Siemens Caltrans/IDOT Venture design, engineering, testing and delivery (2012-1Q 2024)

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yup. Here is the most relevant part from the Trains article by Kevin P. Keefe:

In a statement provided to Trains News Wire, Caltrans, the lead agency in the 172-car project, acknowledged that some American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds designated for the $551 million project will likely revert back to the U.S. Treasury. The deadline for spending the stimulus funds is Sept. 30, 2017.

Most at risk are the 130 cars intended for use in the Midwest, an order dependent on the ARRA funds.
Click to expand...
The California cars involve very little if any of the ARRA grant tranche that involves a deadline. A significant part of the Midwest order is funded by time limited ARRA grant. Hence the difference in how they need to be handled.

Here is a Wall Street Journal article on the same subject:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/delays-may-derail-stimulus-funding-for-amtrak-railcars-1460308921

If you are not a frequent reader of WSJ on line you should be able to see the entire article without registering.

Here is an interesting slideset from Caltrans giving some details of funding source:

http://www.capitolcorridor.org/downloads/rail_advocacy/StanHunterCaltrans2015.pdf

Here is an even more interesting funding source breakdown from NGEC:

http://docslide.us/documents/bi-level-car-procurement-status-report-ngec-annual-meeting-february-21-2014.html

I can't remember whether it was the ARRA funding that had the deadline or the HSIPR one. Maybe afigg can throw some light on that.
 
IMHO Congress has plenty of time to sort this mess out. That is over a year away. There should be some way of changing this deadline. To not do so would only harm employees at Nippon Sharyo and set back economic progress in the midwest.
 
Congress has the unfortunate habit of not taking action until the very last minute, which is a potential problem for Nippon-Sharyo if you plan on returning the funds to the treasury but get an eleventh hour extension and then have to build the 130 cars which were effectively cancelled.

Can the funds be spent by the affected states on any other project which can be completed within the deadline? Trackwork or station improvements, anything but let the money be wasted (the deficit is so large it makes little difference to the treasury, but is a boon to passenger rail).
 
For the Midwest (IDOT) order, what is the breakdown of the specific HSIPR and ARRA accounts? Do all the accounts involved have September 2017 deadline or only some of them? If the latter what is the amount that does not have September 2017 deadline.

Ah! Here is a breakdown that was posted by Woody back in August 2014 way back in this thread:

IDOT for 88 cars (on behalf of Michigan and Missouri too) total $238.5 million

of which Stimulus $211.4 million

and from HSIPR $27.1 million

Caltrains total $113.8 million

of which Stimulus $54.2 million

from HSIPR $36.8 million

and from Prop 1B state funds $22.8 million

So while Cali might get less than half its cars by deadline Sept 2017,

the Midwest must get about 85% of its cars or it's Cinderella's Coach.

Not so bad for Cali after all

Not sure if any of the 45 option order waiting for sign-off is to use

Stimulus funds, but I doubt it. They've paid attention to the deadline,

after all.
Click to expand...
This shows as I suspected, that California had only a small proportion of the federal funding with the September 2017 deadline and they are probably quite capable of funding that part or a significant part of that part, on their own if necessary. The situation in the case of Midwest is less optimistic. These numbers are consistent with the numbers on one of the slides in the sldieset I pointed to in a message a few messages back.

BTW, I have been reading this thread from page 1 and trying to determine how many of us need to eat how much Crow regarding our starry eyed blue sky optimistic speculation about how all this was going to go down. It is pretty grim. Lots and lots of Crows involved. :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All government action takes place at the last minute. Nippon Shayro knows this and a revival of funds won't take them by surprise. It will be interesting to see if Trump's run for president will have any effect on Congressional elections. Perhaps many loyal Republicans will just stay home leading to more Democrats in Congress. Democrats regaining control of the Senate is very possible. The House may stay Republican but perhaps the Tea Party types will go down to defeat or moderate their views. In any case, time will tell. Of course, if N-S can't build a car to meet the stress test, then it's back to the drawing board.

As far as using the money allocated for the purchase of the cars for other purposes, I don't that would be possible without an act of Congress.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Somewhat on topic (it's about N-S): I had an interesting chat with a Metra employee (not sure as to his role, not an official conductor, i.e. out of uniform, but assisting them) the other day and he hinted/intimated/indicated that the new highliners have a lot of build and reliability problems - obviously no one expected them to last as long as the Mark I highliners - but that could portend bad things for the new bi-level coaches...
 
jis said:
For the Midwest (IDOT) order, what is the breakdown of the specific HSIPR and ARRA accounts? Do all the accounts involved have September 2017 deadline or only some of them? If the latter what is the amount that does not have September 2017 deadline.

