them the shot in the arm of 
confidence that this is actually going to happen.
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you, Mr. Carter. And we are very 
confident about bringing service to the gulf coast, and we have 
reached a settlement with our partners, and our hope is that 
that could commence by the end of the year. We will see. It 
could be pushed on a little longer, depending on some 
construction work that is happening in Mobile, the station 
there, some other things. But we are working hard.
    There is strong support from the States and the Southern 
Rail Commission, as you know, and we are really just at this 
point, got to get all the elements in place. But Amtrak is 
committed, has been long committed to this service and to be a 
partner to the Southern Rail Commission.
    As it relates to Baton Rouge, we supported certainly the 
Louisiana and Southern Rail Commission efforts there and have a 
strong partnership with Canadian Pacific, now CPKC, to permit 
us to operate trains over that route. There is going to be some 
investment required, particularly to deal with the spillway 
there, to be able to facilitate the service. But a good plan, 
both ourselves and CP are soon to be in receipt of the 
preliminary engineering work, a sort of report, that is 
necessary for us to look at those opportunities. But we see 
that service there could happen in several years.
    And on Mobile to New Orleans, that should be within the 
year.
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Fantastic. Thank you very much. I 
know how hard you guys worked on it, but I want to emphasize 
the importance it is for the people of New Orleans, for the 
region. And it is something that has been long awaited, and we 
are very excited about the movement.
    In the 2017 ``Gulf Coast Working Group Report to 
Congress,'' they wrote: ``In the more than 10 years since 
Hurricane Katrina struck, gulf coast leaders and residents have 
made great strides in rebuilding businesses, communities, and 
infrastructure that connect cities across the region. In the 
last 5 years, more than $3 billion in private funds were 
invested in industrial, medical, IT, and aerospace sectors.
    ``As mentioned earlier in this report, during the next 30 
years, the gulf coast and Florida megaregion's populations are 
expected to increase by 10 million and 13.8 million, 
respectively. For the region to harness this projected 
population growth, it needs a multimodal transportation system 
that provides transportation alternatives.''
    Do you believe that this route serves as the multimodal 
transportation system that was called for 5 years ago?
    Mr. Gardner. I think it is the beginning of that service, 
absolutely. There is going to be the initial corridor service 
and then certainly opportunities to strengthen connectivity 
between the intercity passenger rail service and local transit, 
because as the report says, it is really critical that we 
create a network of operations that can support people 
traveling without their cars.
    But we think this initial service is a great start. We are 
excited for it and think there is a lot of support amongst----
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana [interrupting]. Do you see this 
being useful for commuters as well as vacationers?
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely. We see there is a strong 
international visitor component in New Orleans that will find 
rail service, I think, attractive. And then we see a lot of 
opportunity along the gulf coast there for many of the towns 
that have things to offer visitors and for workers who need to 
travel between the various cities for jobs.
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. And we find ourselves now in 
hurricane season. Share with me your view on it being able to 
be utilized as a mode of transportation for disasters and 
evacuations.
    Mr. Gardner. Well, we have had some experience with this in 
the past, and I think that the difficulty typically with using 
passenger trains for evacuation, unless it is well in advance, 
is that our host railroads, the freight railroads, often 
curtail their own operations in advance of a hurricane. So, if 
they have shut down the railroad, we can't operate over it.
    Having said that, certainly we endeavor to work with FEMA 
and work with the State emergency management folks about 
creating opportunities for service when there is a need. But it 
is difficult where we don't control the railroad.
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. OK. I've got a few seconds left. I 
want to go back to these CRISI grants that were mentioned 
earlier. CRISI grants, share with us and the public, the public 
benefit of your having access to CRISI grants.
    Mr. Gardner. Well, CRISI really is a unique program in that 
it is available to a broad set of eligible participants to 
cover a variety of rail improvements. Most of the CRISI grants 
we have ever been involved with are at the request of States or 
railroads who seek to gain safety investments or other 
improvements in their properties that----
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana [interrupting]. Go back for a 
second. Safety. Safety.
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely,
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Safety. One of the most 
significant things that we can do with transportation going 
through communities is making sure the communities are safe. Is 
that correct?
    Mr. Gardner. Absolutely.
    Mr. Carter of Louisiana. I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Mann for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mann. Thank you, Chairman Nehls.
    I represent the Big First District of Kansas, which is 60 
primarily rural counties in western, central, and a few in the 
eastern part of the State of Kansas. Transportation and 
infrastructure is very, very important to us.
    The Southwest Chief route runs through the State of Kansas 
where 53 percent of residents live within 25 miles of a 
passenger rail station and 75 percent within 50 miles. Kansas 
is also home, at the same time, to 4,600 miles of active rail 
which Amtrak utilizes for its passenger rail service.
    Mr. Gardner, the Southwest Chief route runs right through 
my district and makes several stops each night and early 
morning. I am just wanting to confirm that you, as the CEO, and 
Amtrak, are supportive of long-distance passenger rail routes 
like Southwest Chief.
    Mr. Gardner. Yes, sir, we are. We are supportive of the 
Southwest Chief, and we are looking to hopefully connect the 
Southwest Chief with the leadership of the two States, of 
Oklahoma and Kansas, potentially to the Heartland Flyer in 
Newton.
    Mr. Mann. I appreciate that. I have heard that Amtrak has 
planned on reducing the sleeper car capacity of the Southwest 
Chief route. This seems a little contradictory seeing that I 
know you support it. Is this true and can you provide an 
explanation?
    Mr. Gardner. No. I will get back to you on the specific 
details, but our goal here is to, in fact, put as much sleeper 
capacity as we can on routes with strong demand. The western 
routes have particularly strong demand. The issue has been we 
have been working through some of the overhauls that come due 
and need to get done by our mechanical shops and the impacts of 
a number of equipment pieces that we have lost in recent 
incidents.
    So, we have a smaller fleet today because we have roughly 
30 or so wrecked vehicles that can't be repaired, and we are 
working hard to get more capacity back out into all of our 
long-distance routes because we see success occurring on routes 
like the Southwest Chief.
    Mr. Mann. OK. Thank you. And as you know, next question, 
our country has faced significant supply chain issues over the 
past few years. The freight rail and short line rail have been 
some of the major industries that have been affected.
    The railroad, of course, owns the track that Amtrak uses. 
And what assurances can you give our Nation's freight and short 
line railroads, as Amtrak looks to expand, that Amtrak will be 
a good negotiating partner in the development of future 
passenger rail service?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, it is absolutely required that we be a 
good partner. We try and find productive, mutually beneficial 
outcomes to both support the service we have today and achieve 
the kind of results that I think you expect in terms of on-time 
performance and to permit growth where it is appropriate. And 
that, again, is a calculus that is developed by us, our State 
partners, the FRA, et cetera, but then we seek to negotiate and 
come up with a collaborative solution, and generally we have 
been supportive of that.
    I would point to our agreements with Canadian Pacific as a 
great example of two railroads working together. We have a 
great relationship there, and that is going to be always our 
goal, is to find a mutually beneficial solution, but also one 
that respects the rights that the public was given and that 
Amtrak was given, through its creation, to utilize the Nation's 
rail system.
    But we don't do that in a way, we believe, that 
significantly negatively impacts freight railroads. And there 
is a safeguard method essentially that ensures that our 
additional service does not come at the expense of the ability 
to move goods and services in the United States.
    Mr. Mann. I think that is incredibly important.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Stanton for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 
for the opportunity to join the subcommittee for today's 
hearing on a topic of great interest to the people of my State 
in Arizona.
    I wanted to be here because Phoenix is the largest city in 
the United States without access to passenger rail service. As 
other communities have gained access to passenger rail, they 
have experienced significant new economic opportunities, but 
Arizona, thus far, has missed out.
    I am hopeful that will change, and there is reason for 
optimism. Amtrak has applied for funds under the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law to restore long-distance train service to 
Phoenix via the Sunset Limited, and Arizona has submitted a 
proposal to the Federal Railroad Administration's Corridor ID 
Program to advance frequent and reliable passenger rail service 
between our two large and fast-growing metropolitan areas, 
Phoenix and Tucson.
    Arizonans have wanted passenger train service between 
Phoenix and Tucson for decades, so, it is no surprise that this 
effort has significant local and State support. The mayors of 
Phoenix and Tucson and other communities along the proposed 
lines are on board, and the State of Arizona is behind it and 
has provided $3\1/2\ million in State funds for the planning 
effort.
    What does this all mean for Arizona? It means opportunity: 
opportunity to connect our communities, make them more 
accessible and productive and more internationally competitive; 
opportunity to boost our regional economies with better access 
to jobs and more private investment along the route; and 
opportunity to ease congestion along Interstate 10 to help 
reduce air pollution.
    Mr. Gardner, if Amtrak is successful in its application for 
Federal funds through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to 
restore long-distance train service to Phoenix, how 
specifically will these resources be invested, and how will 
these investments help advance and accelerate the development 
of the Tucson-Phoenix-West Valley intercity passenger rail 
line?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you very much for the question. 
And I just had the pleasure of seeing the mayor of Phoenix and 
the mayor of Mesa recently and heard their strong interest and 
support in this.
    And as you said, it is really a pretty remarkable corridor. 
Very, very strong local support, bipartisan support, for 
bringing service back there.
    As we mentioned, Arizona DOT will be the lead. They have 
submitted corridor identification applications to consider 
service between Phoenix and Tucson. And what we are also trying 
to start is the work to connect Phoenix to the West back to the 
UP main line, the Southern Pacific Sunset route. That portion 
of the route was severed.
    Today, our service, the Sunset Limited, goes to Maricopa, 
about 40 miles or so, I think, south of Phoenix, so, it really 
misses the mark. And as you said, Phoenix's growth has been 
huge, and it is really a, frankly, an embarrassment that we 
don't serve such a major and prominent city. And I would say 
that about many other cities--Nashville included, Columbus, et 
cetera--cities that are obviously the right size.
    So, we think that the market in Arizona is great for 
intercity passenger rail and are partnering with the State to 
support that, and we are looking to undertake potentially that 
initial work to understand what it will take to restore the 
service back from Phoenix west and route our long-distance 
train that way.
    Mr. Stanton. I appreciate it. It is time. You said the word 
``embarrassment.'' I mean, Phoenix is the fifth most populous 
city in the United States of America and it does not have 
access to intercity rail service.
    I talked a little bit about the opportunities that will 
come with new passenger rail between Tucson and Phoenix. Could 
you talk about some of the benefits Amtrak has seen in other 
communities that get new intercity rail service and what 
ridership has looked like?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, we are really excited for this new 
service, of course, in the gulf coast coming. I would say that, 
in general, we see very strong adoption when we introduce new 
service.
    Everywhere I go across America, communities small and big, 
the common refrain I get is, how come we don't have more 
trains, how come we don't have faster trains, how come we don't 
have more service in my community. I really, literally, never 
met anyone who wasn't interested in more trains to their 
locations. And when we see new service introduced, we get 
