Active Commuter Rail Agency Service Contracts (10-JUL-06,
GAO-06-820R).
Commuter rail is an important part of the transportation system
in many cities and regions in our country, providing more than
420 million passenger trips in 2005. Although several of the
largest commuter rail agencies hire their own employees, many
agencies contract with other companies, including Amtrak, freight
railroads, and private rail operators, to provide services that
are critical to running the agencies' trains. These contracted
services include providing crews to operate trains (train
operations); maintenance of equipment (MOE), including
maintenance of train cars and locomotives; dispatching train
traffic; and maintenance of way (MOW), which involves maintaining
the track, signals, and other track infrastructure. Commuter rail
agencies can obtain these services by opening contracts to
competition or through noncompetitive negotiations with a service
provider. Congress asked us to provide information on the service
arrangements between commuter rail agencies and other companies.
Accordingly, we addressed the following questions: (1) How many
currently active commuter rail service contracts were obtained
through competitive and noncompetitive processes? (2) What
differences, if any, are there between competitively and
noncompetitively negotiated contracts?
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-06-820R
ACCNO: A56624
TITLE: Active Commuter Rail Agency Service Contracts
DATE: 07/10/2006
SUBJECT: Comparative analysis
Railroad industry
Railroad transportation operations
Service contracts
Competitive procurement
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-820R
* PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf
* Order by Mail or Phone
July 10, 2006
The Honorable Richard C. Shelby
Chairman
Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
United States Senate
Subject: Active Commuter Rail Agency Service Contracts
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Commuter rail is an important part of the transportation system in many
cities and regions in our country, providing more than 420 million
passenger trips in 2005. Although several of the largest commuter rail
agencies hire their own employees, many agencies contract with other
companies, including Amtrak, freight railroads, and private rail
operators, to provide services that are critical to running the agencies'
trains. These contracted services include providing crews to operate
trains (train operations); maintenance of equipment (MOE), including
maintenance of train cars and locomotives; dispatching train traffic; and
maintenance of way (MOW), which involves maintaining the track, signals,
and other track infrastructure. Commuter rail agencies can obtain these
services by opening contracts to competition or through noncompetitive
negotiations with a service provider.
You asked us to provide information on the service arrangements between
commuter rail agencies and other companies. Accordingly, we addressed the
following questions: (1) How many currently active commuter rail service
contracts were obtained through competitive and noncompetitive processes?
(2) What differences, if any, are there between competitively and
noncompetitively negotiated contracts? Through interviews and site visits
with commuter rail agencies, we identified all 50 active commuter rail
contracts that provided at least one of the four following services: train
operations, MOE, dispatching, and MOW. Of these 50 contracts, we found
that 22 only provided access to infrastructure and services directly
related to maintaining and operating the infrastructure (e.g., dispatching
and MOW). These contracts did not include other services, such as train
operations, that are not bound to the infrastructure and for which a
commuter rail agency could choose a provider other than the infrastructure
owner. We excluded these 22 contracts from our analysis because commuter
rail agencies must negotiate with the infrastructure owner for access, and
infrastructure owners generally conduct their own dispatching and maintain
their own rights-of-way. The other 28 contracts included at least one
service that was not bound to infrastructure used by the commuter rail
agency and, therefore, could be provided by an entity other than the
infrastructure owner. These contracts were included in our analysis and
are discussed in greater detail in our findings.
About Half of Commuter Rail Service Contracts Were Obtained through
Competitive Processes
Fifteen of the 28 active commuter rail service contracts were obtained
through competitive processes. As of July 1, 2006, Herzog, a private rail
operator headquartered in Missouri, held 7 of the competitively procured
contracts. Amtrak held 2 of the competitively procured contracts-including
a turnkey service for Caltrain, a commuter rail service linking San
Francisco and San Jose, under which Amtrak provides services critical to
running Caltrain's commuter service, as well as operations at several of
Caltrain's passenger stations. The remaining 6 contracts were spread among
six other private transportation companies.
The other 13 contracts were negotiated noncompetitively. Amtrak held 5 of
these 13 contracts, and three freight railroads-Burlington Northern Santa
Fe (BNSF), CSX, and Union Pacific-held 6. The remaining 2 noncompetitive
contracts were negotiated between commuter rail agencies that share
continuous rights-of-way.1
Table 1 provides information on all 28 active commuter rail service
contracts.
