Milwaukee-Madison High-Speed Rail grant application ... · Detailed Capital Cost Budget and Annual Capital Cost Budget Appendix ... implications resulting from the initiation of the

WICHI MSP/GB – Milwaukee Madison

ty Passenger Rail Service

Financial Plan MilwaukeeMadison HighSpeed Interci

Wisconsin Department of Transportation

October 1, 2009

Acceptance and Adoption of the Plan The Milwaukee‐Madison High‐Seed Intercity Passenger Rail Service Financial Plan was developed by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. It represents an overall plan that the Wisconsin Department of Transportation agrees to adopt and accept as a general description of internal financing for the Milwaukee‐Madison High‐Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Service Project. The Financial Plan was developed based on anticipated funding through the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail.

Wisconsin Department of Transportation approves the Financial Plan.

______________________________________ Signature

Ronald E. Adams________________________ Name

WisDOT, Milwaukee‐Madison High‐Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Service Project Manager________________________ Title

October 1, 2009________________________ Date

WI‐CHI MSP/GB HSR Milwaukee Madison, Financial Plan Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WI‐CHI MSP/GB – MILWAUKEE MADISON .......................................................................................................... 1

MILWAUKEE‐MADISON HIGH‐SPEED INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE ......................................................... 1

ACCEPTANCE AND ADOPTION OF THE PLAN ....................................................................................................... 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................................... 3

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................... 4

LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................... 4

GENERAL ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................. 6

PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................................... 6 PROJECT LIMITS ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 PROJECT NEEDS ............................................................................................................................................................. 9

PROGRAM COST ESTIMATE ............................................................................................................................... 11

POTENTIAL COST OVERRUNS .......................................................................................................................................... 11

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ..................................................................................................................... 12

PROJECT FINANCING AND REVENUES ................................................................................................................ 14

WISCONSIN: RECENT FINANCIAL CONDITION ..................................................................................................................... 14 Legal Authority .................................................................................................................................................... 14

CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................ 14 FEDERAL CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 15 STATE CONTRIBUTIONS.................................................................................................................................................. 15

Operating Subsidy ............................................................................................................................................... 15 LOCAL COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTIONS: STATIONS ................................................................................................................ 18

PROJECT CASH FLOW ........................................................................................................................................ 18

RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION ................................................................................................................. 18

ANNUAL UPDATES ............................................................................................................................................ 21

COST AND REVENUE HISTORY ........................................................................................................................... 22

COST AND REVENUE TRENDS ............................................................................................................................ 23

REVENUE SHORTFALL MITIGATION .................................................................................................................... 24

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT COST REDUCTION .................................................................................................. 25

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. MWRRS NETWORK MAP ..................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION MAP ....................................................................................................................................... 8


LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. CAPITAL COSTS SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 11 TABLE 2. PROJECT TIMELINE BY IMPROVEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 13 TABLE 3. MILWAUKEE‐MADISON RAIL CORRIDOR INVESTMENTS AND IMPROVEMENT ................................................................... 14 TABLE 4. AMTRAK OPERATING AND FINANCIAL RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 16 TABLE 5. AMTRAK REVENUE & RIDERSHIP ............................................................................................................................. 17 TABLE 6. RISK ASSESSMENT & MITIGATION ........................................................................................................................... 19 TABLE A3.1. AMTRAK OPERATING AND FINANCIAL RESULTS .................................................................................................... 31 TABLE A3.2. AMTRAK RIDERSHIP AND REVENUE .................................................................................................................... 32

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1. Detailed Capital Cost Budget and Annual Capital Cost Budget Appendix 2. Implementation Plan Appendix 3. Amtrak Operating and Financial Results:

Chicago‐Milwaukee 10 round trips/Milwaukee‐Madison 6 round trips


GENERAL The initial Financial Plan will provide information on the immediate and longer‐term financial implications resulting from the initiation of the Milwaukee‐Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Project. Annual updates to the financial plan will provide information on actual cost, expenditure and revenue performance in comparison to the initial estimates and updated estimates for future year’s obligations and expenditures. The annual updates will provide information on cost and revenue trends, current and potential funding shortfalls, and the financial adjustments necessary to ensure completion of the project. The Financial Plan and it subsequent updates will also provide assurance that the project’s impact on the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program has been addressed.


INTRODUCTION The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) is an experienced and highly successful partner in administering a broad array of federally‐funded programs across all transportation modes. WisDOT has all necessary financial management capacity and capability to receive and administer federal funding for high‐speed intercity passenger rail projects.

WisDOT is expressly directed to administer the following programs under Wisconsin State Statute Chapter 85:

• 85.06(2)‐Rail Passenger Assistance and Promotion: The statute covers the program which may include financial and technical planning, contracting, adjust services as needed, monitor for quality, marketing and promotional activities, apply for and accept federal funds, acquire equipment or facilities, and promote passenger rail service.

• 85.061‐Rail Passenger Route Development: The statute was established with the State’s recognition that resources available are unable to fully meet the transportation needs for all citizens. The program includes capital needs for service extension routes… between Milwaukee and Madison… and station improvements for existing services.

Project Description WisDOT is requesting 2009 American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) funds, in coordination with other Midwest Regional Rail System Track 1a, 1b and 2 applications.

WisDOT and Amtrak, in cooperation with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), propose to return intercity passenger rail service between Milwaukee‐Madison. This project will include:

• Infrastructure improvements (including but not limited to track, bridges, structures, drainage, signals and grade crossing improvements) to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Class VI standards to support high speed intericty passenger train operations up to 110 mph with the 2016 implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC)

• Positive Train Control (PTC) installation, testing and implementation

• Acquisition of two new train sets

• Acquisition of eight next generation locomotives (features include low weight, high horsepower, high acceleration and low center of gravity)

• New stations at Brookfield, Oconomowoc, Watertown and Madison

• Train service and inspection facility at Madison to support operations with new train set equipment

The overall goal of the project is to initiate intercity passenger rail service between Milwaukee and Madison in January 2013 (approximately three years after funding authorization) operating at 79 mph initially. With the federally‐mandated implementation of PTC by December 31, 2015, intercity passenger train operating speeds on this corridor will be increased to 90‐110 mph between Milwaukee‐Watertown and 110 mph between Watertown‐Madison.