really a initial period, of course, of introduction, but we 
have seen very strong results.
    We just extended, for instance, the service to Burlington, 
Vermont, up from Rutland, which has been a long time coming, 
and we have already exceeded our expectations there in terms of 
the ramp-up of the service. We anticipate--again, where we can 
produce a reliable, frequent, and competitive option, that 
passengers will come and that the State will see real value for 
its investment.
    I think this is clear because States continue to maintain 
this service year after year after year. Once it is installed, 
it becomes an integral part of the community, and they elect to 
continue those investments to preserve the service.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. My time is up. I yield 
back. Thank you.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you. The gentleman yields.
    And, gentlemen, I appreciate that you are very engaging in 
sharing your thoughts and your insight into Amtrak. We have a 
couple of Members that would like to go into a second round of 
questioning. So, I would like to yield 5 more minutes to Mr. 
LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate 
the second round here.
    Mr. Warren, I wanted to ask you about, on your Northeast 
Corridor there, do you find at this point that your passengers 
are utilizing all or most of the tickets for either the 
conventional or the Acela high-speed line? How is that 
performing?
    Mr. Warren. I am sorry. Passengers are utilizing the Amtrak 
regional and Amtrak----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. How are ticket sales for the 
high-speed line basically, yes? Are they selling out or are 
they----
    Mr. Warren [interrupting]. Well, Acela has struggled some 
because they have had a shortage of trains and have just been 
replacing them. The regional trains have been doing very well 
on the corridor, the leisure travel.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Are the high-speed Acela trains selling out?
    Mr. Warren. I might turn to Stephen for that. I know there 
has been--the trains I have taken have been very busy, partly 
because there have been very fewer of them, but they have also 
been getting more leisure travelers on the Acela trains to make 
up for some of the loss of business travelers.
    So, overall, the ridership, as Stephen mentioned before, on 
the corridor, is very strong, particularly Amtrak. The commuter 
railroads are----
    Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. Well, I am trying to parallel 
this with the prospects of a high-speed rail in California. Of 
course, it is going to be four times more the cost that was 
sold to the voters back 10, 12 years ago, whatever it was. And 
so, I want to see the performance on a dense route like--so, I 
will ask it again.
    Do you believe Acela, the high-speed trains in and of 
themselves, are they performing well on tickets, on sales, or 
are they half full? How does it look?
    Mr. Warren. Yes. Well, before COVID, they were making a 
significant profit, an operating profit. That was largely 
driven by the Acela trains and the sales made for tickets on 
the Acela trains. I believe the profits were in the 
neighborhood of $300 million, $400 million a year on the 
operating side on the Northeast Corridor pre-COVID.
    Obviously, since COVID, they have been down, but the Acela 
trains have been very successful and have driven significant 
operating profits on the corridor.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Thank you.
    Mr. Gardner, what do you anticipate that Amtrak's 
relationship will be with California with the high-speed rail 
line, whatever portion that may be completed of that? Right 
now, it is going to start in an almond orchard somewhere around 
Bakersfield and be completed somewhere around Madera. It is 
just the first segment. There is going to be two more giant 
segments needed after that.
    What you do think Amtrak's role will be with whatever that 
is going to be?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, thanks for the question. I 
think that, first off, the State and the authority and our 
partners, JPA as well, will decide exactly how the service is 
going to progress. My understanding is that there will be a 
connection between the San Joaquins service to the new high-
speed service, and we will see if Amtrak is the operator there.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, I know----
    Mr. Gardner [interrupting]. We are really the partner, we 
are the provider of service, so, it is really the State and the 
authorities that are going to decide how the service operates, 
but we will connect wherever we can with our long-distance 
service, of course, to create opportunities for riders to 
connect to the service.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes. OK. Thank you.
    When we are talking in general about expansion of service 
or lines, are we talking building new tracks somewhere for 
Amtrak?
    Mr. Gardner. Most often not. So, most of the expansion 
opportunities that we see and that many folks have applied for 
through this Corridor Development Program are to take existing 
railway lines and upgrade them in some instances or use them if 
they are already at the right class of track.
    Mr. LaMalfa. And for the most part, so, there might be 
areas where you are adding more parallel track or even making 
brandnew--breaking ground on new routes?
    Mr. Gardner. There will be instances where additional track 
is necessary, often within an existing right-of-way, because 
many rights-of-way used to have more track than they do today 
and were downsized by the freight railroads, so--but in some 
cases, there may be a need for some additional track or new 
routes, but much of the proposed expansion of service is on 
existing rail lines.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. How do you expect that--and I am not 
trying to be a mean guy here on this. I like passenger rail, 
and I enjoy it on the times I get to run up and down the 
corridor here and such, but it has got to be in the ballpark of 
at least breaking even or profitable.
    So, how does adding more to a situation that is not 
profitable or break even going to help the bottom line to not 
take that even in a deeper spiral?
    Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, I would say that most of 
the--really all of the States who decide to get into this 
business of supporting passenger rail do so for broader 
mobility goals, the same way that public transit operates, 
right? Public transit is not profitable. It comes with 
significant investments that are required, but it creates value 
by providing mobility that then enables more economic activity, 
enables development in cities and towns.
    So, I think that is the rationale on which folks invest in 
passenger rail, because transportation in and of itself is 
often unprofitable if you add all the cost of the aviation 
system to what the carriers pay, you don't, I think, in the way 
see a net profit. Similar on the highway system, it is that 
the--it is a means to create value in these transportation 
systems. And so, States elect to start new service or fund the 
service they have because they get value for their citizens in 
doing so.
    Mr. LaMalfa. I get you. I am going to have to yield the 
time here, so, thank you.
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you.
    Mr. LaMalfa. But it sounds like the bottom line is that 
indeed it will add more negative costs that Federal Government 
will have to cover since there doesn't seem to be the ability 
to have profit.
    So, thank you again for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Nehls. Yes. Mr. LaMalfa yields.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Payne for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And we have heard a lot about Amtrak not turning a profit 
today. Last month, we heard from the very profitable freight 
railroads and from their customers about their ongoing supply 
chain challenges and how the freight rail customers are still 
not getting adequate service.
    Mr. Gardner, what would happen to Amtrak's service if you 
adopted a single-minded focus on profitability?
    Mr. Gardner. Congressman, I think essentially none of the 
national network trains that are long distance would still be 
in operation. They all require significant investments.
    And the State-supported routes are, by and large, funded by 
the States. There is a little bit of Federal investment there, 
and under the new policy we developed, Amtrak is providing some 
of the core security and insurance costs, but those routes 
would be at risk if the States elected not to continue to fund 
them.
    The Northeast Corridor, to just go to the earlier 
conversation, pre-pandemic, was creating about $500 million or 
$550 million in net operating surplus, but of course that 
relies on a very significant investment in capital to bring the 
assets up to a state of good repair.
    So, Federal funding is required for this network. It always 
has been. It likely always will be. Our goal is to try and get 
as much value for the American taxpayer out of that and run the 
network that you all as our owners tell us that you want for 
the Nation.
    This is similar for every passenger rail operator around 
the world, and we take our stewardship responsibilities 
seriously, and we are trying to always balance that connection 
between sort of quality of service and level of service with 
expense. And, of course, we still have to live every year with 
the dollars that are provided to us in annual appropriations.
    Mr. Payne. So, the railroad entities around the world have 
the same challenges as Amtrak does?
    Mr. Gardner. They do, except they receive significantly 
more funding typically than Amtrak does.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    Mr. Gardner. Yes.
    Mr. Payne. That is what I wanted to hear.
    Mr. Warren, how would passengers along the Northeast 
Corridor react to these changes to services?
    Mr. Warren. The improvements that are going to be funded 
through the infrastructure bill are going to have significant 
benefits to service, going to have more reliable service, more 
frequent service, and faster service. So, we are expecting to 
track significant new passengers over the course of the 15 
years of this plan as we are able to improve the service and 
build new capacity.
    In the NEC 2035 plan, we estimate about 60 million new 
riders over 15 years. So, our expectation--as you note, the 
ridership in the Northeast Corridor is already strong, and it 
is just going to get stronger as we can improve the reliability 
of the trains and the frequency.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    Mr. Gardner, now that the funding is at least taken care of 
for the immediate future, what are some of the major obstacles 
to enhancing and developing rail service?
    Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Representative Payne. There are, on 
the Northeast Corridor, and broadly, several challenges. First, 
of course, is workforce. We have talked about the need to ramp 
up the workforce and train the workforce. That is a big 
challenge. We are working hard on that.
    Two, the supply chain is a challenge, finding adequate 
vendors and suppliers with a domestic supply chain, because, of 
course, Amtrak, 97 percent of our purchases are with firms here 
in the United States, and getting the robust supply we need for 
not only things like rolling stock, but just simple amounts of 
concrete, steel, copper, et cetera, to build all these new big 
programs is going to be a challenge and dealing with 
inflationary costs there.
    The coordination amongst the operators--and let me just 
sort of thank Mitch Warren here who has been an incredible 
leader of the Commission, came to the Commission really in its 
inception and works hard to bring all of the entities together 
to come up with a common plan.
    We have a common plan, but it is not easy to execute. We 
have 12 different railway operators over four owners in the 
Northeast Corridor, and trying to get coordinated and balance 
construction work against service is a real challenge.
    In order to rebuild the railroad, we have to take it out of 
service. Similar to on interstate highways, we all hate it in 
the summer. They close down a bunch of lanes to do work. We all 
sit in traffic. That kind of problem faces us on the corridor 
as well, because we have got to rebuild the railroad while it 
is still under load, and balance the different needs of 
operations against construction.
    And then, finally, the partnerships for funding are 
required. Amtrak is an investor of much of the Northeast 
Corridor projects but certainly not the only investor. And in 
something like the Gateway, we are the minority investor. We 
need the States to come up with their local matches and their 
transit partners to have the dollars they need to be able to 
partner with us on these shared benefit projects.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you. I appreciate both of you gentlemen 
staying here and--well, Chairman, as I look at both sides of 
the aisle, it looks like it is just you and me.
    Mr. Nehls. I guess so.
    Mr. Payne. With that, I will yield back.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you. The ranking member yields.
    Are there any further questions from any other members on 
the subcommittee?
    I see none.
    This concludes our hearing today. And I would like to thank 
each of our witnesses for their testimony.
    I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing 
remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided 
answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in 
writing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 
for 15 days for any additional comments and information 
submitted by Members and witnesses to be included in the record 
of today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    The subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:47 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]


