Loading...
Untitled (19) BNSF John P. Lanigan, Jr. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Executive Vice President PO Box 961051 And Chief Marketing Officer Fort Worth TX 76161-0051 2650 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth TX 76131-2830 817-867-6400 817-352-7122-Fax APR 2 g 2603 � April 23, 2003 Dear Shelly, Since coming to BNSF in January, I've been impressed with the teamwork at BNSF and the partnerships with our customers and fellow transportation providers. Pete Rickershauser has shared his thoughts with me on the importance of our shortline partners in providing seamless service to our customers. I completely agree. Team BNSF, our employee brand, was founded on the idea of pulling together to move our customers' world, and we see you--our shortline partner--as an integral part of this process. Our customers continue to tell us that in order to maintain and increase their use of rail transportation for their products, they need real time shipment information from origin to destination, no matter how many individual railroads are involved in a shipment's route. Railroads need the same information, to plan for and execute a seamless, competitive service product on every shipment. As we communicated to you earlier this year, one of our initiatives is the development of a state-of- the-art movement event reporting tool that makes it easier for both customers and our transportation partners to do business with us. I'm pleased to report that dozens of shortlines are already using the new tool, and we're receiving favorable feedback not only from them but also--and even more importantly--from shared customers who depend both on BNSF and shortlines. Customers tell us they appreciate the seamless flow of information as their shipments move between shortlines and BNSF. Visibility of information, along with efficient interchange, helps build confidence among customers that railroads do provide consistent, reliable service--whether a shipment moves ever one railroad or more than one. If you are already using the shortline event reporting tool or another system to report events to the AAR, thank you for doing your part to support business growth both on shortlines and Class I railroads. If you are not currently reporting events to the AAR, you can sign up for the BNSF Shortline Event Reporting tool by visiting the demo at http://www.bnsfcom/business/demos/SERDemo/SERHome.html. To obtain more information, contact us at Short]ines(c�bnsf.com, or your BNSF Shortline Development Group contact. Sincerely, Page 1 of 1 From: Shelly Badger <shelly@yelmtel.com> To: Joe Williams <willgrpjsw@aol.com>; Adam Rivas <AGRivas@ywave.com> Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:05 AM Subject: Fw: YRPL Adam & Joe, attached is an e-mail I received from Taro at Steve Day's office who I called for input on the intergovernmental versus request for proposal issue. He wanted to connect with our City Attorney, Brent Dille, at Owens Davies Mackie prior to giving us his recommendation. As you can see, it is our choice on direct negotiation with City of Tacoma in the form of an intergovernmental agreement or a competetive process. FYI only at this time. Shelly -----Original Message----- From: Taro Kusunose<tkusunose@bpmlaw.com> To: 'shelly@yelmtel.com'<shel_ly@yelmtel.com> Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 10:24 AM Subject: YRPL Shelly: I spoke with Brent for a while this morning and worked out some answers to your questions: In short, the City of Yelm is NOT required by law to open up the YRPL shortline lease/operator contract to public bidding. Accordingly, the City could work out a deal with Tacoma Rail ('Tacoma")at this early stage. What this also means is that if the City chooses to seek proposals, it could pick and choose from among the proposals using its own criteria, as opposed to having to take'lowest price,"etc. Brent made it clear to me that one important criteria that the City has is the lease/operator's commitment to marketing the City's industrial area. As I mentioned to you yesterday, based on my discussion with Steve Day, it would probably be beneficial to the City if the City opened the process up to some sort of soliciting of proposals. The logic being that with the myriad possibilities in getting the line operated and Miles'cargo routed to its destinations, there is much to be gained by being able to compare the prices and packages being offered. Plus, it never hurts to let bidders know that there are others who want it just as bad as they.... Ultimately, the decision is the City's. If the City would like to work things out with Tacoma, Steve and I can do that. If the City would like to request proposals, I will get letters out to Miles and to the local dairy inquiring of their proposed shortline usage, in preparation for the request for proposals. Taro Taro Kusunose (206)268-8646 Betts,Patterson& Mines Seattle,Washington USA Check us out at: www.bpmlaw.com Notice: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received this communication in error,please advise the sender by reply email and then immediately delete this communication including any attachments,without copying or disclosing its contents. Thank you. 04/17/2001 T` City of Ye l m 4 Executive Department 105 Yelm Avenue West Y LM Yelm, Washington 98597 WAEMIN - February 13, 2009 Dale King Superintendent Tacoma Rail 2601 SR 509 North Frontage Road Tacoma, WA 98421 Dear Mr. King, The City of Yelm is supportive of Tacoma Rail's request for funding of a siding at Stiebrs Farm in Yelm. This project will result in a $1.5 million investment in a new feed mill adjacent to our City. The mill will provide permanent employment for at least 10 people in a rural area, improve the competitiveness of agricultural business in our area, and create opportunities for the development of other industry-related or rail suitable business. The project will preserve the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division line from Frederickson to Centralia and Chehalis, which is currently inactive. Reactivation of the line will not only have immediate advantages as mentioned above, there are also direct environmental and road safety benefits, including: • elimination of 600 to 800 truck trips per year, equating to 25,000 to 34,000 miles; • fewer trucks on the state highway; and • reduced length of 300 to 400 truck trips per year by 13,000 to 17,000 total miles. An operational TRMW line will also create more long-term rail