The Milwaukee‐Madison corridorservice reinstates service between the two cities and serves as an extension of the current Chicago‐Milwaukee Amtrak Hiawatha Service and provides interconnectivity with the proposed intercity passenger rail service between Chicago‐Milwaukee‐Minneapolis/St. Paul (final route selection between Milwaukee and the Minneapolis/St.Paul will not occur until completion of a Service Level NEPA study). This service will provide a travel option to the public with connections in Chicago and other cities to Midwwest Regional Rail System (MWRRS) train services. Figure 1 presents the MWRRS network map.

Figure 1. MWRRS Network Map

Project Limits The Milwaukee‐Madison High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail corridor extends from the Milwaukee Intermodal Station (MP 85.7) located at 433 West St. Paul Avenue in downtown Milwaukee to yet to be determined site (pending completion of environmental study with station alternatives analysis). The intercity passenger rail service on this 85‐mile corridor will serve the communities of Milwaukee, Brookfield, Oconomowoc, Watertown and Madison. This service will be an extension of Amtrak’s


Hiawatha Service between Chicago and Milwaukee and will advance WisDOT’s plans of extending service to Minneapolis/St. Paul. With the connection to Milwaukee, this service will also provide passengers with connectivity to the Milwaukee Airport Rail Station at General Mitchell International Airport, Chicago including the MWRRS network, and long distance train service. Refer to Figure 2 for a project location map.

The Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) will continue to operate freight service between Milwaukee and Watertown (approximately 53 miles) and between the Dane County Regional Airport Rail Station to Wisconsin Southern Railroad’s (WSOR’s) E. Johnson St. Yard in Madison. WSOR will continue to operate short line freight service between Watertown to Madison (approximately 32 miles). Amtrak’s Empire Builder, which operates between Chicago and Seattle/Portland, will continue to operate over this corridor between Milwaukee‐Watertown.

Figure 2. Project Location Map


Project Needs Travel between Milwaukee and Madison is primarily completed via the highway (automobile or bus) network and less frequently by air transportation. Currently passenger rail service does not operate between Milwaukee and Madison. The purpose of high speed intercity passenger rail service along the corridor between Milwaukee and Madison is to help meet travel demands by re‐establishing reliable, efficient, frequent and cost‐effective rail service within the corridor. In order for high‐speed intercity passenger rail service to be a competitive alternative to highway and air travel, it needs to be reliable, frequent and provide amenities attractive to potential rail travelers. High‐speed intercity passenger rail service in this corridor will also serve the purpose of promoting multimodal connections, enhance development of livable communities within the region, and support the regional economy.

Highway and air travel modes are greatly affected by traffic congestion and weather conditions. As congestion occurs in major travel corridors, fuel prices continue to rise, and demographics of the region change, a transportation alternative in the Milwaukee ‐ Madison corridor is needed to meet the growing travel demand. Rising fuel prices will result in passengers opting for lower‐cost alternatives to highway and air travel. Along with fuel costs, congested transportation networks cost travelers and businesses money in the form of lost time and productivity. Changing demographics of the region are also expected to affect travel demand. Between 2000 and 2030, the population of Wisconsin is expected to rise by 19 percent, with the largest growth occurring in the over 65 age group (90 percent increase). This group is an aging demographic that is still active and has a growing need to travel longer distances comfortably. High‐speed intercity passenger rail service between Milwaukee and Madison is, needed to improve regional mobility and enhance intermobility, which in turn can promote economic development and livable communities.

Currently, passenger rail service does not operate between Milwaukee and Madison; however, Amtrak does operate the Empire Builder through Milwaukee and other Wisconsin communities north and west of Madison. Access from communities in the corridor to existing Amtrak service is primarily accomplished by automobile.

Passenger rail service along the Madison‐Milwaukee corridor will provide improved access to the entire Amtrak system via the existing Milwaukee Intermodal Station. The service will also provide interconnectivity through Milwaukee to Chicago, which is a hub for existing Amtrak intercity and long distance passenger rail and is the hub of the proposed MWRRS network. Passenger rail service in the corridor will also enhance connections between rail service and the air travel network available at General Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee and Dane County Regional Airport in Madison. Passenger rail service in the corridor will also enhance connections between rail service and the intercity bus network.

Intercity passenger rail service is needed to provide another link between the business centers of Milwaukee and Madison. Introducing intercity passenger rail service between these metropolitan areas offers business travelers a transportation alternative that is competitive with highway and air travel modes. More choices for passengers mean more competition for transportation businesses. In turn, transportation rates are lowered, services are improved, and options for businesses and travelers are


increased. The benefits of intercity passenger rail can also be viewed as a catalyst to stimulate economic development in proposed station areas. For example, the 2006 Midwest Regional Rail Initiative Economic Analysis study estimates that Wisconsin communities would see $704 million in increased joint development potential, and $173 million in extra household income with full build out of the Midwest Regional Rail System.

The tourism industry is one of the top three industries in the State of Wisconsin and many of the top counties for tourism are located in the southeast section of the state. Tourists from Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota and Michigan account for almost 90 percent of the tourists; in‐state residents make up approximately 58 percent of all tourists. There are many special events within the southeast section of the state that generate large volumes of traffic including Milwaukee festivals (Summerfest, State Fair, etc.), Milwaukee Brewers baseball games, and University of Wisconsin‐Madison Badger games. In addition, if Chicago is chosen as the host for the 2016 Summer Olympics, Milwaukee and Madison have been identified as potential sites for specific Olympic events. Efficient and reliable transportation options would be critical for Olympic athletes and visitors for travel to/from the various venues.


PROGRAM COST ESTIMATE Projected capital expenditures are detailed in the HSIPR Track 2 Program Application Supporting Forms, Detailed Capital Cost Budget and Annual Capital Cost Budget which are included as part of this application. The projected capital cost includes the necessary elements to initiate intercity passenger rail service on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor as an extension of the Chicago‐Milwaukee service. Improvements include:

Table 1. Capital Costs Summary Infrastructure/Capital Improvements Capital (YOE $)

Milwaukee‐Watertown Infrastructure, including PTC $286,130,284Watertown‐Madison Infrastructure, including PTC $330,629,526Passenger Rail Stations $24,770,088Train Set Acquisition (2) $48,360,835Train Set Service and Inspection Facility $47,639,504Next Generation Locomotives Acquisition (8) $42,972,709Environmental Commitments $25,758,917WisDOT Project Management $11,351,433

TOTAL $817,613,296

The Milwaukee‐Madison Corridor Detailed Capital Cost Estimate is included as Appendix 1.