                       Submissions for the Record

                              ----------                              


 Statement of Scott R. Spencer, Chief Operating Officer, AmeriStarRail 
          LLC, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
    Dear Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Payne and Members of the 
Subcommittee,
    I appreciate the opportunity to provide the subcommittee with this 
statement regarding the private sector proposal of AmeriStarRail to 
partner with Amtrak to help improve safety, service, ridership, 
revenues and reliability on the Northeast Corridor without the use of 
additional government funds.
    AmeriStarRail (www.AmeriStarRail.com) is a private sector company, 
planning the most dramatic transformation of Amtrak's Northeast 
Corridor service since America's first high speed trains, The 
Metroliners, in 1969.
    In this partnership, AmeriStarRail is proposing to privately 
finance, operate and maintain a fleet of high-speed trains, branded as 
Amtrak trains using union employees in the same way private airlines 
operate connecting United Airlines and American Airlines flights as 
affiliated carriers. As a valuable public asset, the Northeast Corridor 
infrastructure will still be owned, controlled and maintained by Amtrak 
with continued support by Congress and the U.S. Department of 
Transportation.
    Under this transformative business model, based only on the costs 
``above the rail'', AmeriStarRail will pay Amtrak hundreds of millions 
of dollars annually in user fees and monthly performance incentives to 
use its tracks and stations.
    Key to this transformation is implementing innovation in four key 
areas: service, marketing, technology and the organization. Most of 
these innovative solutions were devised to help Amtrak confront a 
number of challenges and create opportunities to improve efficiency and 
service.
    Multiple challenges that Amtrak faces on the Northeast Corridor 
include:
      Low market share among all rail, car, bus and air trips
      Poor utilization of the federal investment in high-speed 
rail
      Most of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) trains (Amfleet) are 
nearly 50 years old
      NEC congestion contributes to poor on-time performance
      High speed track standards are not maintained as 
rigorously as those in Europe and Asia
      Unsecured right-of-way is a major factor in train delays 
due to trespassers deaths and debris collisions on the Northeast 
Corridor
 Amtrak's Low Market Share for All Trip Modes on the Northeast Corridor
    AmeriStarRail and our private investors believe that one of the 
greatest challenges facing Amtrak is its low market share of rail, car, 
bus and air trips after over 50 years of operation on the Northeast 
Corridor. According to 2019 and 2022 data from the National Household 
Travel Survey, conducted annually by the Federal Highway 
Administration, Amtrak has only a single digit marketshare of all rail, 
car, bus and air Northeast Corridor intercity trips. For some city 
pairs Amtrak's marketshare is just 3%. These results indicate Amtrak 
significantly underperforms its market potential to reduce energy 
consumption, pollution and traffic/airport congestion.
    To confront this challenge and significantly improve ridership and 
Amtrak's marketshare, AmeriStarRail is proposing a partnership with 
Amtrak to implement the following private sector initiatives, vision 
and innovation:
    1.  Eliminate costly, time consuming terminal operations at New 
York, Philadelphia and Washington.
    2.  Operate more frequent service, including hourly nonstops, at 
higher speeds up to 160 mph with a standard high-speed trainset fleet 
offering food service and Triple-Class service for Coach, Business and 
First Class passengers on every Northeast Corridor train.
    3.  Operation of a standard high-speed fleet will improve on-time 
performance, reliability and dramatically reduce trainset maintenance 
costs with the centralized efficiency of the Northeast Corridor's first 
Trainset Maintenance Center (TMC).
    4.  Extend direct Amtrak Northeast Corridor service to over 30 new 
stations including Amtrak trains serving stations in Center City 
Philadelphia, Hoboken Terminal and Long Island.
     Poor Utilization of the Federal Investment in High-Speed Rail
    According to Amtrak's ridership reports, although Amtrak carried 
12.5 million passengers on the Northeast Corridor between Boston and 
Washington in 2019, less than 30%, or only 3.6 million passengers could 
afford to ride on high-speed Acela trains. AmeriStarRail's solution, 
offering Triple-Class service of Coach, Business and First Class on a 
standardized Northeast Corridor fleet of 160 mph high-speed trains 
means 100% of Amtrak passengers and 100% of Amtrak trains will utilize 
the federal investment in the high-speed rail infrastructure from 
Boston to Washington.
    Amtrak's current $7.3 billion plan to buy slower trains for 
Northeast Corridor coach passengers from Siemens would still go forward 
but these trainsets can be reassigned to Amtrak's new routes 
nationwide.
    All high-speed trains in Europe and Asia serve Coach passengers. 
All airlines offering First Class and Business Class seating also serve 
Coach passengers on the same aircraft on every flight. AmeriStarRail 
wants to implement a privately funded solution that will allow Amtrak 
to improve utilization of its high-speed rail investments. Our goal is 
for Amtrak conductors to announce ``All Aboard'' Amtrak's fastest 
trains for all passengers.
  Most of the Northeast Corridor (NEC) Trains (Amfleet) are Nearly 50 
                               Years Old
    On January 4, 2023, AmeriStarRail's Senior Advisor, Paul Reistrup 
(former President of Amtrak) sent a letter to Federal Railroad 
Administrator Amit Bose expressing safety concerns for continuing to 
operate the aging Amfleet cars at speeds up to 125 mph on the Northeast 
Corridor since ``no rail passenger service in North American railroad 
history has operated passenger train cars so old, so fast.'' 
AmeriStarRail's privately funded solution, if implemented, will begin 
to replace the Amfleet cars next year and replace all of these cars 
before they turn 50 years old in 2025. Amtrak's current plan will not 
replace all of the Amfleet until sometime after the Year 2030.
    AmeriStarRail is proposing to replace the Amfleet cars with an 
additional order of the Alstom Avelia Liberty trainsets, currently 
being built in Hornell, NY, to offer ``Triple-Class service'' for 
Coach, Business and First Class passengers on every Northeast Corridor 
train. This is the fastest way to replace the Amfleet cars with 
trainsets that are equipped with safety features that do not exist on 
the Amfleet cars.
    Although Amfleet cars, built in the 1970s, meet grandfathered FRA 
safety requirements, they do not have the structural materials, safety 
features, technology and crash energy management systems found in the 
current Acela fleet or the next generation Alstom built Acela fleet. In 
case of an emergency, Amfleet windows are too small for first 
responders to evacuate injured passengers on stretchers. AmeriStarRail 
believes the safest course of action is to remove the Amfleet cars from 
high-speed Northeast Corridor service as soon as possible and replace 
them with newer, safer trainsets.
         NEC Congestion Contributes to Poor On-Time Performance
    AmeriStarRail's plans to eliminate terminal operations at 
Washington, Philadelphia and New York City will significantly reduce 
Northeast Corridor station congestion. Operation of a standardized 
fleet of 160 mph high-speed trainsets will also allow synchronization 
of operating speeds of all Northeast Corridor Amtrak trains for the 
first time in Amtrak's history. This will reduce the operating costs 
and inefficiencies of train overtakes, congestion, delays and 
dispatching complexities, and improve Northeast Corridor capacity. NEC 
on-time performance in recent years has averaged less than 85%.
    There are also a number of opportunities to reduce and eliminate 
conflicts and congestion with freight trains along the corridor to 
improve on-time performance.
     Amtrak's NEC High-Speed Track Standards are not Maintained as 
                 Rigorously as Those in Europe and Asia
    The tracks on the Northeast Corridor are not maintained to the more 
rigorous and precise standards of high-speed tracks in Europe and Asia. 
This is a key reason for the delay in completing the testing and 
certification of the new Alstom Acela trainsets which are not expected 
to enter service until sometime in 2024.
    Although Amtrak conducts regular track inspections, at frequent 
intervals throughout the year, the world class standard of daily track 
inspections requires a special inspection train that conducts 
measurements of track defects and variations in the precise track 
geometry required to maintain safe and smooth train operations at high 
speeds. Around the world these dedicated inspection trains are known as 
``doctor trains'' and conduct inspections of both the track and 
catenary at top speeds up to 220 mph. Amtrak, to date, has not utilized 
this readily-available technology to maintain the Northeast Corridor.
    With the use of private financing, AmeriStarRail will provide 
Amtrak with access, for the first time, to a dedicated ``doctor train'' 
that will be a critical tool for improving and maintaining the highest 
track standards on the Northeast Corridor to improve safety, ride 
quality and service reliability. This high-speed inspection train will 
be a new Alstom Avelia Liberty trainset, built without passenger 
seating, equipped with track and catenary inspection systems designed 
to perform daily inspections at speeds up to 160 mph.
    Deconflicting and reducing the operation of freight trains on 
tracks dedicated for high-speed operations will also be essential to 
maintaining precise track standards for high-speed trains.
    Unsecured Right-of-Way is a Major Factor in Train Delays Due to 
   Trespassers Deaths and Debris Collisions on the Northeast Corridor
    Some of the most significant train delays on the Northeast 
Corridors are the result of service being stopped for several hours due 
to the tragic accidental or suicide death of a trespasser on the 
tracks. Other service disruptions are the result of trains colliding 
with debris such as water heaters, bicycles, tires, shopping carts and 
other debris which are dumped along the tracks in major cities along 
the Northeast Corridor.
    Unsecured right-of-way has existed since the Northeast Corridor 
route was built in the 19th Century. With trains operating at speeds up 
to 160 mph in the 21st Century this poses an unacceptable risk to 
safety and service reliability.
    In the airline industry it would be unacceptable to operate 
unsecured airports with people crossing runways as a shortcut between 
neighborhoods or planes striking debris on the runway due to illegal 
dumping. Just as airport perimeters are fenced in and interstate 
highways have fencing to deter trespassing, AmeriStarRail is proposing 
that the multi-billion dollar investment in improving the Northeast 
Corridor also include a project to seal the corridor to prevent 
trespassers and illegal dumping of debris from disrupting train 
operations. This innovative safety project will include right-of-way 
fencing and walls and setback platform screens on Amtrak and commuter 
rail station platforms as is used to seal high-speed rail corridors in 
Japan and other countries.
    We at AmeriStarRail look forward to having an opportunity to 
partner with Amtrak and work with Congress to implement our proposed 
solutions to confront Amtrak's challenges and create opportunities to 
improve its efficiency and service.

                                 
    Statement of James Tilley, President, Florida Coalition of Rail 
       Passengers, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
                              Introduction
    My name is James Tilley. I am President of the Florida Coalition of 
Rail Passengers. The Coalition is a 501(c)3 and was formed in 1983 to 
preserve and to improve passenger rail service for Floridians and 
visitors to our state. Since FCRP's inception, we have been an all-
volunteer organization made up entirely of citizen rail advocates.
    I am also a member of the Rail Passenger Association's national 
Council of Representatives which advocates for passenger rail 
nationwide.
    Prior to my retirement I held several positions dealing with 
railroad equipment including Vice President-Sales & Marketing for 
Bombardier's railcar financing affiliate. Additionally, I served as 
Vice President-Car Management for Genesee & Wyoming, an international 
holding company owning and operating more than 100 railroads. Finally, 
I was responsible for CSX Transportation's railcar leasing program as 
Assistant Treasurer.
 Amtrak Appears To Be Positioning Itself in Order To Avoid Re-Fleeting 
                 Its Severely Aged Long-Distance Fleet
    Amtrak's March 2023 Congressional grant request fails to include 
any requests to fund replacement of overage long-distance passenger 
cars \1\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Amtrak, ``General and Legislative Annual Report & Fiscal Year 
2024 Grant Request'', www.amtrak.com, page 49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On-going delays in procuring new equipment suggest a pressing need 
for an accelerated state of good repair plan for the existing long-
distance fleet. Bi-level overhauls in FY22 totaled $44.2 million--a 
record low \2\. Congress reduced the FY23 National Network Grant by $1 
billion suggesting overhaul spending may be low again this year \3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Amtrak, ``Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial 
Condition and Results of Operations and Consolidated Financial 
Statements With Report of Independent Auditors (Overview of Contractual 
Obligations and Capital Expenditures)'', FY14 to FY22, various pages.
    \3\ Amtrak, ``General and Legislative Annual Report & Fiscal Year 
2023 Grant Request'', www.amtrak.com, page 6 ($2.2 bil. National 
Network request) & House Committee on Appropriations, ``Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2023: Summary of Appropriations Provisions by 
Subcommittee'', page 45 ($1.2 bil. National Network Appropriation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Amtrak management reporting, dated April 21, 2023, confirms that 
active bi-level and single level long distance fleet counts continue to 
decline \4\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Amtrak, ``Amtrak Equipment Inventory (Detailed), April 21, 
2023; Furnished via Freedom of Information Act request & Amtrak, 
``Equipment Appendices Historic Opportunities--Amtrak's FY 2022-2027 
Service and Asset Line Plans'', Appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Concerns are heightened by the following statement in the FY24 
Grant Request (page 12) that ``if Congress provides less than the base 
funding need for the NEC account, Amtrak will need to take action by 
either reducing / delaying necessary maintenance and capital work along 
the NEC, or else transferring funds between the NEC and National 
Network accounts, as permitted under 49 U.S.C. Sec.  2431 \5\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Amtrak, ``General and Legislative Annual Report & Fiscal Year 
2024 Grant Request'', www.amtrak.com, page 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Clearly, NEC concerns appear to be receiving priority and if 
sufficient funding were not to be appropriated a permitted 
``reprogramming'' of spending authority between the NEC and the NN is a 
real possibility.
    Amtrak may never order new equipment due to
      Escalating Gateway Project costs \6\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Rubinstein, Dana ``Commuter Tunnel Under the Hudson Won't Be 
Finished Until 2035'', www.nytimes.com, August 31, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Federal budget deficit concerns \7\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Epp, Henry ``Amtrak wants $3.6 billion in subsidies. It 
probably won't get all of that'', www.marketplace.org, March 31, 2023.

    To ``stay in business'' in the long-distance market an accelerated 
effort to rebuild and modernize the long-distance fleet will be 
necessary just as Via Rail Canada has invested capital to renew its 
1954 built stainless steel fleet \8\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Johnston, Bob ``On VIA's 40th anniversary, `Canadian' still 
shines'', https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/29-on-vias-
40th-anniversary-canadian-still-shines/, October 28, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Congressional Directive Specifically Aimed at Repairing and Replacing 
                   Long-Distance Equipment Is Needed
      Congress must enhance its oversight of Amtrak.
      Congress must legislate a directive to ensure that Amtrak 
accelerates heavy repairs and rebuilds of long-distance equipment.
      The Congress must also direct acceleration of an order 
for replacement long-distance equipment.
    A New Board of Directors With a Different Skill Set Is Required
      Amtrak requires a representative Board which complies 
with the law.
      The railroad requires a ``working board'' willing and 
able to provide aggressive managerial oversight.
      The board needs to ensure that management is committed to 
the long-distance network.
      A Board possessing transportation & hospitality industry 
expertise.
 Internal Amtrak Sources Report That Field Personnel Are Hamstrung and 
 That Industry Is Slow in Delivering Current and Prospective Rail Car 
                                 Orders
      Work orders and internal approvals that are needed to get 
work into and out of the shops are profoundly delayed.
      Too many layers of managers and supervisors combined with 
a deeply broken set of processes for identifying problems and getting 
them fixed.
      Industry is telling Amtrak, in general terms, that they 
might be able to begin fielding the first batch of new long-distance 
equipment in eight to 10 years.
      Alstom is completely failing in delivering the new ACELA 
II train sets.
Mechanical Personnel on the Ground Express Views That far More Bi-Level 
  Superliners Can Be Repaired/Rebuilt and Returned to the Active Fleet
    From 2008 to 2012 Beech Grove rebuilt heavily damaged long-distance 
passenger cars \9\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://www.milman.ca/projects/listing/17/Amtrak-Superliner-I-
Remanufacture/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Modular interior components installed.
      External surfaces were renewed or replaced.
      Mechanical upgrades installed.
 Time Is of the Essence as Train Delay due to Passenger car Mechanical 
                         Failure Is Escallating
      The FRA reports that car delay minutes for long-distance 
trains were 2.8 times higher than total minutes incurred on the 
Northeast Corridor during the 4th calendar quarter of 2022 \10\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ Federal Railroad Administration, ``Intercity Passenger Rail 
Service Quality and Performance Reports: FY23 Q1 Delay Metrics'', 
https://railroads.dot.gov/rail-network-development/passenger-rail/
amtrak/intercity-passenger-rail-service-quality-and .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The difference is even more dramatic when one considers 
that there are between 2 and 3 dozen Northeast Corridor departures in 
each direction per day and the long-distance trains operate once per 
day.
      Amtrak bi-level fleet counts have now dropped below 
minimum thresholds required to support the operating plan \11\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ Comati, Byron ``Strategic Fleet Planning Amtrak's Approach to 
Re-fleeting--Planning for the next generation of State Service 
Corridors'', September 2018, page 11 (outlines daily fleet needs) & 
Amtrak, ``Amtrak Equipment Inventory (Detailed), April 21, 2023; 
Furnished via Freedom of Information Act request & Amtrak, ``Equipment 
Appendices Historic Opportunities--Amtrak's FY 2022-2027 Service and 
Asset Line Plans'', Appendix B (outlines active fleet counts which are 
lower than daily needs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Mechanical Department Staffing Shortages Were Self-Inflicted
      The issues of staffing issues at Beech Grove and other 
locations were clearly self-imposed.
      Mechanical employment has declined each year since 2014 
with the rate of decline accelerating after 2018 \12\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Surface Transportation Board ``Employment Data'', https://
www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-data/employment-data/ (monthly 
reporting of employment levels by craft and carrier).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Only in the past few months has the employee count been 
restored to pre-pandemic levels.
      During the pandemic Amtrak offered financial incentives 
for mechanical personnel to sever their employment despite emergency 
Congressional funding established to avoid such an outcome \13\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ National Railroad Passenger Corporation ``Board of Directors; 
Minutes of Meeting; September 25, 2020'' page 7 (Engineering and 
Mechanical Plan Review).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 The Record Demonstrates That Amtrak Was Sufficiently Liquid To Avoid 
              Furloughs and Early Retirement Buyouts \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Amtrak, ``Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial 
Condition and Results of Operations and Consolidated Financial 
Statements With Report of Independent Auditors (Consolidated Balance 
Sheets)'', FY19 to FY21, various pages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      At the end of FY19 (before the pandemic) Amtrak reported 
cash, cash equivalents, short term investments and securities available 
for sale of $2.4 billion.
      At the end of FY20 the equivalent reporting totaled $3 
billion.
      C.A.R.E.S. Act funding of $1 billion bolstered Amtrak's 
cash position.
      Additional covid related funding enabled Amtrak to 
increase these key measures of liquidity to $4.2 billion by the end of 
FY21.
Amtrak Received a Congressional Scolding for Delaying the Submission of 
                    Its Supplemental Budget Request
      Congressman Daniel Lipinski admonished Amtrak management 
in September 2020.
      As reported in the September 9, 2020 issue of Roll Call 
``he expressed frustration that Amtrak didn't submit its supplemental 
spending request until 10 days after the House passed a $3.4 trillion 
coronavirus spending bill in May. And it submitted its $4.9 billion 
request, he said, just one month before the current fiscal year 
expires''.
      ``Lipinski also questioned the passenger railroad's 
decision to temporarily reduce service on most long-distance routes 
from daily to three times a week. He argued that such cuts were 
``misguided'' and would weaken the rail service''.
      ``Too often it feels like Amtrak is happy to take money 
from Congress and then ignore Congress' directives,'' he said.