opportunities for Yelm's industrial area and existing businesses, including agri-businesses near the route. The $463,533 siding will make the entire project financially viable. Creating a shipping alternative in our area increases the potential, choices, and opportunities for all our citizens and businesses. Sincerely, Shelly B dger City Administrator The City of Yelm is an Equal Opportunity Provider (360)458-8405 (360)458-4348 FAX www.ei.yelm.wa.us Roy Connection Freight Rail Assistance Packet—September 2008 TACOM " RAIL Contact Information TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES Alan Hardy Interim Superintendent Tacoma Rail 2601 SR 509 North Frontage Road Tacoma, WA 98421 Phone: (253)502-8896 Fax: (253)922-9088 alan.hardy@cityoftacoma.org Project Description Presently,BNSF Railway provides rail service to Roy,WA via a spur from Lakewood, WA. There is one customer at Roy, Wilcox Farms,which receives feed grain.The volume of traffic at Roy is not sufficient for BNSF to continue service to Roy in the long run. Tacoma Rail's Mountain Division passes along the south side of Roy and is parallel to the BNSF line for a short distance on the west side of Roy. This project would construct a connection approximately 4300 feet long(including a crossing of SR 507) between Tacoma Rail and BNSF west of Roy and transfer service at Roy to Tacoma Rail,thereby providing for continued rail service to Wilcox Farms. In addition,Tacoma Rail will work with the City of Yelm to market and institute rail service to the Yelm owned rail line between Roy and Yelm. This line, which was purchased by Yelm from the BNSF in 1999, could serve 1 existing industry in Yelm,and provides access to 2-80 acre potential industrial properties. This connection would also supply a secondary access point to/from the McChord AFB-Fort Lewis military installations: Currently the only way in/out is through Nisqually. Any disruption of service along the 10 mph max track due to track conditions would render rail movement unavailable until disruption is corrected. Currently the service to Lakeview is to run a train between East Olympia to Nisqually on the Mainline with a see-saw movement at the Nisqually plant. The operation on the mainline is approx 11 miles however with the see-saw movement and congestion on the mainline this 11 mile movement can/has taken upwards of 3 hours. Taking this train off the mainline to service the customers on the Lakeview line will remove congestion caused by this"short train"which occupies a space on the mainline that could be occupied by a freight train of up to 1.5 miles long or a passenger/commuter train. TACOMA RAIL Pagel TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES Project Schedule Project Milestone Month/Year Complete ro'ect definition June 2009 Begin preliminary engineering July 2009 Complete environmental documentation NA Complete right-of-way certification(may include acquisition) NA Start construction December 2009 Construction complete and project functionally operational February 2010 Project Cost Design Right of Construction Construction Construction Total En ineerin WayEngineering Other Contract Estimated Project Cost $1,903,000 Committed Local Funds Additional Local Funds Reguested Other Committed Funds $1,403,000 WSDOT Funds Requested $500,000 Proposed Funding Funding Source Public or Private Cash or In-Kind Amount Percentage Local—Port/Rail District Local—Other Railroad WSDOT Public Cash $500,000 26% WSDOT-Rail Bank Other BNSF Cash $1,403,000 74% Total $1,903,000 100% Yearly Maintenance Annual maintenance of the connection and crossing of SR 507 will be the responsibility of Tacoma Rail. In addition,the Pro Forma for this project includes maintenance of the 9 miles of Tacoma Rail's Mountain Division between Frederickson, WA(the location of the closest customer)and Roy,as well as the project and the current BNSF track at Roy. Annual maintenance is estimated at$60,000. This includes vegetation clearing/weed control,track inspection and general expenses. TACOMA M RAIL Paget TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES Shipper Benefits and Reduced Costs Wilcox Farms will enjoy the benefits of continued rail service. Should rail service at Roy be discontinued, the alternatives for Wilcox are to bear the cost of transloading and trucking or relocation to another rail serviced site.If transloading were the better option,Wilcox would likely close the Roy mill anyway,and truck direct to the farm. Hytec,the existing industry in Yelm,manufactures fiberglass products.Certain of their commodities may be divertible from truck to rail,but the low volumes do not by themselves justify the connection nor provide a significant contribution to the project justification. Safety Improvements No specific safety improvements are a part of this project. List of Shippers Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Road Roy, WA 98580 Tax from Industrial Development Being part of the City of Tacoma, Tacoma Rail doesn't pay property taxes. However,Tacoma Rail does pay the City of Tacoma's Gross Earnings Tax at 8 percent and Washington State's Utility and Business Tax at 1.5 percent. Details have been included in the pro-forma(Attachment D). Reducing System Wide Rail Delays Not applicable Environmental Impacts • Are there wetlands or streams on or near your project site?If yes,how close is your project site to those wetlands or streams? o Not applicable. • Has your project site been evaluated for archaeological or historic resources?If yes,please submit the cultural resources report. o No. • What animals,birds,and plants are present on your project site(those species that would be considered endangered,threatened,or monitored by state or federal agencies)? o None known. • Have you completed the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)process?If yes,please submit a copy of the documentation. o No. • What federal,state,and local permits will be needed for your project? o To be determined TACOMA W RAIL Page TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES Geographical Balance and Support for Regional Economies According to the information provided at the website located at: http://www.workforceexplorer com/article asp?articleld=8098&PAGEID=&SUBID= Neither Pierce County nor Thurston County are listed as economically distressed by the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development(CTED). Economic Development Benefits The project will preserve jobs at Roy that might otherwise relocate