Potential Cost Overruns The State of Wisconsin has $72.5 million in remaining bonding authority enacted by the legislature under ss.20.866(2) (up), which authorizes a total of $122 million for rail passenger route development. This bonding authority could be used for any potential cost overruns. The bonding authority already used was for the purchase of the Milwaukee Amtrak station in 2007 and the purchase of two train sets in 2009 to be used initially on the existing Hiawatha Service and eventually on train services between Chicago‐Milwaukee‐Madison.


PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN In 1996, nine Midwest states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin) and Amtrak initiated the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI). The study examined the feasibility of passenger rail service in select corridors and became the vision of a Midwest rail system, specifically, an integrated regional rail system with the hub in Chicago. The network includes the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor as an extension of the Chicago‐Milwaukee service, with a proposed extension from Madison‐Minneapolis.

On June 9, 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA‐21) (PL 105‐178) became law. It authorized $250,000 per year for eligible improvements on the Minneapolis/St. Paul‐Chicago segment of the Midwest High‐Speed Rail Corridor.

On December 11, 1998, the FRA Administrator announced the TEA‐21 authorization extension of the Midwest High‐Speed Rail Corridor (now called the Chicago Hub corridor) from Milwaukee, Wisconsin to Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota.

On June 4, 2001, FRA and WisDOT released the Milwaukee‐Madison High‐Speed Rail Corridor Environmental Assessment (EA). The EA addressed the implementation of an alternative regional travel mode through improvement to the level and quality of rail service in the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor. The EA proposed intercity passenger rail service over the 85‐mile corridor between Milwaukee‐Madison with stations at specific cities, speeds at different locations, and diesel power under three different configurations. On August 13, 2004, the FRA issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) based on the Milwaukee‐Madison High‐Speed Rail Corridor EA.

Since 2001, WisDOT has initiated and completed several projects with federal and state funds and railroad contributions to improve the rail infrastructure on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor in anticipation of ultimately providing passenger rail service between Milwaukee‐Madison. These investments on this corridor include purchase of 32 miles of railroad right‐of‐way between Watertown and Madison; renovation of the downtown Milwaukee Intermodal Station; highway/rail crossing improvements and grade crossing closures; and the purchase of two train sets.

WisDOT’s proposed implementation date for intercity passenger rail service between Milwaukee‐Madison is January 2013 (three years after receipt of 2009 ARRA HSIPR funding) with six round trip daily frequencies initially at 79 mph using new train set equipment with enhanced amenities.

In 2016, WisDOT proposes to increase intercity passenger train speeds to 90‐110 mph between Milwaukee and Watertown and 110 mph between Watertown and Madison to coincide with Federally‐mandated PTC implementation. Refer to Table 2 for the Project Timeline by Improvement.


Table 2 represents a summary of the proposed Milwaukee‐Madison HSIPR corridor project implementation.

Table 2. Project Timeline by Improvement

Infrastructure Improvements

Preliminary Engineering/

NEPA Document

Final Engineering

Design

ConstructionMilwaukee‐Watertown Rail Infrastructure Improvements (CPR)

Complete 2010 2010/2015

Watertown‐Madison Rail Infrastructure Improvements (WisDOT/WSOR)

Complete 2010 2011/2012

Stations: Brookfield, Oconomowoc and Watertown, Madison

2010 Environmental Assessments

2011 2011/2012

Train Set Service & Inspection Facility (Madison)

Complete 2010 2011/2012

Capital Improvements

Specification Development

Manufacturing

Testing

Train Set Acquisition (2) 2009 State of Wisconsin Funding

2009 2009/2012 2012

Train Set Acquisition (2) 2010 2010/2012 2011/2012 Next Generation Locomotives Acquisition (8)

2010/2011 2012/2014 2015

Milwaukee‐Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Service Initiation at 79 mph: January 2013 PTC Installation & Implementation Federally mandated implementation by

December 31, 2015 Milwaukee‐Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Service Initiation with PTC: January 1, 2016

• Milwaukee‐Watertown: 90‐110 mph • Watertown‐Madison: 110 mph

The Milwaukee‐Madison Corridor Project Implementation Plan is presented in Appendix 2.


PROJECT FINANCING AND REVENUES

Wisconsin: Recent Financial Condition The most recent financial and compliance audit of the State of Wisconsin (published in March 2009 by the Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau) is available at http://www.legis.wisconsin.gov/lab/reports/09‐5full.pdf.

Legal Authority WisDOT is expressly directed to administer a rail passenger route development program under ss. 85.061(3) Wis. Stats. and a rail passenger assistance program under ss.85.06(2) Wis. Stats.

Corridor Improvements Since 2001, WisDOT has initiated a number of projects with federal and state funds and railroad contributions to improve the rail infrastructure on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor in anticipation of providing intercity passenger rail service on this corridor. The investments and improvements are represented in Table 3.

Table 3. MilwaukeeMadison Rail Corridor Investments and Improvement Year Improvement Location Cost 2009‐ 2010

Grade Crossing Improvement 68th, 70th, 72nd Streets, Wauwatosa $300,000

2009 Track, Bridge and Signal Capital Improvements

2009 Milwaukee‐Watertown (CPR) Corridor $7,282,000

2008 Purchase of railroad right‐of‐way

32 miles between Watertown‐Madison $7,200,000

2008 Grade Crossing Improvement Packers Avenue, Madison $246,0002008 Grade Crossing Improvement Bird Street, Sun Prairie $176,0002008 Grade Crossing Improvement Park/Market Street, Sun Prairie $42,0002008 Grade Crossing Improvement Cherry Lane, Medina $51,0002008 Grade Crossing Improvement County Highway G, Milford $44,0002007‐ 2008