    Rather than aggressively pursuing additional covid assistance, as 
Chair Lipinski pointed out, Amtrak appears to have deferred the request 
while concurrently ``setting the table'' for 3 day a week long-distance 
service (not daily) and storing rail cars and pausing all but essential 
maintenance.
    Both former Amtrak CEO's David Gunn and Tom Downs publicly warned 
that reducing daily service to tri-weekly was a fool's errand--the cost 
savings imaginary. Moreover, Mr. Gunn correctly concluded that once 
equipment and locomotives were placed into storage it would be 
difficult to return them to service given Amtrak's propensity to 
cannibalize idle equipment \15\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Johnston, Bob ``Former Amtrak president revisits previous move 
to triweekly service'', https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-
wire/former-amtrak-president-revisits-previous-move-to-triweekly-
service/, August 3, 2020.
    Johnston, Bob ``Making the case for daily operation'', https://
www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/making-the-case-for-daily-
operation/, August 6, 2020.
    Johnston, Bob ``Former Amtrak president Gunn sees perils in service 
cuts'', https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/former-
amtrak-president-gunn-sees-perils-in-service-cuts/, September 8, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A Freedom of Information Act request I submitted revealed that 
Amtrak fully utilized its Northeast Corridor covid funding but, as of 
February 28, 2023, the railroad had unused covid funding exceeding $200 
million that was targeted for the National Network which may need to be 
returned to the U.S. Treasury as appears to be required by the pending 
debt-ceiling legislation.
    This unspent and, at risk, funding could very well have been used 
to bolster the long-distance network but clearly was not.
   Amtrak Spent $41 Million During the Height of the Pandemic for an 
  Office Building for Which, Three Years Later, Remains Notably Empty
    Nevertheless, Amtrak pushed forward with the purchase of the 
Renaissance Center in Wilmington for $41 million. DOT had advised 
Amtrak a month earlier that it was receiving $1 billion in covid relief 
as provided for by the C.A.R.E.S. Act. At the same time the Renaissance 
Center transaction closed Amtrak requested even more emergency funding 
in a supplemental grant request to Congress.
    OIG observations regarding the process followed to support the 
buildings purchase are all but damning (it is important to note that no 
one at Amtrak disputed the findings of the OIG in its final report). 
Moreover, media coverage revealed other aspects of this transaction:
      This acquisition was rushed and it failed to follow 
corporate processes and procedures (Amtrak OIG)
      After purchase, the structure was found to be unsuited 
for the purpose it was intended to serve (Amtrak OIG).
      In April 2023, the structure remains largely empty. I was 
there and visited each floor.
      The Board approved the purchase approved despite being 
advised that the 30th Station (an Amtrak owned facility in 
Philadelphia) was the ``ideal'' solution (March 2019 Board minutes).
      Amtrak agreed to pay a premium price for this distressed 
property (Delaware on-line).

    In March 2019 Amtrak's OIG had issued a report sharply critical of 
the realty management function, ``In the absence of detailed 
information about real property costs and use, (Amtrak) manages space 
in an ad hoc manner''. Despite the OIG March 2019 realty evaluation, 
the Renaissance Center acquisition proceeded and the transaction closed 
in May 2020 as Mechanical forces were being targeted for covid-related 
headcount reductions.
  Amtrak Paid Tens of Millions of Dollars To Buyout the Leases of the 
 Acela I Fleet and the HHP8 Locomotives All of Which Are Targeted for 
                               Retirement
    In similar fashion, during covid Amtrak was forced to expend many 
tens of millions of dollars to purchase the HHP8 electric locomotives 
as well as most of the original Acela trainsets that had either been 
removed from service or would be shortly. Amtrak was cannibalizing and 
otherwise not maintaining the HHP8 locomotives triggering a default on 
this particular transaction.
    Amtrak did not own these assets and the railroad defaulted when it 
failed to maintain the equipment (all the legal filings pertaining to 
this litigation are available on the federal PACER website). It is 
important to note that the commuter railroad serving Maryland (MARC) 
experienced the same reliability issues but did in fact return their 
units to service after a mechanical assessment and follow-up upgrades.
    The HHP8 locomotives were co-mingled with the legacy Acela 
trainsets in multiple financings the largest being the one subject to 
the Philip Morris litigation (Amtrak Trust HS-EDC-1) which governed 
eight Acela trainsets and six HHP8 Locomotives.
                          Concluding Comments
    Moving forward, I strongly believe that Amtrak must aggressively 
accelerate maintenance and rebuilding of the bi-level fleet.
    The active bi-level fleet continues to shrink and is now clearly 
below thresholds articulated by Amtrak Corporate Planning in 2018.
    Moreover, in connection with recapitalizing the long-distance 
fleet, one of the Fleet Strategy Principles outlined in the 2018 
presentation by Amtrak Corporate Planning was ``Maximize off-the-shelf, 
proven products; minimize customization''.
    In fact, Amtrak has not adhered to this principle given that the 
new Acela II trainsets are severely delayed due to being an over-
engineered design more suitable for operation in Europe than in the 
United States.
    Likewise, the Aero Intercity trainsets, which will largely operate 
on the Northeast Corridor, are based upon a design that minimizes 
``fungibility''--the equipment is not at all suitable for operation on 
the long-distance network. Each trainset comes equipped with a 
locomotive which, when delivered, will result in the retirement of the 
ACS-64 Siemens Sprinter electric locomotives. These existing 
locomotives represent a $700 million dollar investment and will be 
surplus after service of less than 15 years. The ACS-64 units will 
represent what the utility industry refers to as ``stranded 
investment''.
    The Renaissance Center and lease buyouts demonstrate that many tens 
of millions of dollars were expended on real estate and equipment that 
is generating no incremental benefits--no return on investment. If the 
funds had been invested in railcar repairs those assets would be in 
service today generating sales revenue.
    In closing, I appreciate the opportunity to submit this written 
testimony.

                                 
Article entitled, ``Amtrak Rewarded Executives With Six-Figure Bonuses 
as Rail Service Struggled,'' by Mark Walker and Niraj Chokshi, New York 
   Times, August 5, 2022, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Marcus J. 
                                Molinaro
  Amtrak Rewarded Executives With Six-Figure Bonuses as Rail Service 
                               Struggled
Most of the top leaders received bonuses above $200,000 in the last 
fiscal year, as Amtrak worked to recover from the coronavirus pandemic.

by Mark Walker and Niraj Chokshi

New York Times, August 5, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/us/politics/amtrak-executive-pay-
bonus.html

    Amtrak's top executives received six-figure incentive bonuses in 
2021, their biggest payouts in years, despite the service's lackluster 
financial performance and weak ridership caused by the pandemic, 
according to data obtained by The New York Times.
    The compensation data, obtained through the Freedom of Information 
Act, showed that annual incentive payouts made to Amtrak's senior 
leaders have grown significantly in recent years. Nine top executives 
received bonuses exceeding $200,000 in the 2021 fiscal year, up from 
six executives in 2019. Far smaller bonuses were awarded in 2016, 2017 
and 2018, and none were given in 2015 or 2020.
    Last year's payouts came as the federal government made its largest 
investment in passenger rail since Amtrak started operating in 1971. As 
part of the $1 trillion infrastructure bill that passed in November, 
Congress set aside $66 billion for the rail sector, a third of it 
specifically for Amtrak, which has for years called for greater 
investment to update, modernize and expand passenger rail service in 
the United States.
    Amtrak has lost money ever since Congress created it a half-century 
ago to serve as the nation's passenger rail operator. The service 
appeared to be on the verge of breaking that losing streak in late 
2019, but the coronavirus erased that hope.
    As ridership plunged early in the pandemic, lawmakers provided 
Amtrak with $3.7 billion in emergency relief. The rail service 
furloughed more than 1,200 workers, encouraged others to leave with 
buyout offers and paused hiring for 16 months.
    Last fall, its work force was still 1,500 employees--or more than 8 
percent--smaller than it was before the pandemic. The service has been 
hiring rapidly, but ridership this year through May was still down more 
than a third from the same period in 2019.
    Amtrak said the executive bonuses were based on metrics such as 
ridership, customer satisfaction and financial performance.
    Qiana Spain, Amtrak's executive vice president and chief human 
resources officer, said in a statement that the incentive payments were 
aimed at helping the rail service ``attract and retain talent.''
    In order to earn incentive compensation, ``Amtrak must achieve a 
high level of corporate performance, in support of our company's 
strategic plan--and employees must also meet their individual 
performance goals,'' she said. ``The company has not made any incentive 
payments without first meeting its financial target.''
    John Samuelsen, the president of the Transport Workers Union, whose 
members include nearly 1,500 service workers, mechanics and inspectors 
at Amtrak, said he was disgusted by the payouts.
    ``They gave themselves nice fat bonuses off the backs of workers 
that were exposed to harm's way,'' he said. ``It just underscores the 
reason why there should be worker representatives on the Amtrak 
board.''
    No bonuses were given in 2015, but in 2016 the rail service awarded 
some incentive pay to top executives. It spent no more than $500,000 
annually on payouts in 2016, 2017 and 2018 as it narrowed its losses.
    That changed in 2019. With Amtrak getting close to breaking even, 
the size of the bonus payouts to top executives nearly quadrupled, 
rising to a total of nearly $1.8 million, from just over $480,000 the 
year before. Amtrak paid no bonuses again in 2020, as the virus brought 
travel to a near standstill. But in 2021, it paid out $2.3 million, 
despite reporting its lowest revenue and biggest losses in more than a 
decade.
    Stephen Gardner, who became Amtrak's chief executive this year, has 
received more than $766,000 in short-term incentive bonuses since 2016, 
more than any other executive. Eleanor Acheson, the service's general 
counsel and corporate secretary, was close behind, having received 
nearly $727,000 over that period. Amtrak declined to provide a fuller 
picture of how its executives are compensated, including salaries.
    Of the dozen members of Amtrak's current leadership team, all but 
three received bonuses of more than $200,000 last year, ranging from 
about $230,000 to more than $293,000 for Mr. Gardner, who was president 
at the time.
    A spokesperson said the service increased short-term incentive 
payouts for managers throughout the company in 2019 to make jobs more 
competitive and desirable. Amtrak has no private sector counterpart, 
though the bonuses paid last year pale in comparison with what 
transportation industry executives earn. The chief executives of 
freight railroads, which are profitable, received millions in bonus and 
incentive payments last year, for example.
    ``I know that in all markets everyone is looking to recruit good 
people, but this is a bit surprising,'' Patricia Quinn, the executive 
director of the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority, one of 
Amtrak's state partners, said of the bonuses. ``I would hope that these 
are conversations, as state partners, we could have going forward 
because we all want to align our goals with Amtrak.''
    Ms. Quinn said Amtrak did not discuss goal-setting and incentive 
payouts with its partners. And, in a January audit, Amtrak's inspector 
general reported that about a third of the company's state partners had 
``low trust'' in Amtrak on cost-sharing issues.
    The company said it created the short-term incentive program in 
2013 after making changes to its pension program and closing it off for 
new employees joining the company.
    In the 2019 fiscal year, ending in September, Amtrak customers took 
nearly 33 million trips with the company, a slight increase from the 
year before. Revenue was also up slightly, while customer satisfaction 
fell just shy of a goal for the year. In 2021, however, Amtrak reported 
only about 12 million customer trips, well below the number the year 
before. The service also reported its worst revenue and losses in more 
than a decade. Customer satisfaction was well below where it stood 
before the pandemic, though it surpassed a goal set for the year.
    Jim Mathews, the president and chief executive of the Rail 
Passengers Association, said Amtrak put a lot of stock into its 
customer satisfaction index, a measurement he takes issue with because 
it does not capture the full scope of the company's performance.
    Mr. Mathews said he would like to see incentive compensation tied 
to bringing the company back to its prepandemic level and building up 
from there.
    ``They don't have the same tools to hand out incentives--they don't 
have stock or options to make these jobs more attractive,'' he said. 
``That said, I think these are all good jobs, and as an advocate I 
would really like to see these payouts not only tied to the customer 
satisfaction index but to the recovery scores.''
    The executives have their work cut out for them. Not only is Amtrak 
still working to recover from the pandemic, but it also needs to 
prepare to put the influx of congressional funding to good use.
    The company said in a report this year that the money was an 
``unprecedented level of funding for capital projects'' and would help 
to modernize its fleet and stations, replace major bridges, improve 
reliability, expand service and replace old equipment. Rail advocates 
and insiders welcomed the federal spending, saying it will help to 
address longstanding problems and priorities for passenger rail in the 
United States, too.
    But Amtrak's inspector general has raised concerns about the 
company's ability to hire the workers it needs to spend the new funds 
wisely. In a December report, it concluded that Amtrak's human 
resources department lacked the leadership and staff it needed to 
``effectively recruit, screen, hire and onboard new employees.''
    In an update last month, the inspector general said Amtrak was 
making progress, including by reviewing compensation companywide to 
ensure that salaries are competitive, but added that there was more 
work to do.