Table 1: Active Commuter Rail Service Contracts
Does the
Was this contracted
Contracted contract provider own
Commuter rail service Contract negotiated the
agency Services provider period competitively? infrastructure?
Noncompetitively negotiated contracts
Competitively negotiated
contracts
Altamont Train Herzoga June Yes No
Commuter operations and 1998-June
Express (ACE) MOE 2009, with
the option
to extend
the
contract
for a
period
deemed
appropriate
by ACE's
board
Maryland Contract for Amtrak Dec. Yes No
Transit MOE services 2001-Dec.
Administration at MARC's 2006
(MARC) maintenance
facility in
Frederick,
Maryland
Massachusetts Train Massachusetts July Yes No
Bay operations, Bay Commuter 2003-July
Transportation MOE, MOW, Railroad 2008, with
Authority dispatching, Company the option
(MBTA) and station (MBCR) to extend
operation through
2013
Nashville Train Transit Begins from Yes No
Music City operations and Solutions the start
Starb MOE Group of revenue
service for
5 years,
with the
option to
extend for
5 years;
notice to
proceed was
issued in
May 2006
New Jersey MOE Herzog July Yes No
Transit 2005-June
Corporation 2010, with
(NJT)c the option
to extend
through
June 2012
New Mexico Train Herzog Fall Yes No
Rail Runner operations, 2005-2010,
Expressb MOE, and MOW with the
option to
extend
until 2012
North County Train Herzog July Yes No
Transit operations, 2006-June
District MOE, and MOW 2011
(Coaster)
Peninsula Train Amtrak July Yes No
Corridor Joint operations, 2001-June
Powers Board MOE, MOW, 2009, with
(Caltrain) dispatching, the option
and station to extend
operation until June
2011
Southern MOE Bombardier July Yes No
California 2003-June
Regional Rail 2010, with
Authority the option
(SCRRA), to extend
operator of until 2013
Metrolink
Commuter Rail
Service
SCRRA Train Connex July Yes No
operations 2005-June
2010, with
the option
to extend
until 2015
SCRRA MOW (track and Herzog March Yes No
structures) 2001-June
2007
SCRRA MOW (signals Mass Electric July Yes No
and Construction 2001-June
communication) Co. 2007
Tri-County Train Herzog Nov. Yes No
Commuter Rail operations and 2002-June
Authority MOE 2007
(Tri-Rail)
Trinity Train Herzog Oct. Yes No
Railway operations, 2005-Oct.
Express (TRE) MOE, MOW, and 2010, with
dispatching the option
to extend
through
2015
Virginia MOE STV Group May Yes No
Railway Inc. 2006-May
Express (VRE) 2007, with
1-year
options to
extend up
to 2010
Coaster Dispatching SCRRA In No No
perpetuity
until the
parties
agree to
terminate
the
agreement
Connecticut Train Amtrak March Nod Yes, owns
Department of operations, 2006-June rights-of-way
Transportation MOE, MOW, 2007
Shore Line dispatching,
East (SLE) and station
operation
MARC Train Amtrak Dec. No Yes, owns
operations, 2004-Dec. portions of the
MOE, MOW, 2006 rights-of-way,
dispatching, Washington
and station Union Terminal,
operation and Ivy City
Maintenance
Yard
MARC Train CSX July Noe Yes, owns
operations, 2005-July portions of the
MOE, MOW, and 2010 rights-of-way
dispatching
MTA Train NJT In No Yes, owns
Metro-North operations, perpetuity portions of the
Railroad MOE, MOW, and until the rights-of-way
dispatchingf parties in New Jersey
agree to
terminate
the
agreement
New Mexico Dispatching BNSF March Nog No
Rail Runner 2006-March
Expressb 2009
NJT MOE Amtrak July No Yes, owns
2005-June Sunnyside
2006 Maintenance and
Storage Yard,
in which NJT
has an easement
interest
Northeastern Train BNSF Jan. No Yes, owns
Illinois operations, 2001-Dec. portions of the
Regional MOE, MOW, and 2007 rights-of-way
Commuter dispatching
Railroad
Corporation
(Metra)
Metra Train Union Pacific Jan. No Yes, owns
operations, 2004-Dec. portions of the
MOE, MOW, and 2008 rights-of-way
dispatching
Sound Transit, MOE Amtrak Sept. No Yes, Amtrak
Central Puget 2000-Dec. owns facilities
Sound Regional 2009 and leases
Transportation property at
Authority Holgate
(Sounder) Maintenance and
Storage Yard
Sounder Train BNSF South Route No Yes, owns
operations, 2000-2040; rights-of-way
MOW, and North Route
dispatching 2000-2012,
with the
option to
extend
until 2017
Tri-Rail MOW and CSX To continue Noh No
dispatching until
either