with the Wilcox Farms Feed Mill. Employment is presently less than 10 people. Shipper Savings: The shipper will save the cost of transload from another rail served location or relocation of the mill to another mill. The estimated cost of transloading and trucking is$400,000 per year. The proposed BNSF contribution to this project is based on the savings to BNSF in transload cost reimbursement to Wilcox. Project Business Plan Management profile: Alan Hardy is the railroad's Interim Superintendant and has worked for Tacoma Rail since August of 2004. Before coming to Tacoma Rail, Mr. Hardy worked 9 years for the nation's largest and the world's 2nd largest railroad track equipment manufacturer and contract services company as supervisor and manager assigned to the Union Pacific and Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroads in large scale construction and maintenance contracts. Before that he worked for a very successful short line railroad owned by and serving a Fortune 500 paper company in Northwest Florida. He held the positions of Signal Maintainer,Assistant Roadmaster and Roadmaster during his 21 year career there. Mr. Hardy graduated from Wallace Community College in Dothan, Alabama with a two year technical degree in electronics. Mr. Hardy has completed a variety of railroad related courses and seminars and has been a member of the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association since 1982. Marketing plan: Based on Wilcox Farms present business levels,Tacoma Rail will serve Roy approximately 2 days per week. Traffic will be interchanged with BNSF at Tacoma, WA and handled by Tacoma Rail through Frederickson, WA to Roy. Tacoma Rail will also work on generating new business with Wilcox,with Hytec at Yelm and with other potential customers looking to develop new plants. We estimate that at least 50 additional carloads can be generated in 2011. Operations plan: TACOMA - RAIL Page TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES A connection at Roy to the Prairie Line would open up the possibilities to service the Wilcox Farms facility in the town of Roy, allow secondary,emergency access to the McChord AFB-Fort Lewis military installations,and allow a service to the Lakeview area without adding to the congestion on the mainlines between East Olympia and Nisqually. Wilcox Farms—estimated at 400 railcars per year(8 per week). Service could be factored in from the Frederickson area or from the south Centralia/Chehalis area. It also could be argued that the operational and marketing possibilities for this connection would allow strong potential to locate a transloader in the Roy/Yelm area that would have access to both the Port of Tacoma and Grays Harbor area. This connection would also supply a secondary access point to/from the McChord AFB-Fort Lewis military installations: Currently the only way in/out is through Nisqually. Any disruption of service along the 10 mph max track due to track conditions would render rail movement unavailable until disruption is corrected. Lakeview Service: Currently the service to Lakeview is to run a train between East Olympia to Nisqually on the Mainline with a see-saw movement at the Nisqually plant. The operation on the mainline is approx. I 1 miles however with the see-saw movement and congestion on the mainline this 11 mile movement can/has taken upwards of 3 hours. Taking this train off the mainline to service the customers on the Lakeview line will remove congestion caused by this"short train" which occupies a space on the mainline that could be occupied by a freight train of up to 1.5 miles long or a passenger/commuter train. Tacoma Rail's Safety Manual(Attachment F),details the emergency contacts,training and safety plan. Track maintenance is done to FRA standards according to the required track classification. Financial plan: Tacoma Rail is a 100 percent self supported railroad. Rates are negotiated with the Class I Carriers.Tacoma Rail's revenue factors will be set to fully compensate Tacoma Rail for the added cost of train operations and maintenance,as well as a pro-rata contribution toward maintenance of the track beyond Frederickson to Roy. Annual Financial reports for 2005,2006 and 2007 are included as Attachment E. The pro-forma(Attachment D)includes the added service levels obtainable with the addition of the Roy Connection. Additional Comments This project will further strengthen Tacoma Rail's operations on the Mountain Division.The additional traffic for Wilcox Farms will increase the traffic and revenue base of the rail line.The potential to develop new industries in Yelm further strengthens the line contribution to the economic climate in South West Pierce and eastern Thurston counties. TACOMA W RAIL Page TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES ATTACHMENT A LETTERS OF SUPPORT TACOMA := RAIL Page 6 TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Rd t `�' Since 1909 Roy WA 98580 D� 4`` /� Familv Farms September 2, 2008 Washington State Department of Transportation Rail Office PO Box 47387 Olympia, WA 98504 Wilcox Farms is in the bidding process for improving our feedmill at Roy Washington now served by the BN rail line. We anticipate completion of this remodel prior to November, 2009. However, BN has indicated a desire to discontinue rail service to our site which is at the end of their service area. This possibility has made it nearly impossible to evaluate the return on investment on this capital expenditure and is delaying our start date. Our feedmill provides feed for nearly 1,250,000 chickens near McKenna. Our Roy farm has been in business for 99 years at this location. Our feedmill operation is an integral part of our egg processing business and any disruption of service there would mean discontinuation of our egg processing. This could jeopardize the jobs of approximately 240 people. Tacoma Rail has proposed a plan to cross HY 507 and in doing so gain the ability to provide the services necessary for our business continuation_ We support this plan whole heartedly. Thank you for your interest in supporting the success of Wilcox Farms. Cordially, Linda Thomas CEO Wilcox Farms Inc p�O-TNEA City of Ye l m Mayor Ron Harding 105 Yelm Avenue West Yelm, Washington 98597 WA�NIMO�OU September 2, 2008 Washington State Department of Transportation State Rail & Marine Office PO Box 47407 Olympia, WA 98504-7407 Re: Letter of support—2008 Washington State Freight Rail Assistance Grant application for Tacoma Rail/Roy Connection