Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 773 Capacity Modeling Guidebook for Shared-Use Passenger and Freight Rail Operations Justin Fox Paula Hirsch CDM SMith San Francisco, CA Om Kanike CDM SMith Maitland, FL i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h David P. Simpson DaviD P. SiMPSon ConSultantS, llC St. Paul, MN Andrew J. Cebula a.J. Cebula, inC. Pierrefonds, QC, Canada Alan J. Bing Kittery Point, ME Emmanuel S. “Bruce” Horowitz Alexandria, VA Subscriber Categories Railroads  •  Passenger Transportation  •  Planning and Forecasting TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org  Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 773 Project 08-86 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-30816-8 Library of Congress Control Number 2014953662 © 2014 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 773 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher J. Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Lori L. Sundstrom, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Maria Sabin Crawford, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 08-86 PANEL Area Eight: Transportation Planning—Forecasting Rodney P. Massman, State of Missouri, Jefferson City, MO (Chair) Edgar Bryant, Florida DOT, Tallahassee, FL William Glavin, Texas DOT, Southlake, TX (retired) John H. Hovatter, Jr., Maryland Transit Administration, Baltimore, MD Tracy D. Larkin-Thomason, Nevada DOT, Las Vegas, NV Jerome M. Lutin, Jerome M. Lutin, PhD, LLC, Monmouth Junction, NJ Peter W. Murgas, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Atlanta, GA (retired) Anthony D. Perl, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC Paul E. Vilter, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK), Philadelphia, PA Randall E. Wade, HNTB Corporation, Madison, WI Randy Butler, FHWA Liaison Leonard R. Evans, FRA Liaison Leo Penne, AASHTO Liaison (retired)

This report provides state departments of transportation (DOTs who are starting or expanding passenger rail service on privately-owned and shared-use rail corridors) with technical guidance to aid in their understanding of the methods host railroads use to cali- brate and apply capacity models to determine if adequate capacity exists to support new or increased passenger rail service or if infrastructure improvements may be necessary. A shared understanding of these methods will aid all parties—including state DOTs—in the negotiation of service outcome agreements. This report should be of immediate use to transportation professionals charged with the responsibility for planning passenger rail service and negotiating shared-corridor service agreements with host railroads. The concept of passenger and freight operations co-existing in shared-use corridors is central to the expansion of intercity and commuter passenger rail service in the United States. All current Amtrak service is on shared-use corridors and most of the future plans developed by states for enhanced rail service are based on the shared-use corridor concept. Passenger service providers are interested in on-time performance and minimizing delays. Freight railroads are interested in minimizing delays and maintaining fluidity. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 contain federal funding guidelines for high-speed rail proj- ects on shared-use corridors that require states, host railroads, and Amtrak to reach service outcome agreements regarding frequency, trip time, and reliability before federal project funding is provided. This requirement is designed to ensure that adequate infrastructure is in place to support service outcomes when new or expanded passenger service commences. Capacity models that are designed to simulate passenger and freight movements in a given corridor within a network are often used by host railroads and passenger service oper- ators to identify capacity issues in a given shared-use corridor and to determine the level of track, signal, and structure improvements that are required in order to add additional passenger service in a manner that supports all operations. These models have the potential to simplify the time-consuming negotiations among states or other agencies operating pas- senger rail systems, Amtrak, and host railroads that are currently necessary to establish the required service outcome agreements. The methodology and ground rules for using these models can vary greatly depending on how the modeling analyses are structured, the needs and preferences of the particular railroad, and the specifics of the rail corridor and proposed project(s) that are intended to increase capacity. Under NCHRP Project 08-86, CDM Smith was asked to build upon NCHRP Report 657: Guidebook for Implementing Passenger Rail Service on Shared Passenger and Freight Corridors and produce a guidebook that state transportation agency staff and other stakeholders may F O R E W O R D By Lori L. Sundstrom Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

use to better understand the modeling processes and results that support the negotiation of service outcome agreements for the shared use of rail lines for freight, intercity, and com- muter rail operations. The guidebook examines the modeling processes and results that are used to define, measure, simulate, and evaluate railroad capacity. It addresses the appro- priate use of modeling as a component of collaborative decision-making on operational strategies, maintenance activities, and infrastructure configurations; the relevant measures of capacity and performance (e.g., speed, delay, throughput, and operational flexibility) that differ and are common for different railroad operators; and the modeling assump- tions requiring agreement among the parties. The guidebook should be of immediate use to state rail program staff in supporting their understanding and use of capacity modeling on shared-use rail corridors.