party
provides 9
months
notice to
end or
change the
contract
VRE Train Amtrak July Noi Yes, owns about
operations, 2005-June 1.5 miles of
MOE, MOW, 2010 rights-of-way
dispatching, from L'Enfant
and station Station into
operation Washington
Union Terminal
and Ivy City
Maintenance
Yard, which are
also owned by
Amtrak
1In the first case, Metro-North Railroad, a commuter rail service in the
New York City area, has a contract with New Jersey Transit (NJT), another
commuter rail agency in the same region. Two of Metro-North's lines are
extensions of New Jersey Transit lines that operate out of Hoboken
Terminal in New Jersey, and both agencies have found it to be efficient to
have a single operator (NJT) for this system. In the second case, Coaster
has a contract for dispatching services provided by Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), the operator of Metrolink Commuter Rail
Service. Coaster officials noted that this contract is between two
California public agencies, and, while Coaster's service does not use
parts of the rights-of-way owned by SCRRA, Metrolink commuter rail service
does access Coaster rights-of-way.
Source: GAO analysis of commuter rail contract information.
Notes: Each row of this table represents a single contract. Because
commuter rail agencies may have multiple contracts to obtain the services
critical to their operations, a commuter rail agency may be listed more
than once. For example, Metrolink, a commuter rail service in Los Angeles,
has four contracts-one for train operations, one for maintenance of
equipment, and two for maintenance of way-each of which is summarized on a
separate row; Metrolink, therefore, is listed four times in the table.
aHerzog has several subsidiaries, but we did not distinguish between them
for the purposes of the report.
bThe Nashville Music City Star and the New Mexico Rail Runner Express are
both proposed commuter rail agencies that plan to initiate revenue service
later in 2006.
cThis contract covers about 2 percent of NJT's total maintenance of
equipment service needs.
dSLE has had a noncompetitive agreement with Amtrak, in part because of
labor issues, according to agency officials. However, SLE is investigating
the possibility of contracting with a different train operator and having
a separate noncompetitive agreement with Amtrak for rights-of-way access.
eMARC's contract with CSX requires MARC to issue a request for proposals
for new train operation crews and maintenance of equipment workers because
CSX does not wish to provide these services to MARC in the future. MARC
officials are working to develop the request for proposals and plan to
issue it late in 2006.
fThis contract covers about 7.5 percent of Metro-North's total service and
applies only to Metro-North services west of the Hudson River.
gIn March 2006, New Mexico purchased rights-of-way from BNSF and
established a Joint Use Agreement. In accordance with the terms of the
agreement, BNSF will provide dispatching services over this rights-of-way
for 3 years (until March 2009). After this initial period, New Mexico may
assume dispatching responsibilities or select another provider.
hThis contract is between the state of Florida and CSX. According to
Tri-Rail officials, dispatching and MOW services were negotiated as a part
of the sale of CSX's rights-of-way to the state when the service was
initiated. The state of Florida now owns the rights-of-way and may choose
to competitively procure this service contract provided the state gives
CSX 9 months' notice of its intention to do so.
iIn its July 2005 renegotiations with Amtrak, VRE had Amtrak separate its
costs for access and midday storage at Washington Union Terminal (WUT)
from other expenses. This information would allow VRE to competitively
procure train operations in 2010, when its current service contract with
Amtrak expires. VRE's long-term plans also include the construction of
maintenance facilities so that equipment maintenance would not need to be
performed at WUT. The WUT contract would remain noncompetitive, but VRE
would be able to competitively procure maintenance of equipment services.