Ah! Here is a breakdown that was posted by Woody back in August 2014 way back in this thread:

IDOT for 88 cars (on behalf of Michigan and Missouri too) total $238.5 million

of which Stimulus $211.4 million

and from HSIPR $27.1 million

Caltrains total $113.8 million

of which Stimulus $54.2 million

from HSIPR $36.8 million

and from Prop 1B state funds $22.8 million

So while Cali might get less than half its cars by deadline Sept 2017,

the Midwest must get about 85% of its cars or it's Cinderella's Coach.

Not so bad for Cali after all

Not sure if any of the 45 option order waiting for sign-off is to use

Stimulus funds, but I doubt it. They've paid attention to the deadline,

after all.
Click to expand...
This shows as I suspected, that California had only a small proportion of the federal funding with the September 2017 deadline and they are probably quite capable of funding that part or a significant part of that part, on their own if necessary. The situation in the case of Midwest is less optimistic. These numbers are consistent with the numbers on one of the slides in the sldieset I pointed to in a message a few messages back.

BTW, I have been reading this thread from page 1 and trying to determine how many of us need to eat how much Crow regarding our starry eyed blue sky optimistic speculation about how all this was going to go down. It is pretty grim. Lots and lots of Crows involved. :(
Click to expand...
Hopefully, while the California ones are being built and delivered, the midwest can figure out their money problem. The midwest states really need to come up with a dedicated stream of revenue to pay for their stuff without waiting for the Federal Government. They really need their own version of Prop 1B.
 
HAH! Good luck with that.

Those shiny new Siemens engines are gonna look GREAT pulling 1970's era amfleets
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MisterUptempo said:
I don't mean to throw the discussion too far off course, but does this delay put the Talgos, currently sitting unused at Beech Grove, back into play at all?

If I understand the settlement between Talgo and the state of Wisconsin correctly, Wisconsin paid Talgo $9.7 million(in addition to the $40 million the state spent on the first two trainsets), and Talgo currently holds the title for the two trainsets. Talgo is paying to store the trains and keep them in shape to sell. If Talgo does sell the trainsets, it must kickback 30% of the sale price to Wisconsin, up to a maximum of $9.7 million.

I know the purpose of the Midwest pooled purchase of railcars and locomotives is to have a standardized fleet, and taking on the Talgos would be anathema to that strategy. But would Talgo be desperate enough to either sell the trainsets at a fire sale price, just to get them off the books, or agree to lease the trainsets, provided a maintenance contract was thrown in? Could the Midwest states apply its share of any penalty money Nippon-Sharyo may be required to pay for the bi-level delay against the purchase or lease of the Talgos?

I'd imagine IDOT and MDOT will both be anxious to showcase their new 110-mph corridors once they are ready, potentially wanting to add a frequency or two. MDOT is studying a coast-to-coast service, from Grand Rapids to Detroit as well as a train from Ann Arbor to Traverse City. IDOT still plans on service to the Quad Cities and possibly Rockford. That, of course, was one of the reasons for the new equipment purchases. Would either state consider the Talgos the best stopgap available at the moment
Click to expand...
The two train sets Wisconsin didn't want would be perfect for the new Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service in Illinois. The rail line in and out of Galena is full of twists and turns and these trains would handle the curvy track the best without having to slow down too much. It would be nice if Illinois could have gotten their hands on these Talgo sets for the new Black Hawk service.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anthony V said:
The two train sets Wisconsin didn't want would be perfect for the new Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service in Illinois. The rail line in and out of Galena is full of twists and turns and these trains would handle the curvy track the best without having to slow down too much. It would be nice if Illinois could have gotten their hands on these Talgo sets for the new Black Hawk service.
Click to expand...
No, the two Talgos would have the same drawbacks as anywhere else in the Midwest. Only 2 trainsets which will require a specialized service and maintenance facility for just those 2 trainsets. Will cost money to open and supply a facility that would be better spent on acquiring and supporting N-S bi-levels.