                                Appendix

                              ----------                              


 Questions from Hon. Troy E. Nehls to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive 
       Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

    Question 1. The commuter rail system in the United States has been 
a more diverse market than the intercity passenger rail system, with 
various state and local transit agencies using private contractors to 
conduct rail operations, as well as numerous publicly operated systems. 
With the prospect of new and expanded intercity passenger rail services 
coming online in the next decade, having a competitive rail operator 
market might offer benefits to the states, the passengers and 
taxpayers. In the 2022 annual and legislative report, Amtrak cited as 
evidence that it is an ``ever more efficient rail operator'' \1\ the 
fact that it had ``recently won competitive open bids to provide 
operations services to commuter railroads (Metrolink and MARC Penn 
Line).'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ AMTRAK, General and Legislative Annual Report at 45 (Apr. 27, 
2021), available at https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/
english/public/documents/corporate/reports/Amtrak-General-Legislative-
Annual-Report-FY2022-Grant-Request.pdf.
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question 1.a. What are your thoughts about more involvement of 
private contractors entering the passenger rail market and competing 
alongside Amtrak to provide these state-supported rail operations?
    Question 1.b. How would a competitive operator market affect 
Amtrak?
    Question 1.c. Should new and expanded passenger rail services be 
subject to Federal competitive open bidding procedures?
    Answers to Question 1.a.-1.c. Amtrak believes that a strong 
national intercity passenger railway--the model used by nearly all 
nations across the globe to deliver intercity services--is the most 
efficient way to provide an interconnected network of services across 
the nation. Economies of scale and the ability to utilize common assets 
for a variety of services, including ticketing and reservations, fleet, 
and maintenance facilities, allow the high fixed costs of the business 
to be shared across the network and our Capital assets to be utilized 
more productively. Additionally, a national carrier can focus on the 
interstate needs, looking beyond state borders, to ensure that the 
overall passenger transportation needs of the nation are met.
    However, Amtrak's role as the national carrier doesn't preclude 
others from entering the market or from working with Amtrak and our 
partners as part of an integrated network. In fact, Amtrak already 
faces competition in the provision of the various services required for 
operation of state-supported routes. A number of states contract with 
private companies for maintenance of equipment, on-board food service, 
customer information service, and marketing. Amtrak is happy to work 
with states that choose to use other companies to provide services for 
state-supported routes.
    As for attempts to competitively bid out the operation of various 
Amtrak service, this has been tried unsuccessfully several times, and 
any consideration of competitive bidding for Amtrak-operated services 
must take into account several myths regarding that topic.
    The first myth is that there are numerous U.S. companies qualified 
to operate passenger rail services and eager to do so. That is not the 
case.
      Few private U.S. rail operators--and none of the major 
U.S. railroads--have shown any interest in operating Amtrak or other 
intercity passenger rail services, even with government subsidies. 
Since 2010, four of the five Class I railroads that had been operating 
commuter rail services under contracts with public authorities have 
decided to get out of that business. A 2017 Federal Railroad 
Administration solicitation of bidders to take over the operation of 
one or more Amtrak long-distance routes, with government subsidies, did 
not attract a single proposal.
      Most of the companies that operate commuter rail services 
in the United States or have expressed interest in operating U.S. 
intercity passenger rail services are not really ``private companies'' 
and are not based in the United States. Rather, they are subsidiaries 
of national railroads controlled by the governments of China, Japan and 
European countries.

    The second myth is that competitive bidding will invariably produce 
a lower price and better service. That has not been the case with 
respect to intercity passenger rail services in the United States.
      A 2021 Congressional Research Service report concluded 
that past efforts to foster competition for services provided by Amtrak 
have not resulted in improvements in intercity passenger rail 
service.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Improving Intercity Passenger Rail Service in the United 
States, p. 25. (2021, February 8). Congressional Research Service. 
Retrieved July 14, 2023 from https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45783.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ridership fell 10% and mechanical delays increased 35% 
during the first year after a Midwestern state contracted with a 
private company for provision and maintenance of equipment, food 
service and marketing for an Amtrak state-supported route following a 
competitive procurement. After just 17 months, the state's contractor 
ceased providing services when the state declined its request for a 
large increase in payments.

    Other countries have had similar experiences. Franchising of train 
operations in Great Britain resulted in increases in government 
subsidies, higher fares, service deterioration and a pattern of 
contractors submitting low bids to secure contracts and then walking 
away from their obligations. The British government recently abandoned 
franchising and has resumed direct operation of many train routes.
    The third myth is that there is a level playing field among Amtrak 
and potential competitors. That does not exist today for state-
supported services because Amtrak is subject to many statutory 
requirements that do not apply to other parties. Among other things, 
Amtrak must price the services it provides in accord with a 
statutorily-mandated costing methodology; must ensure that the customer 
service, professional and IT services it utilizes are performed in the 
United States; and must maintain specified levels of liability 
insurance. Some operators of intrastate passenger rail services are not 
subject to the Railroad Retirement Tax Act and other federal laws that 
apply to Amtrak, which gives them an additional cost advantage. All of 
these issues would have to be addressed through legislative changes in 
order to create fair competition among Amtrak and other potential 
operators.
    The fourth myth is that privately-owned freight railroads would be 
willing to allow non-Amtrak passenger trains to operate over their 
lines on reasonable terms. That is often not the case. Proposed 
commuter rail services in Charlotte and Atlanta have been stymied by 
the refusal of the railroad that owns the lines over which they would 
operate to even consider operation of passenger trains. Because 
Amtrak's unique statutory access rights to operate existing or new 
services over freight railroad-owned lines are not transferable to 
states or other parties, a state that selected a non-Amtrak operator 
would have no recourse if a freight railroad demanded unreasonable 
investments or compensation for operation of passenger trains over its 
lines, or simply refused to allow them to operate or to continue to 
operate.
    A fifth myth is that state-supported Amtrak services are, like most 
commuter rail services, isolated operations that could easily be 
provided by different operators without harm to passengers or negative 
impacts on ridership and revenues. Amtrak's state-supported services 
are part of an interconnected national network serving 46 states. Many 
of their passengers are connecting to or from other Amtrak routes with 
which those services share stations, equipment maintenance facilities 
and employees. Any consideration of competitive bidding must take into 
account the inefficiencies of having multiple operators; the increased 
costs resulting from them; and the impact on ridership, revenues and 
customer satisfaction if travelers are required to deal with more than 
one operator and use multiple websites, apps or 800 numbers to obtain 
information about schedules and book travel.

    Question 2. Last March, the Amtrak OIG issued a report about 
challenges that Amtrak might face implementing the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).\4\ Among the challenges cited was 
Amtrak's workforce and your ability to build and maintain a sufficient 
number of employees with the right skills.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ See AMTRAK, Office of Inspector General, OIG-SP-2022-008, 
AMTRAK: Areas for Management Focus in Advance of Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act Funding, (Mar. 31, 2022), available at https://
amtrakoig.gov/sites/default/files/reports/OIG-SP-2022-008.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question 2.a. What is the current status of your workforce and 
ability to retain workers and fulfill your staffing needs?
    Answer. As of June 30, 2023, Amtrak's current workforce stands at 
21,032 active employees. We continue to develop and expand our 
workforce to execute on the investments made by Congress in the IIJA, 
and to support our new and improving services nationwide.
    To minimize employee turnover and boost employee engagement, 
organizations develop retention strategies, which aim to reduce 
attrition and increase retention rates. Although some turnover is 
unavoidable, a sound retention strategy can save time and resources for 
Amtrak. Retaining current employees is less costly and less time-
consuming than constantly hiring new ones. Therefore, it is crucial to 
focus on attrition to gauge the organization's health and capacity to 
deliver.
    Some of the initiatives planned or deployed to support workplace 
fulfillment and retain employees include flexible paid time off, 
enhanced benefits, retention awards for key crafts and skills, 
incentive programs, and student loan support.

    Question 2.b. Have any passenger rail services been impacted by 
Amtrak's hiring challenges? If so, please describe the impacts.
    Answer. Challenges in hiring employees impacted restoration of some 
train frequencies and routes as travel demand recovered from the COVID-
19 pandemic, required limitations in food service on some routes, and 
impacted our ability to perform overhauls and repairs on out-of-service 
equipment to provide sufficient capacity to meet passenger demand. We 
completed restoration of service on all routes suspended during the 
pandemic at our state partners' request in April; have restored pre-
pandemic service frequency on nearly all routes and pre-pandemic food 
service on all routes; and have increased mechanical staffing above 
pre-pandemic levels to enable us to accelerate overhauls and repairs to 
return equipment to service. Some isolated trained employee shortages 
exist today which reduce our ability to cover vacations and employee 
illness; trainees currently qualifying will soon bring staffing levels 
across the system to levels that allow us to better cover all the 
services in these cases.

    Question 2.c. Are you confident in Amtrak's ability to staff and 
crew its current and proposed future passenger rail services, 
especially the state-supported routes?
    Answer. Yes, based on current forecast and hiring run rate we are 
very confident in our ability to staff and crew current and proposed 
future rail services including state-supported routes. However, our 
ability to retain employees and staff and operate current and proposed 
routes will continue to depend on the receipt of adequate federal 
funding through the annual appropriations process.

    Question 2.d. What external factors may affect Amtrak's hiring and 
workforce sustainment capability?
    Answer. For certain parts of our workforce, there are some 
challenges to hiring. For example, there are often difficulties in 
certain geographic regions for hiring onboard service roles on our 
trains (such as conductors and service attendants, among others) due to 
a narrow candidate pool. Increased demand for skilled critical trades 
workers in our Agreement Workforce generally outpaces graduation from 
trade schools, requiring higher compensation in more competitive labor 
markets.
    In terms of broader trends, as the youngest of the ``Baby Boomer'' 
generation (those aged 57 to 75 at present) reach retirement age, we 
anticipate an increasing workforce need approaching 2031. Coupled with 
lagging rates of trade school graduates and workforce entrants, this 
demographic shift may pose a substantial challenge for sustaining our 
Agreement Workforce.
    We are working to prepare for this challenge by devoting resources 
to the development of a pipeline of qualified applicants. For example, 
Talent Acquisition is working to establish deeper relationships with 
specific universities, colleges and tech schools with curriculum in the 
Transportation and Rail industry while providing information to 
students and career service centers about employment opportunities 
available at Amtrak. Our newly, rebranded Future Careers Program will 
offer internship opportunities in the Fall/Spring and the Summer. These 
sessions are longer and offer the intern additional experience working 
with Amtrak.
    In addition to our efforts with educational institutions and our 
internship program, and in addition to the strategies outlined in the 
response to Nehls Question 2 (a), we are also adopting the following 
practices as part of our long-term workforce strategy:
      Implementing targeted recruitment marketing campaigns and 
hiring events segmented by both key critical positions and geographies/
markets;
      Continuing to partner with Union leaders during Quarterly 
Labor Leadership meetings to inform Union members about hiring 
initiatives and progress and partnering with Union leaders to promote 
Amtrak hiring events;
      Upskilling our current workforce to expand capabilities 
in alignment with future business needs;
      Reskilling our workforce to develop cross-functional 
skillsets and enhance organizational readiness

    Question 3. Amtrak was provided a privately financed proposal 
Amtrak was provided a privately financed proposal to improve Amtrak's 
single digit market share on the Northeast Corridor with more 
frequencies, faster service, new routes and stations.
    Why is Amtrak ignoring this joint venture proposal which will not 
cost taxpayers anything and will generate more ridership and revenue 
for Amtrak?
    Answer. Amtrak did not ignore the proposal your question 
references. Senior Amtrak officials met numerous times with the 
proponent of the proposal and determined that it was not viable. The 
proposal is also inconsistent with the NEC FUTURE Plan developed by the 
Federal Railroad Administration, which had rejected the same proposal.