Grade Crossing Improvement East Johnson Street, Madison $415,000

2007 Renovate Milwaukee Intermodal Station

Milwaukee $16,000,000

2006 Grade Crossing Improvement North 13th Street, Milwaukee $21,0002006 Grade Crossing Improvement Duplainville Road, Pewaukee $13,0002006 Grade Crossing Improvement Pilgrim Road/North Avenue, Brookfield $42,0002005 Grade Crossing Improvement 68th Street, Wauwatosa $171,0002005 Grade Crossing Improvement 70th Street, Wauwatosa $171,0002004 Grade Crossing Improvement Gifford Road, Oconomowoc Lake $14,0002003 Grade Crossing Improvement County Highway F, Ixonia $27,0002003 Grade Crossing Improvement Hustiford Road, Ixonia $48,0002003 Grade Crossing Improvement Oakton Avenue, Pewaukee $27,0002003 Grade Crossing Improvement Kopmeier Road, Pewaukee $27,0002003 Grade Crossing Improvement Third Street, Watertown $48,000


http://www.legis.wisconsin.gov/lab/reports/09-5full.pdf

http://www.legis.wisconsin.gov/lab/reports/09-5full.pdf


Table 3. MilwaukeeMadison Rail Corridor Investments and Improvement Year Improvement Location Cost Crossing Closure Sutherland Court, Madison Crossing Closure Pedestrian Crossing, Pewaukee Crossing Closure Lapham, Oconomowoc Crossing Closure Private (392147F), Milford Crossing Closure Private (392149U), Milford Crossing Closure Private (392152C), Milford Crossing Closure Private (392185P), Sun Prairie

TOTAL $32,365,000

Federal Contributions WisDOT is anticipating that the funding requested in this application will fully fund the described capital improvements to initiate intercity passenger rail service between Milwaukee‐Madison. WisDOT is seeking 100‐percent 2009 ARRA High‐Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) funding for the capital improvements necessary to initiate service on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor. The total 2009 ARRA funding requested is for the Milwaukee‐Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Corridor project is $817,613,296.

State Contributions WisDOT along with the Illinois Department of Transportation has continuously supported and improved Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service (Chicago‐Milwaukee) since 1989. It is anticipated that this support from the Wisconsin legislature for high speed intercity passenger rail will continue.

WisDOT is operating under a 2‐year budget (2009‐2011) approved by the Wisconsin state legislature and signed by Governor Jim Doyle.

The current Wisconsin state budget includes sufficient funding to support current operations of Amtrak’s Hiawatha Service during state fiscal years 2010 and 2011. WisDOT will seek sufficient funds to maintain the existing Chicago‐Milwaukee service and to implement the Milwaukee‐Madison service in future years. In the event that sufficient funds are not provided by the budgetary process, adjustments in service will be made as necessary.

The State of Wisconsin purchased two train sets for train services between Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison In 2009 for $47.5 million. These train sets will initially be used on the Amtrak Hiawatha Service until service to Madison starts.

Operating Subsidy The Operating and Financial Results for the Milwaukee‐Madison intercity passenger rail service are based on seven round trips daily service between Chicago‐Milwaukee with the extension of six round trips daily between Milwaukee‐Madison.

Operating & Financial Results Amtrak has prepared the Operating and Financial Results for the implementation of the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor Service. The results are based on operation of seven round trips daily between Chicago and Milwaukee (existing Amtrak Hiawatha Service) with the service extension of six round trips daily between Milwaukee and Madison.

This project has benefits associated with serving as an extension of the existing Amtrak Hiawatha Service between Chicago and Milwaukee. The Operating and Financial Results (Table 4) and Revenue and Ridership (Table 5) projections are based on the benefits associated with the Chicago‐Milwaukee service.

Table 4. Amtrak Operating and Financial Results

Summary P&LMadison-Milwaukee-Chicago HSR CorridorRevenue and Cost Estimates

FY09 Baseline FY13 Baseline

FY13 Proposed 7/6

Plan

Incremental Proposed 7/6 Vs. FY13 Base

Train Mile 428,968 428,968 779,368 350,400Passenger Miles 59,000,000 64,820,000 109,200,000 44,380,000Total Riders 735,400 808,500 1,169,900 361,400

Total Revenue $13,233,748 $16,065,743 $25,114,428 $9,048,685

ExpensesHost Railroad 1,892,000 2,182,000 3,965,000 1,783,000Fuel 1,460,000 2,079,000 3,777,000 1,698,000T&E Labor 2,565,000 3,152,000 5,057,000 1,905,000Yard Ops, Transportation Mgmt & Training 1,577,000 1,935,000 2,135,000 200,000Mechanical 4,238,000 5,179,000 9,729,000 4,550,000Stations 3,181,000 3,936,000 6,453,000 2,517,000Remaining Direct and Shared Costs 4,812,000 5,752,000 9,624,000 3,872,000

Total Direct and Shared Costs 19,725,000 24,215,000 40,740,000 16,525,000

Net Impact (Revenue - Direct and Shared Costs) ($6,491,252) ($8,149,257) ($15,625,572) ($7,476,315)

Fare Box Recovery 67.1% 66.3% 61.6% 54.8%

Revenue per Passenger Mile $0.22 $0.25 $0.23 $0.20Cost per Passenger Mile $0.33 $0.37 $0.37 $0.37Net Per Passenger Mile ($0.11) ($0.13) ($0.14) ($0.17)

Revenue per Train Mile $30.85 $37.45 $32.22 $25.82Cost per Train Mile $45.98 $56.45 $52.27 $47.16Net Per Train Mile ($15.13) ($19.00) ($20.05) ($21.34)

Description



Revenue and Ridership

Table 5. Amtrak Revenue & Ridership

Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Service Prepared September 29, 2009

Benefit Year: 2013Miwaukee-Madison 7/6 Plan

Summary of Inputs IncrementalValue

Baseline Proposed Proposed

Secular Growth

Fares

Train FrequencyChicago - Milwaukee 7 7 no changeChicago - Madison 6 +6

Travel TimesChicago - Milwaukee 1:29 1:27 -2 minutesChicago - Madison 2:53

On-Time PerformanceHiawatha (MKE service) 87% 96% +9 pointsNew Madison Service 96%

Summary of Results

Baseline Baseline Proposed Proposed ProposedFY09 FY13 FY13 vs. FY09 Base vs. FY13 Base

RidershipHiawatha (MKE service) 735,400 808,500 831,900 +96,500 +23,400New Madison Service 0 0 338,000 +338,000 +338,000

TOTAL 735,400 808,500 1,169,900 +434,500 +361,400

Ticket RevenueHiawatha (MKE service) $13,345,000 $15,871,000 $16,335,000 +$2,990,000 +$464,000New Madison Service $0 $0 $8,475,000 +$8,475,000 +$8,475,000

TOTAL $13,345,000 $15,871,000 $24,810,000 +$11,465,000 +$8,939,000

Passenger MilesHiawatha (MKE service) 59,000,000 64,820,000 66,720,000 +7,720,000 +1,900,000New Madison Service 0 0 42,480,000 +42,480,000 +42,480,000

TOTAL 59,000,000 64,820,000 109,200,000 +50,200,000 +44,380,000

These forecasts are based solely upon information available to AECOM Consult as of 8/06/09.These forecasts are provided for the sole use of Amtrak.They are not intended for disclosure in a financial offering statement.