To Whom It May Concern: The City of Yelm stands in full support of the Tacoma Rail/Roy Connection project, proposed by Tacoma Rail. In 2000, Yelm purchased rail from Burlington Northern Santa Fe in order to preserve the rail corridor between Yelm and Roy and prepare for future needs of Yelm's industrial area. The Tacoma Rail/Roy Connection is relatively small in cost, yet large in prospective returns, and another step toward realizing the full potential of the rail system linking Yelm and its neighbors. This project preserves freight mobility options. Therefore, road/automobile traffic impacts, congestion, and associated costs may be reduced, and environmental benefits enhanced. It also increases the capacity for exponential growth of the industrial base in Yelm, the creation of jobs, and stronger local economies of south Pierce and southeast Thurston counties. While the immediate benefits are a continuation of service to Wilcox Farms and other potential rail customers, the Connection also upholds the possibilities of future commuter rail service from southeast Thurston and southwest Pierce counties to Sound Transit's Lakewood Station. Investment in this project is not only cost-effective and beneficial to Tacoma Rail and Wilcox Family Farms, it is an important next-step in the economic development of industrial and commercial prospects in the greater Nisqually Valley. Sincerely Ron Harding, Mayor of Yell The Uv of Ycl!n a!i F.qur:,'Opponruwy Provrcler (360)458-8401 (360)458-4348 FAX u-wu!.c i.yet m.u)a.us ATTACHMENT B PROJECT MAP 1=- I ti 1 r'^. 1•__t_ I 507 t Ar .. ATTACHMENT C PROJECT COST ESTIMATE =1111111""9111111"Mm- Engineers cost for T Roy,WA connection to TRMW TA'-0M ': RAIL TACOMA /U\LIC UTILITIES ITEM# Description Quantity U/M Cost Each Extension 1 Engineering&Design track 1 project $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000.00 2 New track construction 4300 per if $ 160.00 S 688,000.00 3 No.9 turnouts 2 each $ 50,000.00 $ 100,000.00 4 New at-grade concrete crossing 120 feet $ 1,000.00 $ 120,000.00 5 Signals with gates and cantleaver posts 1 project $ 225,000.00 $ 225,000.00 6 ROW grading/rill 20000 cy $ 20.00 $ 400,000.00 7 Potential Property Acquisition 1 project $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 Estimated total $ 1,903,000.00 This preliminary estimate is based on information provided to me,by Tacoma Rail,as of the date Indicated and does not resect actual bids by prospective contractors. Date: S �t WA.S x � U p�37830 pt f ��onnL E� EXPIRES: 05106/julU ATTACHMENT D PRO-FORMA Roy Connection Pro Forma Revenue& Expenses associated with this service only assuming project completion December 2009 2008 2009 2010 2011 Railcars 400 450 Revenue $ 190,000.00 $ 213,750.00 Expenses Fuel Expense $ 27,664.00 $ 30,430.40 C-ew Labor Expense $ 30,576.00 $ 30,576.00 Other Expense $ 99,660.00 $ 112,993.60 Taxes City of Tacoma Gross Earnings Tax $ $ 15,200.00 $ 17,100.00 State of Washington Utility& Business Tax $ $ 2,850.00 $ 3,206.25 Total Expense $ $ $ 175,950.00 $ 194,306.25 Net Income $ $ - $ 14,050.00 $ 19,443.75 ATTACHMENT E ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS OP ` I Lad - lc� �c TDA a�S ZIP - V- J;7141 7 _ TC �f, 00T. 0"- 01,�- IIIDA,� Wka t4m 'i 16a C/ 14,146 CaJ,7'- ld9 6MYYC i. �Jwlukk /9q CL- r"17 —,c �r f J�..w FW: Grant Program Page 1 of 4 � 7 s Shelly Badger From: Stroot, Richard E [Richard.Stroot@bnsf.com] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:46 AM To: Shelly Badger Subject: RE: Grant Program Will do, have a nice weekend, going to be 107' on Sunday! Richard E Stroot BNSF Shortline Development 2500 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth, TX 76131 O: 817-352-4440 M: 817-832-6779 CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: "This message may be confidential and should be read or retained only be the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Shelly Badger [mailto:shellyb@ci.yelm.wa.us] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 12:49 PM To: Stroot, Richard E Subject: RE: Grant Program Sure, how about 9:00 AM my time? Shelly Shelly Badger, Yelm City Administrator City of Yelm www.ci.yelmma.us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 360-458-4348 fax shellyb@ci.yelmma.us From: Stroot, Richard E [maiIto:Richard.Stroot@bnsf.com] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:42 AM To: Shelly Badger Subject: RE: Grant Program Yes, we can talk Monday, should I call you? Richard E Stroot BNSF Shortline Development 2500 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth, TX 76131 O: 817-352-4440 8/1/2008 FW: Grant Program Page 2 of 4 M: 817-832-6779 CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: "This message may be confidential and should be read or retained only be the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Shelly Badger [mailto:shellyb@ci.yelm.wa.us] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 12:43 PM To: Stroot, Richard E Subject: RE: Grant Program Richard, we prepared a preliminary estimate in the amount of 3.5M for a connection to TMBL in the vicinity of the Miles Sand & Gravel pit. I am attaching a copy of the flyer that have provided to our State Legislators, but to date have been unsuccessful in obtaining any dollars. So, until such time as funding is available, we are not able to make any forward progress on the connection. I would like to talk with you further about your thoughts associated with this connection, the Wilcox transload feed option and storage opportunities on the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line. I am available Monday morning from 8:30 — 11:00 AM PST for a phone call, are you? Thank you, have a great weekend. Shelly Shelly Badger, Yelm City Administrator City of Yelm www.ci.yelmma.us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 360-458-4348 fax shellyb@ci.yelmma.us From: Stroot, Richard E [mailto:Richard.Stroot@bnsf.com] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:14 AM To: Shelly Badger Subject: RE: Grant Program Shelly, We are again reviewing the option of installing a connection at Roy to the TMBL. Did Yelm ever get an estimate for this or find funding sources? Richard E Stroot BNSF Shortline Development 2500 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth, TX 76131 O: 817-352-4440 M: 817-832-6779 CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: "This message may be confidential and should be read or retained only be the intended recipient. If you have received this 8/1/2008 FW: Grant Program Page 3 of 4 i transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Shelly Badger [mailto:shellyb@ci.yelm.