    Question 4. Amtrak was also provided a private sector proposal to 
offer equitable and affordable Coach accommodations on Amtrak's 
publicly supported high-speed trains.
    Why can Amtrak not utilize this private sector initiative to 
operate with the same efficiency as high-speed rail in Europe and Asia 
who serve Coach passengers on all high-speed trains?
    Answer. Amtrak officials met numerous times with the proponent of 
this proposal and determined that it was not credible or feasible. 
Additionally, like passenger railroads in Germany, Japan, and other 
countries, Amtrak operates premium service trains along the Northeast 
Corridor--the Acelas--that make fewer stops and generally charge higher 
fares, and other trains--the Northeast Regionals--that operate at 
slightly slower speeds (maximum of 125 mph), serve more communities, 
and generally have lower fares. Private companies in virtually every 
industry offer a range of services to customers and charge more to 
those who choose premium or faster services (such as non-stop flights). 
If Amtrak did not do that, it would generate less revenue and require 
additional federal funding. Finally, Amtrak has already purchased a 
fleet of 83 new, modern, domestically built trainsets to replace our 
aging Amfleet equipment used on our Northeast Regional and other 
corridor services. These trains are anticipated to be in service 
starting in 2026.

    Question 5. The Amfleet cars are nearly 50 years old.
    Question 5.a. Does Amtrak have a privately funded proposal to 
replace the Amfleet cars by 2025 on the Northeast Corridor by adding 
onto the Alstom Avelia Liberty high-speed trainset order now being 
built? If so, please provide further details about this proposal.
    Answer. No proposal of any type could enable the replacement of the 
Amfleet cars Amtrak operates on Northeast Regional trains on the 
Northeast Corridor by 2025. Intercity passenger railcars compliant with 
U.S. safety standards and Buy America laws cannot be bought off the lot 
like a new automobile. Designing, procuring, manufacturing and testing 
them takes years. The Avelia Liberty trainsets the question refers to 
are only capable of operating on electrified rail lines like the 
Northeast Corridor. They would not be able to operate on Northeast 
Regional trains, which operate over both the Northeast Corridor and 
unelectrified lines connected to it.

    Question 5.b. Is including Coach seating on these new trainsets the 
fastest way to provide all passengers on the Northeast Corridor with 
the highest level of safety with these new trainsets?
    Answer. Amtrak has already purchased new Airo trainsets capable of 
operating over both electrified and non-electrified lines, and this is 
the fastest way to acquire modern replacement equipment for the Amfleet 
cars. The Airo procurement is well advanced: Amtrak selected an 
experienced passenger rail manufacturer more than two years ago; the 
first carshell has already been manufactured; and the first trainset is 
expected to enter service in 2026. Canceling the multi-billion-dollar 
contract for the Airo trainsets without cause and restarting the 
process of procuring new equipment would delay the replacement of the 
Amfleet cars by many years and greatly increase the costs of acquiring 
new equipment even if there was a bona fide alternative proposal.

  Questions from Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr., to Stephen Gardner, Chief 
  Executive Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

    Question 1. What percentage of stations across the Amtrak network 
are currently ADA compliant? Is there a discrepancy in percentages for 
stations that are owned by Amtrak and those that are owned by an entity 
other than Amtrak? Could you confirm that all the stations Amtrak 
serves will be fully ADA compliant by the end of 2028?
    Answer. Amtrak has primary or shared ADA responsibility for 385 
stations. We expect nearly all of the stations for which Amtrak has 
primary responsibility, and the elements at shared responsibility 
stations for which Amtrak is responsible, to be compliant by 2028, and 
the remainder of Amtrak-responsible stations/elements to be compliant 
by 2029. Amtrak cannot confirm what the 2028 level of compliance will 
be at the 130 stations for which other parties have ADA responsibility, 
or for third party-responsible elements of stations for which Amtrak 
has shared responsibility, but we will continue to work with these 
entities to advocate for full compliance.

    Question 2. Newark Liberty Airport, located in my district, is one 
of a few airports in the United States served by passenger rail. How 
many, and which, other airports around the country have Amtrak or other 
passenger rail services? Does Amtrak have plans to partner with air 
carriers?
    Answer. Amtrak currently serves five airport stations, all of which 
are located at or adjacent to an airport to which they are connected by 
a fixed guideway system such as a monorail or frequent shuttle service:
      BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport (Baltimore)
      General Mitchell International Airport (Milwaukee)
      Hollywood Burbank Airport
      Newark Liberty International Airport
      Oakland International Airport

    Amtrak is also in negotiations to relocate its Miami, Florida 
station to the Miami Intermodal Center at Miami International Airport, 
and recently submitted an application for a Federal-State Partnership 
for a National Network grant for a planned station at Crystal City in 
Arlington, Virginia that would be located adjacent to Ronald Reagan 
Washington National Airport and connected to it via a pedestrian 
bridge.
    The only other U.S. intercity passenger rail station at an airport, 
located at Ted Stevens International Airport in Anchorage, is served 
only by Alaska Railroad charter trains. Brightline, a private intercity 
passenger rail operator, plans to begin service to Orlando 
International Airport later this year.
    All of the Amtrak airport stations identified above, with the 
exception of General Mitchell and Oakland, are also served or would be 
served by commuter rail. Other commuter rail lines, all but one of 
which Amtrak connects with, serve stations at the following airports:
      Dallas Fort Worth International Airport
      Denver International Airport
      Fort Lauderdale International Airport
      O'Hare Airport (Chicago--limited rail service)
      Philadelphia International Airport
      Rhode Island T.F. Green International Airport 
(Providence)
      South Bend International Airport (no Amtrak connection)

    Many other airports are served by subways and light rail lines.
    Codeshares allow airlines to sell tickets to passengers whose trip 
includes both a flight on the airline and a connecting flight, train or 
bus trip on another carrier. Amtrak has had codeshare agreements with 
airlines, most notably a codeshare agreement at Liberty Newark 
International Airport with United Airlines (and its predecessor 
Continental Airlines) that ended several years ago. Amtrak is 
continually having conversations about other potential codeshare 
agreements with airlines and would welcome a partnership that was 
mutually beneficial to Amtrak and the partner.
    Challenges to establishing such partnerships include:
      The limited number of airports located near Amtrak lines 
with the frequent train service that is necessary for viable air-rail 
connections (so that passengers arriving at the airport by train will 
not have unduly long waits before their flight, and will be able to 
travel on a later train if they miss their train connection because 
their arriving flight is late).
      Federal Aviation Administration regulations that prohibit 
use of federal Airline Improvement Program (AIP) grants and Passenger 
Facility Charges (PFCs) collected from air travelers, a primary source 
of funding for construction of airport parking garages and other 
airport facilities, for rail stations at airports unless the station is 
actually located on airport property. Since most railroad lines do not 
pass through or terminate at airports, this effectively precludes use 
of AIPs and PFCs to build or improve rail stations at most airports 
that are located near existing or proposed Amtrak routes. Amtrak has 
proposed that this impediment to developing more air-rail connections 
be removed via modification of these regulations or a statutory 
amendment.
      Consolidation of the U.S. airline industry, which has 
reduced the number of potential airline partners and created large 
airlines that have less interest in developing codeshares with 
connecting carriers.

    Question 3. The Federal Railroad Administration's Corridor ID 
program provides an opportunity for Amtrak to operate new intercity 
passenger rail corridors. How will Amtrak work with freight or other 
host railroads to create potential new corridors or expand existing 
ones?
    Answer. The FRA-led Corridor ID program is the primary vehicle for 
securing Federal financial support for new or improved intercity 
passenger rail services throughout the United States. The Corridor ID 
multi-step process, which includes the development of a Service 
Development Plan (SDP), Preliminary Engineering, and environmental 
clearance, will include FRA-led host railroad engagement to facilitate 
early and consistent communication. For those corridors that select 
Amtrak as the operator, Amtrak will provide technical resources to the 
corridor sponsors and will actively participate and support FRA's host 
railroad engagement process.

 Questions from Hon. David Rouzer to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive 
       Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

    Question 1. Amtrak uses requests for proposals and other 
competitive bidding procedures to procure goods and services, both 
because it is a common requirement of federal law and procurement 
regulations, but also because it generally assures the best value for 
the taxpayer and prevents fraud and abuse.
    In North Carolina, there are two state-supported routes, the 
Piedmont (between Raleigh and Charlotte) and the Carolinian (between 
Richmond to Raleigh). The state contracts with Amtrak to operate these 
trains, as well as to handle the mechanical work for one of these 
routes (the other is handled by a private contractor). North Carolina 
is also exploring expanded passenger rail services, including new 
passenger rail lines to locations like Asheville, Greenville and 
Wilmington.
    Question 1.a. Should the operation of these passenger rail services 
be subject to competitive bidding procedures--specifically, should the 
current routes that Amtrak operates, or any future routes that North 
Carolina proceeds with, be subject to open competition, where private 
companies can offer proposals to handle operations or other work, 
alongside Amtrak's proposals, and allow the state to determine what is 
the best offer and value?
    Answer. Amtrak already faces competition in the provision of 
services required for operation of state-supported routes. As your 
question notes, North Carolina contracts with a private contractor for 
maintenance of the equipment operated on the Piedmont. Other states 
that fund Amtrak state-supported services utilize non-Amtrak 
contractors for on-board food service, customer information services, 
and marketing. Amtrak is happy to work with states that choose to use 
other companies to provide services for state-supported routes.
    Any consideration of competitive bidding for Amtrak-operated 
services must take into account several myths regarding that topic.
    The first myth is that there are numerous U.S. companies qualified 
to operate passenger rail services and eager to do so. That is not the 
case.
      Few private U.S. rail operators--and none of the major 
U.S. railroads--have shown any interest in operating Amtrak or other 
passenger rail services, even with government subsidies. Since 2010, 
four of the five Class I railroads that had been operating commuter 
rail services under contracts with public authorities have decided to 
get out of that business. A 2017 Federal Railroad Administration 
solicitation of bidders to take over the operation of one or more 
Amtrak long-distance routes, with government subsidies, did not attract 
a single proposal.
      Most of the companies that operate commuter rail services 
in the United States or have expressed interest in operating intercity 
passenger rail services are not really ``private companies'' and are 
not based in the United States. Rather, they are subsidiaries of 
national railroads controlled by the governments of China, Japan and 
European countries.

    The second myth is that competitive bidding will invariably produce 
a lower price and better service. That has not been the case with 
respect to intercity passenger rail services in the United States.
      A 2021 Congressional Research Service report concluded 
that past efforts to foster competition for services provided by Amtrak 
have not resulted in improvements in intercity passenger rail 
service.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Improving Intercity Passenger Rail Service in the United 
States, p. 25. (2021, February 8). Congressional Research Service. 
Retrieved July 14, 2023 from https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45783.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ridership fell 10% and mechanical delays increased 35% 
during the first year after a Midwestern state contracted with a 
private company for provision and maintenance of equipment, food 
service and marketing for an Amtrak state-supported route following a 
competitive procurement. After just 17 months, the state's contractor 
ceased providing services when the state declined its request for a 
large increase in payments.

    Other countries have had similar experiences. Franchising of train 
operations in Great Britain resulted in increases in government 
subsidies, higher fares, service deterioration and a pattern of 
contractors submitting low bids to secure contracts and then walking 
away from their obligations. The British government recently abandoned 
franchising and has resumed direct operation of many train routes.
    The third myth is that there is a level playing field among Amtrak 
and potential competitors. That does not exist today for state-
supported services because Amtrak is subject to many statutory 
requirements that do not apply to other parties. Among other things, 
Amtrak must price the services it provides in accord with a statutorily 
mandated costing methodology; must ensure that the customer service, 
professional and IT services it utilizes are performed in the United 
States; and must maintain specified levels of liability insurance. Some 
operators of intrastate passenger rail services are not subject to the 
Railroad Retirement Tax Act and other federal laws that apply to 
Amtrak, which gives them an additional cost advantage. All of these 
issues would have to be addressed through legislative changes in order 
to create fair competition among Amtrak and other potential operators.
    The fourth myth is that privately-owned freight railroads would be 
willing to allow non-Amtrak passenger trains to operate over their 
lines on reasonable terms. That is often not the case. Proposed 
commuter rail services in Charlotte and Atlanta have been stymied by 
the refusal of the railroad that owns the lines over which they would 
operate to even consider operation of passenger trains. Because 
Amtrak's unique statutory access rights to operate existing or new 
services over freight railroad-owned lines are not transferable to 
states or other parties, a state that selected a non-Amtrak operator 
would have no recourse if a freight railroad demanded unreasonable 
investments or compensation for operation of passenger trains over its 
lines, or simply refused to allow them to operate or to continue to 
operate.
    A fifth myth is that state-supported Amtrak services are, like most 
commuter rail services, isolated operations that could easily be 
provided by different operators without harm to passengers or negative 
impacts on ridership and revenues. Amtrak's state-supported services 
are part of an interconnected national network serving 46 states. Many 
of their passengers are connecting to or from other Amtrak routes with 
which those services share stations, equipment maintenance facilities 
and employees. Any consideration of competitive bidding must take into 
account the inefficiencies of having multiple operators; the increased 
costs resulting from those inefficiencies; and the impact on ridership, 
revenues and customer satisfaction if travelers are required to deal 
with more than one operator and use multiple websites, apps or 800 
numbers to obtain information about schedules and book travel.