1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction, Purpose and Overview of This Guidebook 1 1.1.1 Introduction 1 1.1.2 Purpose of Report 2 1.1.3 Overview of Report 2 1.2 Outreach to Stakeholders 2 1.2.1 Introduction 2 1.2.2 Freight Railroads 4 1.2.3 Commuter Railroads 4 1.2.4 State Sponsored Services 5 1.2.5 Amtrak 5 1.2.6 The Federal Railroad Administration 6 1.3 Realities of Railroad Operation 6 1.3.1 Signaling and Safety 7 1.3.2 Management of Train Movements 9 1.3.3 Capacity and Capacity Analysis 9 1.3.4 Positive Train Control (PTC) 10 1.3.5 Rail Line Planning Versus Highway Planning 12 Chapter 2 Synthesis of Stakeholder Input 12 2.1 Introduction 12 2.2 What is “Rail Capacity” and Why Is It Important? 14 2.3 A Building Block for Project Execution 14 2.4 Transparency of Modeling Inputs 15 2.5 Doing the Homework 16 2.6 The Long View 16 2.7 Phasing Finesse 16 2.7.1 California Corridor Services 17 2.7.2 Cascades Services 17 2.7.3 North Carolina Services 18 2.8 Communications and Capacity Assessment 18 2.9 The Wide View 19 2.10 Railways Are Not Highways 19 2.11 What the Models Leave Out 20 2.12 A Model Is Not a Strategy 20 2.13 Capacity Modeling—The Bottom Line 22 Chapter 3 Analytical Approaches to Line Capacity  in Shared-Use Corridors 22 3.1 Introduction 23 3.2 Complexity of Shared Railroad Operations 25 3.3 Main Line Capacity Factors C O N T E N T S

26 3.4 Rail Line Capacity Analysis Methodologies and Applications 26 3.4.1 Introduction 26 3.4.2 Scoping Models and Building Blocks 31 3.4.3 Operations Simulation Analysis Methods 32 3.4.4 Modeling Objectives and Model Data Requirements 32 3.5 Detailed Simulation Models 32 3.5.1 Technical Modeling Process and Data Needed 36 3.5.2 Descriptions of Individual Capacity Models 40 Chapter 4 Best Practices 40 4.1 Introduction 40 4.2 LOSSAN Corridor Capacity Investment Planning 40 4.2.1 Introduction 41 4.2.2 Existing Corridor Services 41 4.2.3 Planning for the Future 41 4.2.4 Grid Time Analysis 43 4.2.5 Future Train Volumes and Required Improvements 44 4.2.6 LOSSAN Grid Time Analysis Summary 45 4.3 New Haven-Hartford-Springfield Corridor Planning 45 4.3.1 Introduction 46 4.3.2 Existing Corridor Operations 46 4.3.3 Simulation Parameters 49 4.3.4 Simulation Results 49 4.3.5 NHHS Operations Simulation Summary 50 4.4 North Sound Rail Assessment Comparisons 50 4.4.1 Introduction 51 4.4.2 North Sound Rail Operations Simulation 56 4.4.3 North Sound Grid Time Analysis 64 4.4.4 North Sound Web-based Shared-use Tool Analysis 66 4.4.5 Comparison of RTC, Grid Analysis and SU Tool Results 68 Chapter 5 Taking Shared-Use to the Next Level:  Chicago–Saint Louis High Speed Rail 68 5.1 Introduction 68 5.2 Background 69 5.3 Freight Carrier Perspective 70 5.4 A Timely Example 70 5.5 Project Vision—Illinois DOT 71 5.6 Project Environment 71 5.7 Corridor Analysis and Development of the Upgrade Program 73 5.8 Translation of the Corridor Analysis into the Engineering and Investment Program 73 5.9 Service Outcomes Agreement 74 5.10 Track Maintenance Agreement 74 5.11 Next Steps 76 5.12 Conclusion

77 Appendix A   Discussion of Train Prioritization  and Effect on Line Capacity 81 Appendix B   Discussion of Positive Train Control  and Effect on Line Capacity 83 Appendix C   Glossary of Railroad Terminology  Appearing in This Guidebook Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.