Total Values

Annual Totals Annual Increment

When the full build‐out of Phase 1 of the MWRRS is complete (with future infrastructure improvements made between Chicago and Milwaukee), frequencies are planned to increase to 10 round trips between Chicago and Milwaukee, with six continuing on to Madison. Operation and financial results for this future scenario have also been completed. Refer to Appendix 3.

Local Community Contributions: Stations 2009 ARRA HSIPR funding is being requested for NEPA, property acquisition, design and construction for stations at Brookfield, Oconomowoc, Watertown and Madison. The local communities will be involved with the design, construction, and maintenance and operation of their local stations.

PROJECT CASH FLOW 2009 ARRA HSIPR funding provides for 100% reimbursement for eligible expenses. It will be necessary to comply with all ARRA guidelines and reporting requirements to ensure that the program is properly managed and eligible costs are reimbursed. The 2009 ARRA HSIPR Track 2 funding requires that all eligible expenses are reimbursed by September 30, 2017.

The Milwaukee‐Madison Annual Capital Budget is included as Appendix 1.

The majority of the capital program costs will be expended between 2010‐2013 to support the initiation of intercity passenger rail services on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor in 2013 and completion of the station facilities. PTC equipment, testing, training and installation costs on the corridor will continue between 2013 and 2015 to meet the federally mandated PTC requirement for December 31, 2015 implementation. The delivery of the next generation locomotives will coincide with the implementation of 90‐110 mph passenger rail operations upon implementation of PTC in 2016.

RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION A project of the size, complexity and scope of the Milwaukee‐Madison HSIPR Corridor will undoubtedly have risks to those participating. Through internal planning and development of procurement strategies and options, WisDOT will carefully identify and analyze risks throughout the project and develop creative methods to mitigate such risks. Table 6 summarizes issues identified risks for the Milwaukee‐Madison HSIPR Corridor Project.


Table 6. Risk Assessment & Mitigation Category Risks Mitigation

Milwaukee‐Watertown (CPR)

As part of CPR approval of the EA/FONSI, the railroad reserved the right to review the proposed capital improvements as the project progresses.

CPR included as part of project steering committee

Track speed for intercity passenger rail service operating with PTC has not been finalized between Milwaukee‐Watertown.

Railroads PTC implementation plans must be submitted to the FRA by 04/2010. Stakeholder agreement will include operations detailed for 2013 service initiation and 2016 service with PTC implementation.

Watertown‐Madison (WisDOT/WSOR)

Entity to perform train dispatching services on the corridor is not yet determined.

Negotiations of stakeholder agreements will identify the entity that will provide train dispatching for intercity passenger rail services.

Environmental Commitments

Environmental Justice process may impact the project schedule.

WisDOT has successfully implemented environmental justice programs for mega highway projects (i.e., I‐94 Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee) which would be used as a basis for the Milwaukee‐Madison HSIPR program.

New Stations Concepts are presented for stations; no engineering has been initiated.

Station estimates include 30% contingency based on conceptual level of design.

Project Level NEPA/preliminary engineering needs to be approved prior to FRA’s authorization of funding for final design/construction

WisDOT and WisDNR will be involved in the environmental/preliminary engineering processes with the local communities. WisDOT has successful experience in preparing environmental documents for FRA approval (i.e., Milwaukee‐Madison Corridor EA/FONSI).

Property acquisition may be required for stations and facilities that could impact the project schedule.

WisDOT will need to assist the communities in managing the property acquisition process.

Train Set Acquisition Train set equipment specifications arebeing developed by the states involved with the MWRRI and potentially coinciding with a nationwide effort; progress must continue to determine train set equipment specification in order to acquire and implement service by 2013.

WisDOT is the lead state for the MWRRI and will manage the efforts of the Steering Committee to identify the preferred train set equipment type. WisDOT also is involved in the nationwide effort to identify and acquire the preferred train set equipment through their involvement in the Next Generation Corridor Equipment Committee (mandated by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Section 3605).



Table 6. Risk Assessment & Mitigation Category Risks Mitigation

Delivery of train sets on schedule for 2013 service implementation.

Contract for train set manufacturing will include specific delivery dates. Terms will include penalties for failure to deliver by the contract‐specified date.

Next Generation Locomotives Acquisition

Next generation locomotive acquisition specifications are not yet developed; process must be initiated to determine locomotive specification (light weight, high horsepower, high acceleration and low center or gravity) in order to acquire to coincide with PTC implementation in 2016 allowing for high speed intercity passenger rail service.

WisDOT is involved in the nationwide effort to identify and acquire the preferred next generation locomotive through their involvement in the Next Generation Corridor Equipment Committee (mandated by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Section 3605).

Delivery of next generation locomotives on schedule to coincide with 2016 PTC implementation.

Contract for locomotive manufacturing will include specific delivery dates. Terms will include penalties for failure to deliver by the contract‐specified date.

Train Set Service & Inspection Facility

Environmental documentation prepared by Amtrak for the WSOR E. Johnson St. Yard train set service and inspection facility location is complete. Requires FRA Record of Decision.

WisDOT will process environmental documents for FRA issuance of Record of Decision.

Concepts are presented for the train set service and inspection facility; no engineering has been initiated.

Design and construction contracts for the Train Set Service & Inspection Facility will have specific milestones identified. Terms will include penalties for failure to deliver based on the milestone‐specified dates.

Positive Train Control (PTC) System

FRA rulemaking process for PTC is underway; final rules will dictate the PTC system requirements, including definition of on‐board locomotive and wayside equipment, communication protocols, interoperability, testing and employee training

Railroad plans for PTC implementation are to be submitted to the FRA by 04/2010.