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:38 PM To: Stroot, Richard E Subject: RE: Grant Program Richard, thank you for sending the grant information. The City continues to investigate funding opportunities for the connection of our line to Tacoma Rail and will be looking into the WA State Freight Rail Assistance program. I have copies in our file of: * Surface Transportation Board Finance Docket Number 33961 dated November 22, 2000. * Association of American Railroads (March 6, 2001) assigned a reporting mark to the Yelm Roy Prairie Line of'YRPL-079'. I am interested in understanding more the impacts of the Transload feed option related to Wilcox Farms. Also, in talking with you about storage opportunities on the YRPL. Can we set up a time to talk via telephone? If so, let me know your availability Mon-Wed of next week. Thank you Richard, looking forward to talking with you. Shelly Shelly Badger, Yelm City Administrator City of Yelm www.d.yelm.wa.us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 360-458-4348 fax shellyb@d.yelm.wa.us From: Stroot, Richard E [mailto:Richard.Stroot@bnsf.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:37 AM To: alan.hardy@cityoftacoma.org; Shelly Badger Cc: Guthrie, Gregory L Subject: FW: Grant Program Alan and Shelly, Here is a grant program in WA for branch line funding. As you are aware, BNSF has been studying the option to Transload feed grain to Wilcox Farms at Roy using the Transloader at Fredrickson, WA. If this route is taken, it will still be an intermediate step with a long-term goal of connecting the TMBL and the Yelm/Roy line at Roy. I want to keep you both informed as we proceed so there are no surprises or lack of information. Shelly, I have not been able to see if the Roy-Yelm Prairie line was ever registered with the STB to secure your RR marks. If you would like, I can recommend a couple consultants that can assist you. They can also assist with economic studies and business development 8/1/2008 FW: Grant Program Page 4 of 4 Richard E Stroot BNSF Shortline Development 2500 Lou Menk Drive Fort Worth, TX 76131 O: 817-352-4440 M: 817-832-6779 CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: "This message may be confidential and should be read or retained only be the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Thank you. From: Hegeman, Aaron P Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 11:31 AM To: Stroot, Richard E Subject: Grant Program <<FRA_App2008.pdf>> 8/1/2008 Yelm Prairie Rail Line R R Mahing Connections The Project In 1999, with local and Federal funds, the City of Yelm made an investment of over $300,000 when it acquired a 4.5 mile section of soon-to-be-abandoned rail line running between Yelm and Roy from Burlington Northern Santa Fe. Yelm, always focused on the future, desired to preserve the track between Yelm and Roy not only for a pedestrian trail, but also to serve Yelm's industrial area and to provide future transportation op- tions. Having a short-line railroad serve Yelm is just a quarter mile from reality, as the end of the Yelm Prairie Line is just a crossing away from the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division Line. Tacoma Rail has been in the short line railroad business for years, and currently provides regional connections between the Ports of Tacoma and Olympia, Fredrickson, Centralia, Eatonville, and Morton. A connection between the Yelm Prairie Line and the Mountain Division Line would allow access to Yelm's industrial area as well as critical redundancy to the mainline system, providing access to business along the Point Defiance Bypass (Sound Transit) and Fort Lewis in case the usual rail cor- ridor is unavailable. The connection would allow rail users like Wilcox Farms better connections through a true short line railroad. The connection also provides an opportunity to connect with the Sound Transit system in Lakewood in the future. The Need The Roy end of the Yelm Prairie Line is located less than a quarter mile from the Tacoma Rail Moun- tain Division Line. The Benefits The growing community of Yelm is on the cusp of becoming a sustainable community that provides local housing, shopping, and jobs. The development of Yelm's industrial area is key to achieving this vision as outlined in the Growth Management Act in order to achieve a local economy capable of supporting Yelm's burgeoning residential growth. The Yelm Prairie Line will create a regional connection that will City of Yelm Pride of the Prairie become a strong part of the South Sound economy, extending P.O. Box 479 the short line railroad connections by Tacoma Rail to another Yelm, WA 98597 (360) 458-3244 node in The Request the re- Mayor - Ron Harding $3,500,000 Bion. - (360) 458-8401 rnayor@ci.yeIm.wa.US $600,000 right-of-way acquisition Administrator $1 ,500,000 construction Shelly Badger $1 ,400,000 refurbishment of existing line '' 458-8406 shellyb@ci.yelm.wa.us 1 7f ) U vlDVY e17 )Z �� l6pvy w L 1 yl U4 l 1310 '1-1 N N N Tacoma Rail - Mountain Division 46 58, 610 \ rs f \ MOLLY CT SE 83RD WAY SE S CT SE r V~ ~ SE n CT ,O zz � U F AY � / WAL ON LN SE 88 AVE lY < SE GUE / PRAIPo FLOOPCI C rral$Mng l _ Ae — NUAN NW ST 5 �° C SE / 93RD AVE SE / {Q9 > >[ MOUNT N AE CT ��P QA /33 TARE A 96 f� A5,0 / f < V rairie / Cn O N ^' ti > ti` iL KYLE 51 Y y 1 TH SE / W SE / oNisqu U f 507 zE 103RD z SE 103RD S �? SE 104 CL RAIRIEHT MP 29 507 105TH WAY SE 46 56' 507 i t SE p507 `.a GE2M E R GOI 2.N LN e n 109TH AVE SE n, Al ,10TH AVE SE L TY RD SE /� 510' MP 30 WISP LOOP // RLN SE - 115TH LN SE \ TARRYTO LN 8 rl .Burnham Ra � V l^/ 119TH WJ SE / 119THAVE SE GLACIER / MP 31 o / 1 SAV 7 Mn AV. SE MP 33 123RD AVE S / D AVE SE W 0 2000 De GDT,Ino.,Rel.04/2000' .c:��jy �^^""�� r5, gt�al�,i•ti� i � i4'1 ' �..�N '� _ � n � � +tet u how IS s^ rib U 31 Af— IW i,Uc,,t i�"�"" " ° t•§:,=`tlWQra!1{i lF�i; JG. `y l:'!(i a'=r., � rw A __- - -y'i ---"` �['_;i �,b'-sP. . . i.,t �_fi•`�� ��A6'�':Ljt:t�,t�:_`>.t�:^-. - ,p' 'fir -. e` "IN NW . `itS11�CA.t -•r,5 ` ` 4„�,; _ ;ry�t'-�,i r.. tc k rfi • R ' info *+ y f C � .. Via s It '�_ 1• t . ,� i�'` .. +'. �•.:^ {°'oq ,':Ir4i fl. 's x+' rY• � y �• 1' 1 l S` i gs PI. PPP III? oli 4 I,U(- 01,D If�f fj - oj-jjjj$jjj �-'�{4+i4' -ii4:� '} ':.Vy+•1 � � "�* f!'� °1�c` t i �S ,:'S��y �.' ^�.. r cam;: "t t� ��y• �" nS. �r !_ ` ,,,• .t f � v.s7"` s ,BCk y�it t � 'E k "x !, ','fit `£� •r '�` ?"