Besides, the plans for the Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service are in deep freeze, thanks to the Illinois budget crisis made far worse than it needs to be by Governor Rauner. The service expansion, except for the rolling stock, is entirely state funded, so as far as I know, all contract and track work has been stopped. Even the Quad Cities service expansion which has $177 million in federal funding is on hold until Rauner releases the state funding portion of the project. If Rauner doesn't release the state funds soon, the FRA may have to take back the $177 million in FY2010 federal funding and re-allocate it elsewhere.
 
Anyway, I've seen a report that California may want them, to use soonish on added service for the northern stretch of the Pacific Surfliner service, L.A.-Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo.

There's ongoing study to figure our how and where to improve the very curvy route between the mountains and the ocean. Then gather the funds. Then get the work done. Could be years.

But using Talgos could speed up the process. Whether the figures will work depends.

I bet California wishes there were two more slightly unused Talgo trainsets around. LOL.

And then when California gets the route upgraded to use regular equipment, the Talgos can go to Washington State, where they belong. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
afigg said:
Besides, the plans for the Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque service are in deep freeze, thanks to the Illinois budget crisis made far worse than it needs to be by Governor Rauner. The service expansion, except for the rolling stock, is entirely state funded, so as far as I know, all contract and track work has been stopped. Even the Quad Cities service expansion which has $177 million in federal funding is on hold until Rauner releases the state funding portion of the project. If Rauner doesn't release the state funds soon, the FRA may have to take back the $177 million in FY2010 federal funding and re-allocate it elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Also as to Chicago-Rockford-Dubuque, if the budget impasse was cleared up tomorrow (from my keyboard to God's ears!) the present plans are Chicago-Rockford only, via Metra and Union Pacific rails, because Canadian National owns the only possible route west of Rockford and they aren't playing ball right now. :angry2: IIRC, the last plan before Rauner put everything on hold was one daily round-trip to Rockford in 2015 :p followed about a year later by another.
 
jis said:
I can't remember whether it was the ARRA funding that had the deadline or the HSIPR one. Maybe afigg can throw some light on that.
Click to expand...
ARRA (stimulus) funding has a deadline. HSIPR funding has no deadline.
The Federal government can reallocate the money at any time. They have done so already with other ARRA funding. They can't do so as long as the state is in compliance with the terms of the funding, but if the state isn't, the feds can immediately shift the money elsewhere, no act of Congress required.

I'm not sure where they could put it at this point, though; it would have to be projects which can be finished by the end of 2017. Washington State finished its entire "ready to go" list of rail projects already, and hasn't refilled the queue. New York got its entire rather short "ready to go" list funded and hasn't refilled the queue either. Same with Michigan. Illinois is not functional and can't take any money for anything; they'll probably be giving back the Quad Cities money as well as the money for the bilevel coaches. Most of the other states have nothing which is close to ready to build in 1.5 years.

-- Amtrak might have a couple of *very small* buildable projects on the NEC, but not much. (Extend the tunnel box under one more street?)

-- California might be able to accelerate a dozen LOSSAN projects and (by shuffling money) build more of CAHSR.

-- Vermont could accelerate the Western Route.

The plausible Amtrak projects + Vermont don't come close to the amount of money which is likely to be handed back by the Midwest, so I suppose much of it will go to California, but I don't know how much they can actually take!

Those are basically the only places I can see the money going. Can anyone think of any other possibilities?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DSS&A said:
Hi,

It was just announced this week that the FEDS and the California HSR just amended their funding agreement adjusting many items including giving them more time to complete the work. If they did it for the HSR project, they may also amend the funding agreement for the new cars. We will find out soon, one way or the other.
Click to expand...
Read the Progressive Railroading article more carefully. Excerpt:

"Today's amendment marks a significant step toward the delivery of the operable segment connecting the Silicon Valley with the Central Valley, does not delay the project, and will ensure that ARRA funds are expended by the mandated deadline of September 30, 2017," authority officials said.
Click to expand...
The funding for the initial operational segment comes from a mix of Federal ARRA (stimulus) grants, FY2010 grants, state funds, and up to $9 billion in state bond money. What they have arranged to do with the FRA is to spend all of the stimulus funds first by September, 2017; then spend the remaining FY2010 funds along with the state funds. I gather this required restructuring of the contract payment plans and agreements with the FRA as the early spending was to be a mix of federal and state matching funds.