    Question 1.b. While this may be a procurement decision led by the 
State of North Carolina, what are Amtrak's views of competing with the 
private sector to provide these passenger rail operation services?
    Answer. Please refer to my response to Rouzer Question 1.a.

    Question 1.c. Are there any reasons why competitive bidding would 
not work in these settings?
    Answer. Please refer to my response to Rouzer Question 1.a.

 Questions from Hon. Lance Gooden to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive 
       Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

High Speed Rail:
    Question 1. According to emails obtained through an open records 
request, the North Central Texas Council of Governments and Amtrak were 
actively trying to conceal their relationship with Texas Central from 
the public. Why would Amtrak want to conceal that relationship?
    Question 2. Is it Amtrak's goal to take over the right-of-way for 
the Dallas to Houston high-speed rail line?
    Question 3. Please explain, in detail, Amtrak's involvement with 
the Texas High Speed Rail Project, including Amtrak's expectations for 
having a future role in the project.
    Question 4. Please provide a detailed timeline of Amtrak's 
involvement with the Texas High Speed Rail project, including how 
Amtrak became involved in the project. Additionally, please list all 
entities, including Texas Central Railway and any federal, state, and 
local governments, and any private entities that Amtrak has interacted 
with regarding the TXHSR project.
    Question 5. Please discuss any federal funding, including grants, 
that Amtrak plans to use or apply for or has used or applied for 
related to the construction and/or operation of the TXHSR. Please list 
all grant programs Amtrak plans to use to obtain any funding for the 
project.
    Question 6. Is it Amtrak's goal to take over the right-of-way for 
the Dallas to Houston high-speed rail line?
    Answers to Questions 1-6. Amtrak exists to provide high quality, 
safe and efficient rail services to America, thereby connecting people 
and communities. It does this via a complex mix of services, including 
those on the Northeast Corridor, through State supported services, and 
on its long-distance routes. Amtrak's five-year vision is to 
progressively build ridership and expand service, while maintaining the 
existing system in a state of good repair. Key to everything is 
ongoing, sustainable and sufficient funding to enable Amtrak to 
succeed.
    As part of its current work, and consistent with the policy and new 
funding opportunities created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act, Amtrak is exploring the potential for new services in two ways. 
The first is via the Corridor Identification and Development Program 
(CIDP) in partnership with the Federal Railroad Administration, 
individual states and local/regional governmental entities with a view 
to introduction of new service where this does not currently exist, 
reinstatement of discontinued services or enhancement of existing 
service. In Texas, Amtrak supports the consideration and potential 
development of up to 5 new or enhanced conventional intercity corridor 
services, with new corridor train service connecting the ``Texas 
Triangle'' cities, added frequencies to the Heartland Flyer route and 
possible Long Distance service connecting Dallas-Fort Worth to the 
east.
    The second area being explored relates to potential new routes 
utilizing high speed train technology and dedicated new infrastructure. 
To facilitate this review, Amtrak has set up a High-Speed Rail Program 
to review a number of discrete, potential corridors of which Dallas to 
Houston is one because, at face value, it meets the criteria for viable 
high-speed operation. In the case of Dallas to Houston, Amtrak has held 
discussions with Texas Central to assess whether Amtrak wishes to play 
a role in its existing project going forward.
    A timeline of Amtrak's engagement with Texas Central may be found 
below and is followed by a list of entities Amtrak has interacted with 
on this initiative.
      June 2016: At Texas Central's request, Amtrak met with 
its representatives and attorneys and submitted a letter to the Surface 
Transportation Board (STB) advising that it was open to exploring 
opportunities to develop connections with Texas Central.
      August 2016-December 2016: After Texas Central confirmed 
that it was interested in developing connections with Amtrak, Amtrak 
and Texas Central negotiated and entered into a Voluntary Coordination 
Agreement providing for through ticketing and provision of Amtrak 
services to Texas Central.
      January 2017-June 2017: Amtrak and Texas Central had 
communications and an in-person meeting to discuss implementation and 
announcement of the Voluntary Coordination Agreement.
      July 2017-October 2017: Amtrak and Texas Central 
negotiated and entered into a Reservation and Ticketing Agreement.
      April 2018-June 2018: Amtrak communicated with Texas 
Central and its attorneys in connection with a Texas Central press 
release and filings that Texas Central and Amtrak submitted to the STB 
regarding the agreements between Amtrak and Texas Central.
      June 2019-October 2019: Following an STB request for 
additional information about projected connecting ridership between 
Amtrak and Texas Central trains, Amtrak communicated with Texas Central 
and its attorneys regarding STB filings and data and information 
provided by Amtrak that was included in Texas Central's filing.
      March 2022-July 2023: Amtrak has been engaged in 
discussions with Texas Central and the various entities that have been 
working with or for Texas Central to undertake a due diligence analysis 
regarding ways the two companies could potentially further work 
together to advance a high-speed rail corridor between Dallas and 
Houston and the grant applications identified below.

Entities with which Amtrak Has Interacted Regarding the Texas Central 
Project

  Bechtel
  Citibank
  Federal Railroad Administration
  Hatch LTK
  Hitachi
  HTeC
  JR-Central
  Kiewit Corporation
  L.E.K. Consulting
  Mass. Electric Construction Co.
  Mitsubishi
  NEC
  Renfe
  Sidley & Austin
  Suffolk Construction
  Texas Central
  The Shinkansen United (TSU)
  Toshiba
  Venable LLP
  WeBuild Group

    Grant applications under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and 
Safety Improvements Program (CRISI), Corridor Identification and 
Development Program (Corridor ID) and Federal-State Partnership for 
Intercity Passenger Rail-National Network Program (FSP-National) have 
been developed to support further developmental work on the project. 
The outcome of these applications is expected to be known in Fall 2023.
    It is premature to predict the result of Amtrak's review of the 
project, or what role Amtrak might play in the development of the 
project or any future operation. Amtrak will only proceed to a 
developmental phase following completion of its current due diligence 
work, and only then if grant funding is forthcoming.
I-20 Corridor:
    Question 7. The proposed I-20 Corridor project would pass through 
North and East Texas and have a significant impact on my district. I 
sent a letter to FRA Administrator Bose in support of Amtrak's plan to 
implement the project, which has the ability to provide vigorous 
economic and quality-of-life benefits to Mineola, Dallas, and other 
communities in Texas' Congressional District 5. Mr. Gardner, how will 
the I-20 Corridor revitalize cities and towns in Texas and provide more 
work opportunities for my constituents?
    Answer. Amtrak has applied for an FTA Federal-State Partnership 
grant for the I-20 Amtrak Crescent Extension from Meridian to Dallas-
Fort Worth. This new corridor will connect 6.5 million people in the 
Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex with millions more in Atlanta and across 
the Southern and Mid-Atlantic Regions of the United States. The route 
would fill an important gap in Amtrak's National Network along the I-20 
corridor through Mississippi, northern Louisiana, and Texas and would 
provide connection opportunities to existing services such as the Texas 
Eagle, City of New Orleans, Crescent, and Heartland Flyer.
    Construction activities and ongoing operations will generate jobs 
and investment. The assessment estimates the new service will add or 
support 661 permanent jobs across all industries, including 224 
directly connected to the new service. Results from the 2023 Economic 
Benefits Assessment IMPLAN model show that new induced visitor spending 
on lodging, restaurants, entertainment, shopping and local 
transportation, combined with the stimulus effects of savings from 
reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) and spending on the rail 
operation itself, can be expected to support an additional labor income 
increment of $46.5 million and value-added effects--i.e., incremental 
contribution to Gross Domestic Product from industry-to-industry 
transactions--of $91.8 million annually.
    The service will connect Texas communities with the economic 
epicenters of the region. These direct connections strengthen the 
ability for smaller communities to attract and retain businesses, jobs, 
employees, residents, and visitors. Additional service at stations or 
new stations can also generate economic development around the station 
areas.
Border Crisis:
    Question 8. An existing contract with ICE allows Amtrak to 
transport undocumented immigrants across the country to detention 
facilities or deliver them to immigration hearings or court 
appearances. Are there any limitations or restrictions on Amtrak's 
involvement in transporting migrants, such as in regard to the types of 
individuals or locations that can be transported?
    Answer. Amtrak has not engaged in any organized transport of 
undocumented migrants with any entity, including ICE. Amtrak and the 
Amtrak Police Department (APD) do have policies governing the 
transportation of prisoners by law enforcement agencies using Amtrak 
services, but there are no specific allotments or provisions pertaining 
to the transportation of undocumented migrants.

    Question 9. Is Amtrak currently or have they ever entered a 
contract of any kind with a non-profit charitable organization or non-
governmental organization to transport migrants throughout the United 
States? If so, please provide any existing contracts and list of any 
NGOs using Amtrak trains to transport migrants.
    Answer. Amtrak has never been, and is not currently, under contract 
of any kind with any organization to transport migrants. In the months 
prior to the discontinuation of Title 42, Amtrak engaged with non-
governmental organizations and charities to provide a dedicated 
customer service telephone line for organizations seeking to buy 
tickets. This service received extremely limited use and was eventually 
folded into our general reservation system.

    Question 10. Is Amtrak currently or have they ever entered a 
contract of any kind with a local, state, or federal entity for the 
purpose of transporting migrants throughout the United States? If so, 
please provide a list of any NGOs using Amtrak trains to transport 
migrants. For example, has Amtrak received money from the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency to transport an undocumented immigrant?
    Answer. Amtrak is not currently and has not previously been under 
contract with any local, state, or federal entity for the purpose of 
transporting migrants in the United States, nor has Amtrak received 
funding from any government institution for that purpose.

Questions from Hon. Rudy Yakym III to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive 
       Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

    Question 1. Mr. Gardner, you testified that Amtrak's starting up 
the Great River route this year, with a daily roundtrip train between 
Chicago and St. Paul, Minnesota.
    The trip is projected to be seven and a half hours.\6\ You can 
drive from Union Station in Chicago to Union Depot in St. Paul in under 
six hours. You can fly from Chicago-O'Hare to Minneapolis-St. Paul in 
an hour and a half, and the route is well-served, with my staff 
identifying 26 nonstop flights on four major airlines on a day picked 
at random.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/multimodal/rail/
TCMC-booklet20210526.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Can you please describe the market research that was undertaken 
before deciding to establish this route, as well as the key facts and 
figures that contributed to the decision?
    Question 1.a. What is the target demographic that Amtrak 
anticipates riding the Great River?
    Question 1.b. Was the market research Amtrak conducted ahead of the 
Great River route in line with the typical market research it conducts 
as it evaluates new service?
    Question 1.c. What is the overriding factor as Amtrak considers a 
new service? Is it profitability, ridership, or something else?
    Answers to Questions 1, 1.a., 1.b., & 1.c. Like airlines, Amtrak 
uses ridership and revenue forecasting models to project future 
ridership and revenues on all of its existing and proposed routes, 
including the Great River. These models incorporate a large number of 
different demographic inputs that affect travel demand and historical 
data on demand for Amtrak services.
    Under Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement 
Act of 2008 (Section 209) and 49 U.S.C. 24712, it is up to states to 
decide whether they wish Amtrak to operate routes of 750 miles or less 
outside of the Northeast Corridor, such as the planned Great River 
route. On these routes, which are referred to as ``state-supported 
routes,'' states--Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois in the case of the 
Great River, which will be a Milwaukee-to-St. Paul extension of 
existing state-supported Chicago-to-Milwaukee trains--are responsible 
for funding or securing funding for most operating costs that are not 
covered by passenger revenues, and for certain capital costs.
    In advancing new routes, Amtrak considers many factors, including 
current market conditions; the existence and performance of current 
intercity service; and changing demographic, economic development and 
growth patterns, along with current and anticipated congestion and 
reliability conditions of other modes. Of course, Amtrak must also 
consider all the operational factors, including feasibility, host 
railroad access and the availability of equipment (for which states pay 
a capital charge) and other necessary resources in evaluating any 
service. When good candidate routes are identified, the overriding 
factor that Amtrak considers regarding whether to operate a new state-
supported route is whether a state or states is prepared to provide or 
secure funding for the necessary costs. While different states have a 
variety of reasons for funding state-supported routes, the primary one 
is usually to provide more mobility options for their residents.
    Like Amtrak's other services, the Great River service is not 
targeted at one particular market segment or demographic. Similar 
state-supported services carry significant numbers of college students; 
passengers traveling to visit family members; travelers making personal 
business trips (e.g., for medical appointments, weddings and funerals); 
and passengers making leisure trips. (Chicago, Milwaukee and 
Minneapolis/St. Paul are all significant leisure destinations with 
multiple attractions and major league sports teams, and Wisconsin Dells 
attracts approximately four million annual visitors.) Many of these 
travelers prefer the experience of rail travel or are unable to drive 
or fly, and in many cases flying is not an option between the points 
they are traveling.
    As you point out, there is frequent airline service between the two 
large metropolitan areas--Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul--the Great 
River will connect. However, there is no air service in most of the 
communities along the Great River route. Of the seven planned stops 
between Milwaukee and St. Paul, only one--La Crosse, Wisconsin--has any 
scheduled air service, and the only destination to which one can fly 
directly from La Crosse is Chicago. Airfares for passengers who are not 
traveling between major airline hubs or are unable to book tickets in 
advance are often prohibitively expensive. The lowest airfare for the 
215-mile flight between Chicago and La Crosse is $259, and passengers 
booking same- or next-day flights between Chicago and Minneapolis/St. 
Paul can expect to pay a similar fare. While Amtrak's long-distance 
Chicago to Seattle/Portland Empire Builder serves the same stations the 
Great River will serve, it operates at different times of day than the 
Great River will; is frequently sold out between Chicago and St. Paul; 
and is often late eastbound because of delays encountered while 
operating over host railroad lines west of St. Paul.