+c. - r I z, J, a-t.4 .:-,4 .. OWNWOW Tacoma Rail is a full service short line railroad. Interchange is available with -/'fir the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroads. Interchange ■AEW can also be made with the Puget Sound& Pacific for service to the Port of NWN!r TACOMA RAIL Chehalis industrial park and to Hoquiam. The Mountain Division has 131 miles of track connecting Tacoma & Fife with Frederickson, Chehalis and Morton. Tacoma Rail is the former Tacoma Municipal Belt Line RR (TMBL) owned by the City of Tacoma and operated -{ under Tacoma Public Utilities. Tacoma Rail now has two operating divisions. The Tidelands Division serves over 50 customers and the Port of Tacoma in the industrial&port area just northeast of the City making more than 55,000 revenue moves per year. r s� f' Rates are negotiated for each customer based on the level of service, number of railcars switched, types of railcars, desired switching schedule and frequency of service. There are many options for assistance in construction of needed loading facilities. These may include economic development grants, low-interest loans, and take-or-pay contracts. OTacoma Rail operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Service schedules can be set to meet the needs of each customer. The service inventory for Tacoma Rail includes three-1200 horsepower locomotives, four-2000 horsepower locomotives and a recently acquired 3000 horsepower locomotive Tacoma Rail Tidelands Division especially suited for Mountain Division service. UPRR Fife Services available include car gNSF Tacoma L+l order, specialized railcar rental Hillsdale or lease, heavy lift& heavy trans- Midland port and direct access to Port of Frederickson Tacoma intermodal facilities. sham Greendale Roy r Kapowsin Western Junction Clay McKenna y C ity Maytown Rainier �+l Puget Sound&Pack Eatonvlll Taco �to Essex Park Junction Elbe UPRR Blakeslee Junction National FACT connection Centralia Mineral Chehalis BNSF connection SHEETto Part of Chehalis Morton Call Tacoma Rail at 253-922-6631; July 1999 ask for Dennis Dean (ext 13) or Paula Henry (ext 14). RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY USE AND TRACK AGREEMENT THIS RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY USE AND TRACK AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is entered into as of this day of , 2001, by and between CITY OF YELM, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington (hereinafter referred to as "Owner"), and TACOMA RAIL, an agency of the City of Tacoma, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington (hereinafter referred to as "Operator"), (Owner or Operator being sometimes referred to herein individually as "Party"and collectively as "Parties"). WHEREAS, Owner owns approximately 4.57 miles of rail line running from Roy, Washington (milepost 20.99) to Yelm, Washington (milepost 25.56), and located in Pierce and Thurston Counties, Washington; and officially known as the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line ("YRPL"), formerly the Prairie Line Railroad: WHEREAS, Owner desires to have Operator perform certain freight rail service on the Subject Line, and Operator desires to provide such service, on the terms and conditions stated herein: NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions 1.1 The term "Subject Line" shall mean the Yelm-Roy Prairie Line ("YRPL") described in the recitals hereto. The term Subject Line shall include the track structure owned, used and held for use or otherwise possessed by Owner in connection with the operation, use, or enjoyment of the Subject Line and all appurtenances thereto, including, but not limited to, rail and fastenings (including the main track, side tracks, spur tracks, connecting tracks, yard tracks, industry tracks and team tracks), switches, bumpers, ties, ballast, roadbed, embankments, signals, culverts, bridges, drainage facilities, and any other structures necessary for the performance of common carrier freight rail operations on the Subject Line, and any and all materials and facilities required in connection with the construction, renewal, maintenance and operation of the Subject Line and all appurtenances thereto. 1.2 The term"Owner's Rail Common Carrier Obligations" shall mean those legal and contractual obligations arising as a result of Owner's status as a rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board. 1.3 The term "loss and damage" shall mean all loss of or damage to property, both real and personal, and injury to or death of persons and all liability therefor. 1.4 The term"Miles Property" shall refer to a rail easement to be established by Owner on property owned by Miles Sand and Gravel,located adjacent to the Subject Line. It is anticipated that the Miles Property easement will exist at a point between Milepost 21.8 and Milepost 22.4. 131011/112701 1049/57820001 2. Terms 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be years, upon the satisfaction of all conditions precedent appearing in section 10, or such other date as the Parties agree in writing (the "Commencement Date"); provided, however, that the Parties shall each have the option to terminate this Agreement prior to the scheduled termination date (an "Early Termination"). Operator may terminate in the event of casualty damage to the Subject Line, which would make use of the Subject Line by Operator excessively costly or operationally impractical. Owner may terminate this Agreement if the Annual Rent(as such term is defined in section 2.5, hereof) in the second full calendar year or any year thereafter is less than $ .00 Both events are "Early Termination Events." Early Termination may be exercised by either Party by providing written notice to the non-terminating Party within ninety (90)days after the occurrence of an Early Termination Event(which for insufficient Annual Rent shall be the date upon which payment of Annual Rent is remitted or due to be remitted under 2.5, herein by Operator to Owner). If neither Party exercises its right of Early Termination within ° such time period, this Agreement shall remain a valid and binding obligation upon each of the Parties in accordance with its terms, subject to the subsequent occurrence of an Early Termination Event. In any event, no termination of this Agreement shall be effective until the Surface Transportation Board (or its successor) (the "Board") approves a change of operator on the Subject Line (the "Termination Date"), or, at Owner's sole initiation, authorizes the termination of common carrier service on the Subject Line. Each Party agrees that, upon an exercise of Early Termination in accordance with the terms of this section 2.1, Operator will support the Owner's application, petition for exemption or notice of exemption before the Board for regulatory approval to change operators over the Subject Line, pursuant to 49 CFR 1150.31(a)(3)(4) or 49 CFR 1150.41(c), or such other proceeding before the Board which Owner, in its sole discretion, deems appropriate. Operator may not initiate any proceeding before the Board which affects the Subject Line without Owner's prior written approval. 