Construction Cost Escalation

Estimates are based on 2010 dollars. WisDOT will revisit periodically to address current economic conditions

Operations and Maintenance Cost Escalation

There is no historical data associated with operations and maintenance costs associated with the re‐instatement of intercity passenger rail service on the Milwaukee‐Madison corridor.

State operating funds must be approved on a biennial basis.

ANNUAL UPDATES The following sections will be discussed as to format, but the details will be included in the annual updates to the Financial Plan to be completed. The date of the annual updates established by WisDOT with concurrence by the FRA and in accordance with 2009 ARRA HSIPR funding reporting requirements.


COST AND REVENUE HISTORY This section to be added with annual updates to the Financial Plan


COST AND REVENUE TRENDS This section to be added with annual updates to the Financial Plan


REVENUE SHORTFALL MITIGATION This section will be added with annual updates to the Financial Plan.



SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT COST REDUCTION This section to be added with annual updates to the Financial Plan.

Attachment 1 Detailed Capital Cost Budget and Annual Capital Cost Budget

WI‐CHI MSP/GB‐Milwaukee Madison, Financial Plan

Total Allocated Cost (Thousands of Base Yr FY10 Dollars )

Allocated Contingency

(Thousands of Base Yr FY10 Dollars)

TOTAL COST (Thousands of Base Yr FY10 Dollars)

Explanation Provided? (if so use *)

10 TRACK STRUCTURES & TRACK

10.01 Track structure: Viaduct 101,965,000$ 30,589,500$ 132,554,500$

10.02 Track structure: Major/Movable bridge ‐$ ‐$ 10.03 Track structure: Undergrade Bridges 64,356,000$ 19,306,800$ 83,662,800$

10.04 Track structure: Culverts and drainage structures ‐$ ‐$

10.05 Track structure: Cut and Fill (> 4' height/depth) 1,967,440$ 590,232$ 2,557,672$

10.06 Track structure: At‐grade (grading and subgrade stabilization) 6,864,990$ 2,059,497$ 8,924,487$

10.07 Track structure: Tunnel ‐$ ‐$

10.08 Track structure: Retaining walls and systems 4,349,400$ 1,304,820$ 5,654,220$

10.18 Other linear structures including fencing, sound walls 5,384,040$ 1,615,212$ 6,999,252$

184,886,870$ 55,466,061$ 240,352,931$

10.09 Track new construction: Conventional ballasted 87,159,970$ 26,147,991$ 113,307,961$

10.10 Track new construction: Non‐ballasted ‐$ ‐$

10.11 Track rehabilitation: Ballast and surfacing 9,812,400$ 2,943,720$ 12,756,120$

10.12 Track rehabilitation: Ditching and drainage 500,000$ 150,000$ 650,000$

10.13 Track rehabilitation: Component replacement (rail, ties, etc) 25,257,760$ 7,577,328$ 32,835,088$

10.14 Track: Special track work (switches, turnouts, insulated joints) 15,595,000$ 4,678,500$ 20,273,500$

10.15 Track: Major interlockings 100,000$ 30,000$ 130,000$

10.16 Track: Switch heaters (with power and control) 300,000$ 90,000$ 390,000$

10.17 Track: Vibration and noise dampening ‐$ ‐$

138,725,130$ 41,617,539$ 180,342,669$

323,612,000$ 97,083,600$ 420,695,600$

20 STATIONS, TERMINALS, INTERMODAL

20.01 Station buildings: Intercity passenger rail only 18,960,000$ ‐$ 18,960,000$

20.02 Station buildings: Joint use (commuter rail, intercity bus) ‐$ ‐$

20.03 Platforms ‐$ ‐$

20.04 Elevators, escalators ‐$ ‐$

20.05 Joint commercial development ‐$ ‐$

20.06 Pedestrian / bike access and accommodation, landscaping, ‐$ ‐$

20.07 Automobile, bus, van accessways including roads ‐$ ‐$

20.08 Fare collection systems and equipment ‐$ ‐$

20.09 Station security ‐$ ‐$

18,960,000$ ‐$ 18,960,000$

30 SUPPORT FACILITIES: YARDS, SHOPS, ADMIN. BLDGS

30.01 Administration building: Office, sales, storage, revenue counting ‐$ ‐$

30.02 Light maintenance facility 37,948,930$ 3,794,893$ 41,743,823$

30.03 Heavy maintenance facility ‐$ ‐$

30.04 Storage or maintenance‐of‐way building/bases 300,000$ 30,000$ 330,000$

30.05 Yard and yard track ‐$ ‐$

38,248,930$ 3,824,893$ 42,073,823$

Total for Category 20 STATIONS, TERMINALS, INTERMODAL

Total for Category 30 SUPPORT FACILITIES: YARDS, SHOPS, ADMIN. BLDGS

Detailed Capital Cost Budget

Program Name: WI‐CHI MSP/GB HSR‐Milwaukee Madison

Total for Category 10 TRACK STRUCTURES & TRACK

Note: Cells in Red represent the minimum required APPLICANT INPUTS (enter zero where not applicable)

Bridges, Tunnels, and Other Structures Subcategory Total

Track Construction and Rehabilititation Subcategory Total



40 SITEWORK, RIGHT OF WAY, LAND, EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS

40.07 Purchase or lease of real estate ‐$ ‐$

Purchase or lease of real estate Subcategory Total ‐$ ‐$ ‐$

40.01 Demolition, clearing, site preparation 193,536$ 19,354$ 212,890$

40.02 Site utilities, utility relocation 6,462,000$ 646,200$ 7,108,200$

40.03 Hazardous material, contaminated soil removal/mitigation, ground water treatments

‐$ ‐$

40.04 Environmental mitigation: wetlands, historic/archeology, parks 22,955,000$ 2,295,500$ 25,250,500$

40.05 Site structures including retaining walls, sound walls ‐$ ‐$

40.06 Temporary facilities and other indirect costs during construction 1,152,000$ 115,200$ 1,267,200$

40.08 Highway/pedestrian overpass/grade separations ‐$ ‐$

40.09 Relocation of existing households and businesses ‐$ ‐$

All other Sitework, ROW, Existing Improvements Subcategory 30,762,536$ 3,076,254$ 33,838,790$