The N-S contract doesn't have that much flexibility as much of it is funded by stimulus grants. The fix is simple, 2 or 3 sentences extending the deadline in a FY2017 appropriations bill. The politics of that fix, so long as we have members in the House such as Congressman Jeff Denham ®, who is determined to block the HSR project and take jobs & economic benefits of the HSR corridor away from his district, is another matter.
 
afigg said:
DSS&A said:
... the FEDS and the CAHSR just amended their funding agreement ... giving them more time to complete the work.

If they did it for the HSR project, they may also amend the funding agreement for the new cars.
Click to expand...
Read the Progressive Railroading article more carefully. Excerpt:

"Today's amendment ... will ensure that ARRA funds are expended by the mandated deadline of September 30, 2017"....
Click to expand...
The N-S contract ... is funded by stimulus grants. The fix is simple, 2 or 3 sentences extending the deadline in a FY2017 appropriations bill. The politics of that fix ...
Click to expand...
The California amendments are all good news. Obviously the FRA is aware of the deadline problems and trying to find a work-around.

But if the states have to go to Congress to get an extension, it will be easier to do with CAHSR out of the way.

CAHSR has sworn embittered enemies. Bi-level cars for Midwestern and California routes are probably sort of opposed by the usual rail haters, but not at the level of passion as CAHSR. So a deadline extension, for bi-level cars only, should be more do-able if it comes to that.
 
WoodyinNYC said:
CAHSR has sworn embittered enemies. Bi-level cars for Midwestern and California routes are probably sort of opposed by the usual rail haters, but not at the level of passion as CAHSR. So a deadline extension, for bi-level cars only, should be more do-able if it comes to that.
Click to expand...
There are likely a few other projects that will bump up against the September, 2017 deadline. Yes, tailoring an extension to exclude CAHSR or limit it to rolling stock only (to provide a margin for Siemens if there are delays in the Charger testing or production) might improve the chances of getting the rider through the House. But there are 30 to 40 right-wingers who object and obstruct every chance they get, so the extension would have to be in a bill that won't need their votes to pass. The politics on Capital Hill are complex and near toxic these days.
 
The only other use of money which jumps to mind as plausible would be either adding to the CAF order (fouled-up as it is, some money-shuffling could be pulled off there by moving the "new" money in to pay for the "existing" order) with some wacky payment schedules, buying the Wisconsin Talgos (that's a ready-to-go purchase and they're technically NEC-capable), and possibly shoving some money around to displace some random smaller-level TIGER-and-friends projects.
 
I think it all has to go to projects which originally applied for the money when the ARRA funds first became available. This would rule out the CAF order. Washington State could buy the Wisconsin Talgos since they originally did ask for money to buy more trainsets. Vermont's Western Route is a good bet since they applied for the full funding to finish the entire route. CAHSR applied for ludicrously large amounts of money and LOSSAN applied for much more than they actually got, which is why those two are definitely possibilities. I think money could also be used for purchase of track from the freight companies, which could be done very fast and was arguably an implied possibility in many applications, but I don't know if there are any tracks the freights would be interested in selling.

There was actually a very long list of unfunded applications from Illinois. But with Rauner, Illinois can do nothing. Rauner has really created an unmitigated disaster in Illinois. I wonder when he'll be impeached.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The draft minutes of a June 7 meeting of the NGEC Executive Board have been posted which have the following updates for the Bi-level contract:

The FAI for the manual door took place at the end of May.

The FAI for truck assembly is to take place on July 12th.

The section burn test will take place on June 22nd with the dynamic test taking place on June 27th.

With regard to the car shell re-design:

A number of items have been closed.

They are looking at weight reductions as a part of the re-design modifications.

Mock ups and design are taking place simultaneously.

It is anticipated that the manufacturer will have an updated schedule this week for the test/at risk model with testing planned for the Fall of 2016 – to be finalized in January, 2017.

The states (Caltrans and IDOT) and FRA are working on funding, and funding options, and solutions despite the expiration of ARRA funds. They have a commitment to have a complete project that fulfills the original intent – post ARRA funding.
Click to expand...
The boldface on the last item is mine. So they are working on options to fund and complete the 130 car order despite the delay and the ARRA funding deadline. Whatever those "options" are. Anyway, appears that the current schedule has the first new bi-levels being delivered for testing in early 2017.

BTW, in the minutes it is stated that VIA Rail has contacted the NGEC to request authorization to use the PRIIA specs for their own future equipment order so they can have fully interoperable equipment between the US and Canada. However it is the single level equipment spec that VIA wants to use. VIA Rail will be invited to join the NGEC Technical Subcommittee as a non-voting member.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top