2.2 Owner hereby grants to Operator, the exclusive right to perform Owner's Rail Common Carrier Obligations, and to conduct contract rail service as approved by the City of Yelm, on the Subject Line using Operator's railroad equipment. 2.3 Operator will actively market for and solicit rail freight business for the Subject Line, and Owner will assist Operator in such marketing efforts. The Parties expressly recognize that Owner desires to have commercial activity on the Subject Line increase, and that Owner is also particularly interested in developing such activity within the industrial park located at the current southern terminus of the Subject Line (see attached Exhibit "A," incorporated herein by reference), as well The Parties shall cooperate in attracting new rail shippers to the Subject Line. 2.4 Operator shall maintain its equipment and conduct its railroad operations in compliance with all federal and state laws and regulations which may now, or in the future, be applicable to such equipment and operations. Operator assumes all risks, including loss of or damage to its equipment by reason of its use and operation of the Subject Line. Operator further covenants and agrees to defend, release, and hold Owner, its successors and assigns, harmless - 2 - 131011/112701 2 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 from any such loss or damage, except to the extent such loss or damage is solely attributable to an act or omission of Owner. 2.5 For the privilege of operating on and using the Subject Line as set forth herein, Operator shall pay Owner a fee ("Annual Rent") of percent (__%) of Operator's • gross freight revenues, payable in arrears no later than of the year following the calendar year upon which such Annual Rent is based. Operator will allow Owner to inspect its books and records to verify Operator's gross freight revenues. In the event that in any calendar year Operator operates less than the full calendar year, either as a result of the Commencement Date being other than on January 1 or due to Early Termination, the fee shall be a pro-rata percentage of Operator's gross freight revenue for the comparable portion of the calendar year during which this Agreement was in effect. The term "gross freight revenues" shall mean all freight charges or other invoiced charges or fees related to railroad common carrier service for- hire, including,but not limited to, switching charges, allowances or divisions paid to Operator by customers or other rail carriers on account of Operator moving loaded or empty freight cars over all or part of the Subject Line. The term "gross freight revenues" shall include demurrage charged to customers for the detention of rail cars, repairs performed on rail cars or locomotives owned by third parties, the storage of rail cars, or any other revenues received by Operator when such activity is performed by Operator on the Subject Line. 2.6 In addition to operations over the Subject Line, Operator shall have all rights, duties and obligations enumerated herein to operate over Owner's Miles Property Rail Easement. Once this extension of Owner's rail line is approved by the Surface Transportation Board, it shall be included in any reference herein to the term"Subject Line." 2.6.1 Owner will negotiate with Miles Sand and Gravel and obtain a Rail Easement on the Miles Property and obtain any necessary authorizations or permits from the Surface Transportation Board for such extension of its authorized line of railroad. 2.6.2 Operator will construct necessary track and switching structure to connect with Owner's Miles Property, and will construct all track and switch structures on the Miles property which are necessary to: a) Connect with Owner's existing line of railroad; and b), serve Miles Sand and Gravel. 2.6.3 Upon cessation of operations for any reason, the track structures required in Section 2.6.2 shall be transferred by Operator to Owner by quit claim deed. The consideration for such transfer shall be one dollar($1). 2.6.4 Owner will cooperate with Operator in obtaining federal or state loans and grants for construction of the switch and track structures required by Section 2.6.2,but operator shall have the sole responsibility to finance said construction. 2.7 Operator will obtain Owner's prior written permission for any use of the Subject Line which is not directly related to the provision of common carrier freight rail services to freight customers on the Subject Line. Owner retains the right to perform passenger operations along the Subject Line, either directly or through another operator, subject to reasonable controls as set forth in paragraph 4, herein. - 3 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 2.8 Upon termination of this Agreement for any reason, Operator shall remove its equipment from the Subject Line and restore the Subject Line to the Base-Line Condition(as such term is defined in section 4.3 hereof)without delay. In any event, Operator will vacate the premises upon the effective date of a Board decision as contemplated in section 2.1 above. After a Board decision terminating Operator's presence on the Subject Line: (a) if Operator needs access to the property to remove any remaining equipment or finish any required maintenance or restoration , it will first obtain Owner's written permission, and in no case will such access interfere with any other rail operations over the Subject Line; and, (b) in the event Operator does not restore the Subject Line d to Base-Line condition within 120 days after a Board decision terminating Operator, Owner may have the Subject Lines so restored at Operator's expense. 3. Assignability This Agreement may not be assigned by Operator except with the prior, written consent of Owner. 