30,762,536$ 3,076,254$ 33,838,790$

50 COMMUNICATIONS & SIGNALING

50.01 Wayside signaling equipment 66,359,500$ 19,907,850$ 86,267,350$

50.02 Signal power access and distribution ‐$ ‐$

50.03 On‐board signaling equipment 2,773,000$ 831,900$ 3,604,900$

50.04 Traffic control and dispatching systems ‐$ ‐$

50.05 Communications ‐$ ‐$

50.06 Grade crossing protection ‐$ ‐$

50.07 Hazard detectors (dragging equipment, , slide, etc.) ‐$ ‐$

50.08 Station train approach warning system ‐$ ‐$

69,132,500$ 20,739,750$ 89,872,250$

60 ELECTRIC TRACTION

60.01 Traction power transmission: High voltage ‐$ ‐$

60.02 Traction power supply: Substations ‐$ ‐$

60.03 Traction power distribution: Catenary and third rail ‐$ ‐$

60.04 Traction power control ‐$ ‐$

‐$ ‐$ ‐$ Total for Category 60 ELECTRIC TRACTION

Total for Category 50 COMMUNICATIONS & SIGNALING

Total for Category 40 SITEWORK, RIGHT OF WAY, LAND, EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS



70 VEHICLES

70.00 Vehicle acquisition: Electric locomotive ‐$ ‐$

70.01 Vehicle acquisition: Non‐electric locomotive 40,000,000$ ‐$ 40,000,000$

70.02 Vehicle acquisition: Electric multiple unit ‐$ ‐$

70.03 Vehicle acquisition: Diesel multiple unit ‐$ ‐$

70.04 Veh acq: Loco‐hauled passenger cars w/ ticketed space ‐$ ‐$

70.05 Veh acq: Loco‐hauled passenger cars w/o ticketed space 47,220,000$ ‐$ 47,220,000$

70.06 Vehicle acquisition: Maintenance of way vehicles 5,995,000$ ‐$ 5,995,000$

70.07 Vehicle acquisition: Non‐railroad support vehicles ‐$ ‐$

Vehicle Acquisition Subcategory Total 93,215,000$ ‐$ 93,215,000$

70.08 Vehicle refurbishment: Electric locomotive ‐$ ‐$

70.09 Vehicle refurbishment: Non‐electric locomotive ‐$ ‐$

70.10 Vehicle refurbishment: Electric multiple unit ‐$ ‐$

70.11 Vehicle refurbishment: Diesel multiple unit ‐$ ‐$

70.12 Veh refurb: Passeng. loco‐hauled car w/ ticketed space ‐$ ‐$

70.13 Veh refurb: Non‐passeng loco‐hauled car w/o ticketed space ‐$ ‐$

70.14 Vehicle refurbishment: Maintenance of way vehicles ‐$ ‐$

70.15 Spare parts ‐$ ‐$

Vehicle Refurbishment and Spare Parts Subcategory Total ‐$ ‐$ ‐$

93,215,000$ ‐$ 93,215,000$

80 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

80.01 Service Development Plan/Service Environmental ‐$ ‐$

Service Development Plan/Service Environmental Subcategory ‐$ ‐$ ‐$

80.02 Preliminary Engineering/Project Environmental 2,400,000$ 120,000$ 2,520,000$

Preliminary Engineering/Project Environmental Subcategory 2,400,000$ 120,000$ 2,520,000$

80.03 Final Design 36,671,498$ 1,833,575$ 38,505,073$

Final Design Subcategory Total 36,671,498$ 1,833,575$ 38,505,073$

80.04 Project management for design and construction 30,956,877$ 1,547,844$ 32,504,721$

80.05 Construction administration & management 7,799,327$ 389,966$ 8,189,293$

80.06 Professional liability and other non‐construction insurance ‐$ ‐$

80.07 Legal; Permits; Review Fees by other agencies, cities, etc. ‐$ ‐$

80.08 Surveys, testing, investigation ‐$ ‐$

80.09 Engineering inspection ‐$ ‐$

80.10 Start up ‐$ ‐$

All Other Professional Services Subcategory Total 38,756,204$ 1,937,810$ 40,694,014$

77,827,702$ 3,891,385$ 81,719,087$

Subtotal (10‐80) 651,758,668$ 128,615,882$ 780,374,550$

4,000,000$

784,374,550$

784,374,550$

Space provided for additional descriptions of capital costs. See Example under "Instructions" above. Please include references to specific Cost Category numbers.

Total for Category 70 VEHICLES

Total for Category 80 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (applies to Cats. 10‐60)

100 FINANCE CHARGES

TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS (10‐100)

90 UNALLOCATED CONTINGENCY

Subtotal (10‐90)



2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Total in Base Yr /FY

10 Dollars*Check Figures Taken from

Detailed Budget‡

‐$ 16,225,301$ 134,823,433$ 151,048,734$ 110,485,481$ 8,112,651$ 420,695,600$ 420,695,600$

‐$ 4,740,000$ 14,220,000$ 18,960,000$ 18,960,000$

‐$ 17,274,011$ 24,799,812$ 42,073,823$ 42,073,823$

‐$ 8,415,500$ 13,524,260$ 11,899,030$ 33,838,790$ 33,838,790$

‐$ 12,999,675$ 39,896,509$ 18,020,116$ 10,065,819$ 8,890,131$ 89,872,250$ 89,872,250$

‐$ ‐$ ‐$

‐$ 11,444,000$ 20,888,000$ 28,384,250$ 6,498,750$ 13,000,000$ 13,000,000$ 93,215,000$ 93,215,000$

‐$ 20,598,286$ 24,495,182$ 19,328,698$ 12,101,620$ 4,071,733$ 1,123,568$ 81,719,087$ 81,719,087$

‐$ 2,000,000$ 2,000,000$ 4,000,000$ 4,000,000$

‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$

‐$ 56,683,087$ 230,744,561$ 291,577,033$ 147,105,967$ 35,250,202$ 23,013,699$ ‐$ ‐$ 784,374,550$ 784,374,550$

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YOE Total**

16,225,301$ 137,519,902$ 157,151,103$ 117,248,076$ 8,781,394$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 436,925,776$

‐$ 4,834,800$ 14,794,488$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 19,629,288$

‐$ 17,619,491$ 25,801,724$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 43,421,216$