Infrastructure Ownership Appears to Be an Important Determinant in Whether
Contracts Are Competitively Negotiated
According to our analysis, the most notable difference between contracts
that were competitively and noncompetitively negotiated was whether the
service provider owned the infrastructure that the commuter rail agency
was using. Specifically, for all 15 contracts that were negotiated
competitively, the service provider did not own the infrastructure used by
the commuter rail agency. Rather, in most cases the commuter rail agency
or its sister transit agency owned the majority of the infrastructure. In
contrast, for 10 of the 13 contracts that were negotiated
noncompetitively, the service provider owned the infrastructure used by
the commuter rail agency. In two other cases, the service provider was the
former owner of the rights-of-way, and the service agreement was
established concurrently with the sale of the track. Thus, the service
provider currently or previously owned the infrastructure used by the
commuter rail agencies for 12 of the 13 noncompetitively negotiated
contracts.
Another difference between the competitively and noncompetitively
negotiated contracts was the types of services included in the contract.
Although competitive and noncompetitive contracts were almost equally
likely to cover train operations, maintenance of equipment, and
maintenance of way, the noncompetitive contracts were much more likely to
include dispatching-an important infrastructure-related service that
allows the provider to control train traffic on the rights-of-way. (See
table 2.)
Table 2: Services Included in Contracts Reviewed
Service Competitive contracts Noncompetitive contracts
Train operations 9 of 15 8 of 13
Maintenance of equipment 12 of 15 9 of 13
Maintenance of way 7 of 15 9 of 13
Dispatching 3 of 15 11 of 13
Source: GAO analysis of commuter rail agency contract information.
Note: Most contracts included terms for more than one service. For
example, a single contract may include train operations, maintenance of
equipment, and maintenance of way services. As a result, the number of
services exceeds the number of contracts in each column.
Although infrastructure ownership appears to have played a critical role
in determining whether the current contracts were negotiated
competitively, commuter rail agencies indicated that, in the future, they
may have greater latitude in choosing a provider other than the
infrastructure owner. For example, several commuter rail agencies have
taken steps to competitively procure services that are currently being
provided by the infrastructure owner, and two agencies noted that the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's (MBTA) experience with
changing service providers served as an example for other agencies.
Specifically, in 2003, MBTA replaced Amtrak with a new service provider,
even though Amtrak had provided these services since 1987 and the two
agencies are dependent on each other's infrastructure. In addition,
commuter rail agency officials noted that the number of private rail
companies has grown in the last 5 to 10 years, potentially making
competitive negotiations financially more worthwhile. For example,
officials from the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) took steps to
restructure their current service contract with Amtrak and are developing
long-term plans to build their own equipment maintenance yard so that the
agency is positioned to competitively negotiate train operations and
maintenance of equipment services when their contract with Amtrak expires
in 2010.
Agency Comments
We provided the Department of Transportation and Amtrak officials with a
draft of this report for review and comment. Both agencies provided
technical clarifications that we incorporated, as appropriate.
Scope and Methodology
To address our objectives, we contacted officials from all existing
commuter rail agencies, as reported by the American Public Transportation
Association, as well as two proposed commuter rail agencies that plan to
initiate service in 2006. We conducted a semistructured interview with
each agency to identify its service needs, the companies it has contracted
with, and the scope of the services covered by its contracts. We also
determined through these interviews whether the contracts included rights
for the commuter rail agency to access infrastructure owned by the service
provider (e.g., rights-of-way, passenger stations, and train maintenance
yards). Through site visits with seven existing and one proposed commuter
rail agency and through follow-up correspondence with all existing
commuter agencies and the two proposed commuter agencies, we identified
the length of the service contracts and determined whether each contract
had been competitively or noncompetitively negotiated. We also examined
some current commuter rail service contracts and documents related to
milestones in agencies' competitive procurement processes.2 To ensure the
accuracy of information summarized in the report, we verified the
information we collected with the commuter rail agencies.3
2Our audit work also contributed to a comprehensive report on commuter
rail agencies' reliance on Amtrak for services and access to
infrastructure. See GAO, Commuter Rail: Commuter Rail Issues Should Be
Considered in Debate over Amtrak, GAO-06-470 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 21,
2006).
3Two commuter rail agencies did not respond to our request to verify
information.
Our review identified 50 active commuter rail contracts that provided at
least one of four services critical to running an agency's service-that
is, these services are all related to the movement of trains (i.e., train
operations, MOE, dispatching, or MOW).4 Many of these contracts covered
more than one critical service. Of the 50 contracts, we found that 22
provided access only to infrastructure and services directly related to
maintaining and operating the infrastructure (e.g., dispatching and MOW).