    Question 2. Amtrak projects annual ridership of 124,000 for the 
Great River in a ``travelshed'' that sees 10 million annual trips 
across car, plane, bus, and train.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question 2.a. How did Amtrak arrive at this ridership estimate?
    Question 2.b. When was the estimate released in relation to the 
COVID-19 pandemic? If it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, why did 
Amtrak not update the figure to account for the new ridership 
realities?
    Question 2.c. If ridership comes in below the projected level, what 
steps does Amtrak plan to take to increase ridership?
    Question 2.d. If ridership comes in below the projected level, are 
the additional financial losses borne by Amtrak, the Federal 
Restoration and Enhancement Grant, or the state partners?
    Question 2.e. What ridership does Amtrak project for this route in 
fiscal year 2029?
    Question 2.f. Amtrak projects revenue growth for the Great River 
route to be about 4.5% between fiscal year 2024 and 2029--an average of 
0.9% annual growth.\8\ On a one-for-one basis of ridership to revenue, 
this appears to mean that Amtrak anticipates attracting only about 5800 
additional riders in six years. Given the 10 million-trip travelshed, 
why does Amtrak not project more robust growth in ridership?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answers to Questions 2.a.-2.f. The manner in which Amtrak ridership 
estimates are developed is described in the response to Yakym Question 
1 above. Amtrak has recently updated its ridership estimates for the 
Great River. The updated projections take into account changes in the 
operating plan for the service, which is now planned to operate as an 
extension of an existing Chicago-Milwaukee state-supported train. They 
also reflect changes in demand for Amtrak services since the onset of 
the COVID-19 pandemic and during the ongoing recovery from the decrease 
in travel demand it triggered. Amtrak's growing ridership now 
approximates or exceeds pre-pandemic ridership on most state-supported 
routes.
    In conjunction with its state partners, Amtrak uses a variety of 
methods to attract and grow ridership on its state-supported services, 
including pricing actions and marketing campaigns. Under the state-
supported service cost allocation methodology adopted pursuant to 
Section 209, if revenues for a state-supported service are less than 
projected, states are responsible for making up the difference. 
Restoration and Enhancement grants are awarded in fixed amounts.
    Amtrak has not yet developed 2029 ridership projections that 
reflect the revised operating plan.

    Question 3. Amtrak projects an operating cost for the Great River 
route of around $12.3 million, revenue around $5.0 million, and a 
federal and state subsidy of about $7.2 million, with the federal 
government shouldering the lion's share in the early years and 
transitioning fully to the state partners in fiscal year 2027.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Question 3.a. Does Amtrak project that the Great River service will 
ever be profitable?
    Question 3.b. Does Amtrak consider a route whose revenue only 
covers 40% of operating costs to be a valuable use of limited 
resources?
    Question 3.c. Is a route whose revenue only covers 40% of operating 
costs sustainable? If so, for how long?
    Answers to Questions 3.a.-3.c. Amtrak has recently updated its 
forecasts for the Great River to reflect changes in travel demand, 
operating plans and inflation since previous forecasts were prepared. 
The updated forecasts project that, in Fiscal Year 2024, the Great 
River will have ridership of 231,900 passengers, including passengers 
traveling between Chicago and Milwaukee since the train is now planned 
to operate as an extension of an existing Chicago-to-Milwaukee state-
supported train. Projected revenues are $10.2 million, and the 
projected annual state payment will be $6.1 million under the Section 
209 methodology. We project a farebox recovery of approximately 57%.
    While Amtrak does not expect the Great River to be profitable, its 
projected financial performance compares favorably to that of other 
U.S. publicly-funded transportation services. The Northern Indiana 
Commuter Transportation District's South Shore Line you asked me about 
at the hearing, which prior to the COVID-19 pandemic had one of the 
best financial performances among U.S. passenger railroads, covered 48% 
of its operating costs from farebox revenues in 2019. Likewise, airline 
and highway services, particularly in less populated communities like 
those the Great River will serve, receive both direct and indirect 
public subsidies. Among other things, Congress provided $61 billion in 
funding to sustain the airline industry during the COVID-19 pandemic 
and has appropriated $275 billion in general taxpayer revenues to the 
Highway Trust Fund since it became insolvent in 2008.
    The Great River and Amtrak's other state-supported services are 
sustainable. As with commuter trains, airline services and federal 
highways, the federal, state and local governments that fund them 
recognize that they are essential to mobility and national and local 
economic prosperity. Despite the funding challenges states face, and 
lack of federal funding to match state investments in Amtrak state-
supported services until the enactment of the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act, Amtrak's state-supported services and their ridership 
have grown significantly in recent decades. In the past 25 years, only 
one state has ceased providing funding support for a state-supported 
route. Given the mobility, economic and other benefits passenger rail 
provides, and growing travel demand that already congested highways and 
airports will be unable to accommodate, Amtrak believes that the 
funding federal and state governments provide to Amtrak and its state-
supported services is a necessary and very prudent use of limited 
public funding.

Questions from Hon. Troy E. Nehls to Mitch Warren, Executive Director, 
                     Northeast Corridor Commission

    Question 1. In the Northeast, there is a diverse approach to 
passenger rail operations. This currently includes both publicly and 
privately operated commuter rail lines, as well as intercity passenger 
rail operated by Amtrak and a privately-operated, competitively-
selected service, the CTRail.
    Question 1.a. With a number of new routes under consideration in 
New England, as well as the rest of the country, please describe your 
views on whether Amtrak should be the sole rail operator providing 
intercity passenger rail services, or whether there are benefits to 
having private operators as well?
    Question 1.b. Do you think competitive bidding between private 
operators and Amtrak would have benefits for these routes and their 
state sponsors? Please explain your answer.
    Answers to Questions 1.a. & 1.b. You are correct about the diverse 
approach to passenger rail operations on the corridor. Most agencies 
run their own services, although Amtrak operates MARC Penn Line service 
for Maryland and Shore Line East service for Connecticut, and MBTA and 
CTrail Hartford Line services are operated on behalf of the agencies by 
private contract operators based on competitive bidding. Amtrak runs 
intercity services on the corridor.
    Intercity routes outside the Northeast Corridor are outside of the 
Commission's purview, although our state members appreciate the 
flexibility to bid out their commuter service operations when 
appropriate and believe that flexibility to competitively bid passenger 
rail operations helps to maximize public benefit. Of course, there are 
added complexities in privatizing intercity operations outside the NEC, 
such as the rights to operate on freight railroads. In many cases, due 
to its access rights on freight railroad lines and other advantages 
such as the efficiencies gained when operating multiple services within 
a geographic area, Amtrak may be the best operator of intercity routes.

 Questions from Hon. Donald M. Payne, Jr., to Mitch Warren, Executive 
                Director, Northeast Corridor Commission

    Question 1. The Northeast Corridor is unique as it is one of the 
few electrified rail corridors in the country. This means that as the 
country moves towards greener energy sources, communities along the 
corridor stand to benefit greatly. What are partner agencies on the 
commission doing to facilitate greater use of the corridor's 
electrification?
    Answer. Rail travel produces up to 83 percent fewer greenhouse gas 
emissions than driving and up to 73 percent fewer than flying, and 
electric rail service is cleaner than diesel service. In addition to 
its climate benefits, electric rail service also does not emit 
particulate matter and helps to promote cleaner air.
    The vast majority of trains on the Northeast Corridor are 
electrified. This includes all Amtrak Acela, Regional, and Keystone 
trains, all Metro North and Long Island Rail Road trains, all New 
Jersey Transit trains, and all SEPTA trains.
    Last year, Connecticut electrified all Shore Line East trains and 
realized the benefits of faster acceleration and deceleration compared 
to the diesel sets they replaced. As a result, CTDOT and Amtrak worked 
to develop new schedules that saved up to ten minutes in travel time. 
These new, electrified trains also reduce air pollution, resulting in 
improved air quality for the surrounding communities, and are quieter, 
resulting in less noise pollution. CTDOT has initiated an 
electrification feasibility study as part of the department's goal to 
fully electrify the CTrail network. The study will focus on the 
feasibility of electrification on the Danbury, Waterbury, and Hartford 
lines.
    Massachusetts and Rhode Island have submitted a CRISI application 
to study electrification of MBTA's highest ridership service, the 
Providence Line. The NEC mainline tracks between Boston and Wickford 
Junction are already electrified and Amtrak runs dozens of daily 
Regional and Acela trains over those tracks. However, MBTA's trains are 
currently powered by diesel locomotives and some station platforms are 
only accessible via non-electrified tracks. The expectation is that by 
shifting MBTA's Providence Line to electric service, the faster 
acceleration and deceleration will allow for improved trip times and 
reduce conflicts with Amtrak's higher speed intercity trains. Faster, 
cleaner electric train service on the Providence line will not only 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions directly, but the hope is that improved 
rail service will encourage mode shift from cars to trains and further 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote cleaner air.
    Maryland MTA plans to return to electric service on the MARC Penn 
Line upon completion of the Frederick Douglass Tunnel. Penn Line 
service accounts for 68 percent of MARC's weekday trains and 100 
percent of weekend service. In addition to cleaner air and reduced 
greenhouse gas emissions, Maryland expects that faster acceleration 
between stations, higher maximum speeds, and faster schedule recovery 
will allow for reduced trip times on the Penn Line.

    Question 2. What are Northeast Corridor Commission members doing to 
ensure bipartisan infrastructure funding will help create a level 
playing field for socially and economically disadvantaged individuals?
    Answer. Investments in new and upgraded stations provide access to 
opportunity for socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. 
Improvements to the existing station in Coatesville, Pennsylvania 
provide ADA access and multimodal connections that will boost economic 
development, serving a community that is 80 percent nonwhite and for 
which, among the population that commutes by public transportation, 78 
percent are 60 years and over. ADA improvements at the West Baltimore 
MARC station will serve a community that is 12 percent 65 years and 
older, and 73 percent Black or African American. The Penn Station 
Access project will result in four new stations served by Metro North 
Railroad in majority nonwhite neighborhoods in the Bronx, bringing new 
service to Penn Station in New York City.
    Nearly 30 projects in the Commission's 15-year CONNECT NEC 2037 
plan incorporate ADA accessibility improvements. This work will ensure 
that riders with disabilities have safe access to passenger rail 
service along the corridor. Amtrak also is advancing numerous ADA 
accessibility projects across the country with its supplemental IIJA 
appropriations.
    Investments along the corridor create direct, indirect, and induced 
jobs. Direct job creation refers to jobs that are required to deliver 
rail investments, such as project planners, designers, engineers, and 
construction workers. The latter are typically union jobs that do not 
require college degrees. Indirect jobs include non-construction jobs at 
suppliers of materials generated to support infrastructure investment, 
such as steel, concrete, wood, and specialized railroad equipment. 
Induced jobs are those created by the spending of monies such as 
project salaries for items such as groceries, gas, and entertainment.
    Amtrak's workforce development initiatives within its B&P Tunnel 
Replacement project in Baltimore will include a jobs center in West 
Baltimore and partnerships with local universities and technology 
programs.
    Many NEC agencies are also already implementing or planning 
adjustments to schedules that spread train service more evenly 
throughout the day. This method of delivering service will benefit 
those with travel needs outside of morning and evening peak periods. In 
addition, increases in commuter service will allow those living in less 
expensive housing to access opportunities in economic centers.

                               [all]