8,415,500$ 13,794,745$ 12,379,750$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 34,589,996$

‐$ 13,259,669$ 41,508,328$ 19,123,091$ 10,895,566$ 9,815,423$ ‐$ ‐$ 94,602,077$

‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$

11,444,000$ 21,305,760$ 29,530,974$ 6,896,525$ 14,071,618$ 14,353,050$ ‐$ ‐$ 97,601,928$

20,598,286$ 25,474,989$ 20,905,920$ 13,612,677$ 4,763,352$ 1,366,992$ ‐$ ‐$ 86,722,216$

‐$ 2,040,000$ 2,080,800$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 4,120,800$

‐$

‐$ 56,683,087$ 235,849,356$ 304,153,088$ 156,880,369$ 38,511,930$ 25,535,466$ ‐$ ‐$ 817,613,296$

100 FINANCE CHARGESTotal Program Cost (10‐100)



70 VEHICLES

Total Program Cost (10‐100)


10 TRACK STRUCTURES & TRACK 20 STATIONS, TERMINALS, INTERMODAL30 SUPPORT FACILITIES: YARDS, SHOPS, ADMIN. BLDGS

90 UNALLOCATED CONTINGENCY

10 TRACK STRUCTURES & TRACK 20 STATIONS, TERMINALS, INTERMODAL30 SUPPORT FACILITIES: YARDS, SHOPS, ADMIN. BLDGS

Program Name:

BASE YEAR FY 2010 DOLLARS (Thousands)

90 UNALLOCATED CONTINGENCY100 FINANCE CHARGES


If not using the FRA‐provided formulas, please describe your methodology in the space provided below as well as listing any supporting documentation.

WI‐CHI MSP/GB HSR‐Milwaukee Madison

70 VEHICLES


80 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (applies to Cats. 10‐60)

* For the purpose of this application, base year dollars are considered FY 2010 dollars. **Year‐of‐Expenditure(YOE) dollars are inflated Base Year dollars. Applicants may determine their own inflation rate and enter it on the "General Info" tab. Applicants should also explain their proposed inflation assumptions (and methodology, if applicable) in the Application Form. ‡ As a convenience to applicants in cross‐checking their figures, this column shows the "Total Costs" by category in FY 2010 dollars carried over from the "Detailed Capital Cost Budget" sheet.

80 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (applies to Cats. 10‐60)

YEAR OF EXPENDITURE (YOE) DOLLARS


Attachment 2 Implementation Plan


Attachment 3 Amtrak Operating and Financial Results: Chicago‐Milwaukee 10 round trips/Milwaukee‐Madison 6 round trips


Table A3.1. Amtrak Operating and Financial Results Proposed Daily Service Levels: Chicago‐Milwaukee: Operation of 10 daily round trips (increase from current 7 daily round trips)

Chicago‐Milwaukee‐Madison: Operation of 6 daily round trips Projected Incremental Ridership and Profit & Loss (P&L) Results Incremental Annual Ridership: 593,600 trips Hiawatha Service: Chicago‐Milwaukee baseline for FY 2013 service increases from 808,500

trips for the current service to 1,026,600 trips with 10 daily round trips. (Increase of 221,100 trips over FY 2013 operation of current service level.)

New Madison service adds 372,000 annual trips based upon 12‐month 2013 operation. Incremental Revenue: $13,900,000 (including both ticket revenue of $13,687,000 and food and beverage revenue of $213,000) Hiawatha Service – Chicago‐Milwaukee FY 2013 Hiawatha Service baseline: $15,871,000 FY 2013 at new 10 round trip service level: $20,219,000 FY 2013 Incremental – increase to 10 round trips: $4,348,000 New Madison Service: 2013 operation is projected to add $9,339,000 in new (incremental

revenue) Incremental 2013 food and beverage revenue projected at $213,000 Incremental Direct Operating Costs: $26,100,000 Incremental Direct Operating (Loss): ($12,200,000)

Attachment 3 Amtrak Operating and Financial Results: Chicago‐Milwaukee 10 round trips/Milwaukee‐Madison 6 round trips


Table A3.2. Amtrak Ridership and Revenue

Chicago‐Milwaukee‐Madison Intercity Passenger Rail Service Benefit Year: 2013 Summary of Inputs

Assumptions& Average

Sensitivities

Total Values Incremental

Value Proposed Baseline Proposed

Secular Growth Aggressive 2.4%/year

Fares Match Inflation 2%/year

Train Frequency

+5.2% per 10% freq. increase

Chicago ‐ Milwaukee 7 10 +3

Chicago ‐ Madison 6

Travel Times +7% per 10% trip time

improvement

Chicago ‐ Milwaukee 1:29 1:25 ‐4 minutes

Chicago ‐ Madison 2:40

On‐Time Performance +0.6% per 5 point OTP

improvement

Hiawatha (MKE service) 87% 96% +9 points

New Madison Service 96%

Summary of Results Annual Totals Annual Increment

Baseline Baseline Proposed Proposed Proposed

FY09 FY13 FY13 vs. FY09 Base vs. FY13 Base

Ridership

Hiawatha (MKE service) 735,400 808,500 1,029,600 +294,200 +221,100

New Madison Service 0 0 372,500 +372,500 +372,500

TOTAL 735,400 808,500 1,402,100 +666,700 +593,600

Ticket Revenue

Hiawatha (MKE service) $13,345,000 $15,871,000 $20,219,000 +$6,874,000 +$4,348,000

New Madison Service $0 $0 $9,339,000 +$9,339,000 +$9,339,000

TOTAL $13,345,000 $15,871,000 $29,558,000 +$16,213,000 +$13,687,000

Passenger Miles

Hiawatha (MKE service) 59,000,000 64,820,000 82,580,000 +23,580,000 +17,760,000

New Madison Service 0 0 46,820,000 +46,820,000 +46,820,000

TOTAL 59,000,000 64,820,000 129,400,000 +70,400,000 +64,580,000

These forecasts are based solely upon information available to AECOM Consult as of 8/06/09.

These forecasts are provided for the sole use of Amtrak.

They are not intended for disclosure in a financial offering statement.

Documents

Milwaukee-Madison High-Speed Rail grant application ... · Detailed Capital Cost Budget and Annual Capital Cost Budget Appendix ... implications resulting from the initiation of the