These contracts did not include other services, such as train operations,
that are not bound to the infrastructure and for which a commuter rail
agency could choose a provider other than the infrastructure owner. We
excluded these 22 contracts from our analysis because commuter rail
agencies must negotiate with the infrastructure owner for access, and
infrastructure owners generally conduct their own dispatching and maintain
their own rights-of-way. A limitation of our analysis is that we did not
collect information on the willingness of infrastructure owners to provide
infrastructure access without also providing other services to commuter
rail agencies. Table 3 describes all 50 contracts and indicates whether
they are included in our analysis.
Table 3: Commuter Rail Service Contracts, by Agency
Commuter rail Provider Contract description Included
agency Commuter Provider Contract description or
rail agency Provider Contract description excluded
Commuter rail Provider Contract description in our
agency Commuter analysis
rail agency Included
or
excluded
in our
analysis
Included
or
excluded
in our
analysis
Included
or
excluded
in our
analysis
Existing commuter rail agencies
Altamont Herzog Contract for train Included
Commuter Express operations and MOE
(ACE) Union Pacific Contract for Excluded
access to Union
Pacific
rights-of-way
(ROW) and
associated
dispatching and
MOW
Caltrain Contract for Excluded
dispatching and
train storage at
Caltrain's San
Jose Station
Connecticut Amtrak Contract for train Included
Department of operations, MOE,
Transportation dispatching, MOW, and
Shore Line East station operation; also
(SLE) includes access to Amtrak
ROW
Maryland Transit Amtrak Contract for train Included
Administration operations, MOE,
(MARC) dispatching, MOW, and
station operation; also
includes access to Amtrak
ROW and Washington Union
Station
Amtrak Contract for MOE Included
services at MARC's
maintenance
facility in
Frederick,
Maryland
CSX Contract for train Included
operations, MOE,
dispatching, and
MOW
Massachusetts MBCR Contract for train Included
Bay operations, MOE,
Transportation dispatching, MOW, and
Authority (MBTA) station operation
Amtrak Contract for Excluded
access to
Amtrak-owned ROW
and associated
dispatching and
MOW
Amtrak Contract for MOW Excluded
at the Route 128
Station, which is
owned by Amtrak
but sits on land
owned by MBTA
CSX Contract for Excluded
access to CSX ROW
and associated
dispatching and
MOW
Guilford Contract for Excluded
access to Guilford
ROW and associated
dispatching
MTA Long Island Amtrak Contracts for MOW and Excluded
Rail Road (LIRR) special maintenance
projects, as well as access
to ROW approaching Penn
Station and Penn Station
itself, all of which are
owned by Amtraka
MTA Metro-North New Jersey Contract for train Included
Railroad Transit operations, MOE,
dispatching, and MOW, as
well as access to NJT ROW
New Jersey Herzog Contract for MOE services Included
Transit on a small portion of the
Corporation NJT train fleet
(NJT) Amtrak Contract for MOE Included
services at
Amtrak's Sunnyside
Yard
Amtrak Contract for Excluded
access to Amtrak
ROW and Penn
Station, as well
as dispatching,
MOW, and services
related to use of
Amtrak ROW and
Penn Station
Conrail Contract for Excluded
access to Conrail
ROW and associated
dispatching and
MOW
North County Herzog Contract for train Included
Transit District operations, MOE, and MOW
(Coaster) SCRRA Contract for Included
dispatching
services
Northeastern Union Pacific Contract for train Included
Illinois operations, MOE,
Commuter dispatching, and MOW; also
Railroad includes access to Union
Corporation Pacific ROW
(Metra) BNSF Contract for train Included
operations, MOE,
dispatching, and
MOW; also includes
access to BNSF ROW
Amtrak Contract for MOW Excluded
and dispatching in
the area
immediately
surrounding
Chicago Union
Station, which is
owned by Amtrak;
contract also
includes access to
Chicago Union
Station
Canadian Contract for Excluded
National access to Canadian
National ROW, and
associated
dispatching and
MOW
Norfolk Contract for Excluded
Southern access to Norfolk
Southern ROW, and
associated
dispatching and
MOW
CSX Contract for Excluded
access to CSX ROW,
and associated
dispatching and
MOW
Illinois Contract for Excluded
Central access to Illinois
Central ROW, and
associated
dispatching and
MOW
Northern Indiana Metra Contract for access to Excluded
Commuter Metra ROW, stations, and
Transportation associated dispatching and
District (NICTD) MOW
Peninsula Amtrak Contract for train Included
Corridor Joint operations, MOE,
Powers Board dispatching, MOW, and
(Caltrain) station operation
Union Pacific Contract for Excluded
access to Union
Pacific ROW and
the right for
Caltrain to
maintain and
operate this
portion of the
track
Sound Transit, Amtrak Contract for MOE and access Included
Central Puget to Holgate Maintenance Yard
Sound Regional BNSF Contract for train Included
Transportation operations,
Authority dispatching, and
(Sounder) MOW, as well as
access to BNSF ROW
Southeastern Amtrak Contract for access to Excluded
Pennsylvania Amtrak-owned ROW, as well
Transportation as associated MOW,
Authority dispatching, and propulsion
(SEPTA) power on Amtrak's Northeast
Corridor and Harrisburg
Line
Southern Connex Contract for train Included
California operations
Regional Rail Bombardier Contract for MOE Included
Authority Herzog Contract for MOW Included
(SCRRA), (track and
operator of structures)
Metrolink Mass Electric Contract for MOW Included
Commuter Rail Construction (signals and
Service Co. communications)
Union Pacific Shared-use Excluded
agreements for
access to Union
Pacific ROW, and
associated MOW and
dispatching
BNSF Shared use Excluded
agreements for
access to BNSF
ROW, and
associated MOW and
dispatching
Trinity Railway Herzog Contract for train Included
Express (TRE) operations, MOE,
dispatching, and MOW
Tri-County Herzog Contract for train Included
Commuter Rail operations and MOE
Authority CSX Contract for Included
(Tri-Rail) dispatching and
MOW
Virginia Railway Amtrak Contract for train Included
Express (VRE) operations, MOE,
dispatching, MOW, and
station operation; also
includes access to Amtrak
ROW and Washington Union
Station
STV Group Inc. Contract for MOE Included
CSX Contract for Excluded
access to CSX ROW,
and associated
dispatching and
MOW
Norfolk Contract for Excluded
Southern access to Norfolk
Southern ROW, and
associated
dispatching and
MOW
Proposed commuter rail agencies
New Mexico Rail Herzog Contract for train Included
Runner Express operations, MOE, and MOW
BNSF Joint Use Included
Agreement for
dispatching
services
Nashville Music Transit Contract for train Included
City Star Solutions operations and MOE; notice
Group to proceed was issued in
May 2006
Nashville and Contract for Excluded
Eastern Rail access to NERA
Authority ROW, and
(NERA) dispatching and
MOW services
through NERA's
contractor, the
Nashville and
Eastern Railroad
Corporation;
notice to proceed
was issued in May
2006
4Commuter rail agencies such as MTA Long Island Rail Road, MTA Metro-North
Railroad, New Jersey Transit, the Northeastern Illinois Regional Commuter
Railroad Corporation (Metra), the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation
District, and the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority use
their own employees for most of their service needs, including train
operations, dispatching, MOE, and MOW. Although the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), which operates the Metrolink Commuter
Rail Service, contracts out almost all other services, it has its own
staff to provide dispatching services. We did not include these in-house
arrangements in our analysis.
Source: GAO analysis of commuter rail contract information.
aDispatching at Penn Station is a joint responsibility between Amtrak and
LIRR, with each company providing half of the dispatching employees.
Our review did not examine commuter rail agencies' compliance with the
Federal Transit Administration's requirements for the use of competitive
procurement for railroad service contracts. We conducted our review from
July 2005 to July 2006 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
- - - - -
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of
this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from
the report date. At that time, we will send copies to congressional
committees with responsibilities for commuter rail issues, the Secretary
of Transportation, the Acting President of Amtrak, and the Administrators
of the Federal Railroad Administration and the Federal Transit
Administration. We will also make copies available to others upon request.
In addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site
at http://www.gao.gov .
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
me at (202) 512-2834 or [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. Key contributors to this report were Nikki Clowers
(Assistant Director), Gregory Hanna, Nancy Lueke, and Joah Iannotta.
Sincerely yours,
JayEtta Z. Hecker
Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues
(544122)
GAO's Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: [email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Congressional Relations
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548
Public Affairs
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
D.C. 20548
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
*** End of document. ***