4. Control, Management, Maintenance and Operation 4.1 Operator shall carry out all of Owner's common carrier obligations on the Subject Line, and by this agreement shall have exclusive control of and responsibility for railroad management, dispatch, maintenance and operation of the Subject Line. Operator shall have such responsibility for the entire Subject Line, including, but not limited to, for all signals, including grade crossing signals used or installed for rail operations over the Subject Line 4.2 Operator shall order and direct movement of trains over the Subject Line under such reasonable rules and regulations customary among railroads of similar type. All rules, regulations and orders governing dispatch, and interpretations and applications thereof, shall be reasonable, fair and consistent with the terms of this Agreement. Operator shall provide current copies of all operating rules and related information used by Operator under this section. 4.3 Prior to commencement of operations under this Agreement, Operator and Owner will jointly inspect the Subject Line to establish its base-line condition ("Base-Line Condition"). The Base-Line Condition shall be expressed in FRA class, on a segment by segment basis. During the term of this Agreement, Operator shall maintain the Subject Line in at least the Base-Line Condition; provided, however, that Operator shall not have any obligation to make capital expenditures on the Subject Line in excess of its obligation to do so under section 4.5 hereof. A written description of the Base Line Condition shall be appended hereto as Exhibit"B"prior to Operator's commencement of operations. 4.4 Operator and Owner (or Owner's designee) shall meet periodically to discuss whether traffic levels warrant an adjustment to the standard of maintenance. In the event that during any calendar year Operator incurs more than Dollars ($ .00) of maintenance expense in connection with the Subject Line (prorated on a - 4 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 365-day basis for any calendar year in which this Agreement is in effect less than 365 days), Operator may apply to Owner for a credit of such excess against the Annual Rent payable for such year. Any application for maintenance expense credit shall be supported by such documentation necessary to establish that all maintenance has been at reasonable cost and necessary to maintain Base-Line condition. Operator shall obtain Owner's prior approval for any proposed maintenance project over $5,000 per project, or $25,000 in the aggregate for all forecasted projects in any 365 day period. 4.5 Prior to commencement of operations under the terms of this Agreement, Owner or its designee and Operator will inspect the Subject Line and jointly develop a three (3) year capital budget for the Subject Line, which may be reviewed and adjusted annually. During the term of this Agreement, Operator will make or cause to be made all necessary capital improvements on the Subject Line; provided, that the costs and expenses of such capital expenditures shall be borne by the Operator as follows: (a) All capital expenditures up to an amount per calendar year that, when added to Operator's maintenance expenditures under section 4.4 hereof, equals the sum of (i) Dollars ($ .00) [The maintenance expense listed in 4.4] (prorated on a 365-day basis for any year in which this Agreement is in effect less than the full calendar year) plus (ii)the approved maintenance projects under section 4.4; in excess of ($ .00) [The agreed override] (prorated on a 365-day basis for any year in which this Agreement is in effect less than the full calendar year), if any. (b) Except as specifically provided herein, Owner shall not be responsible for repair, rehabilitation, maintenance on the Subject Line. Notwithstanding the above, Owner and Operator will cooperate in seeking to facilitate the acquisition of any grants or loans available for capital expenditure or other uses on the Subject Line. The Parties will agree in writing as to the appropriate uses of any such funds. For purposes of this section 4.5, an expenditure shall be considered a "capital expenditure" if it may be properly capitalized for federal income tax purposes pursuant to sections 1012 and 1016 of the Internal Revenue Code(or to any successor provisions). 4.6 Operator will not be responsible for costs and expenses arising out of any repair and/or restoration of damage to the Subject Line necessitated by Acts of God (e.g., earthquakes, flood, lightning, wind, etc.) which are in excess of Operator's obligations under sections 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 hereunder. Operator shall bear any loss of business or related losses due to Acts of God. 4.7 Owner represents and warrants that, as of the date of this Agreement, there is no other rail carrier to which Owner or any other party with an interest in the Subject Line has granted rights to use the Subject Line. Owner covenants that from the date of this Agreement through the date of its termination, Owner will not grant to any third party any rights to conduct common carrier rail freight service on the Subject Line; Operator agrees to keep the Subject Line free and clear of debris, weeds and equipment not in actual use for rail operations, except that - 5 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 Cars subject to rental revenue for storage may be placed on the Subject Line unless such storage would interfere with rail passenger operations. 4.8 Operator will not take any action which results in or creates any lien or otherwise impairs Owner's title to the Subject Line, and Operator shall hold Owner harmless " against any liability or resulting loss caused by a breach of this subsection. 5. Pick Up and Removal of Wrecks 5.1 If an engine, car or other equipment moved by Operator is wrecked or derailed upon the Subject Line, Operator shall, within twenty-four (24) hours of such wreck or derailment, pick up and remove such wreck or derailment, and any cost of equipment removal and repair to the Subject Line shall be borne by Operator. Operator may provide by agreement with any other rail carriers operating over the Subject Lines, that to the extent that any such wreck or derailment is attributable to operations of such other rail carriers, the costs of equipment removal and repair to the Subject Line arising from such wreck or derailment shall be borne by such party. Owner shall not be required to furnish any supplies for the operation of Operator's trains, the removal of wrecks or the repairs of the Subject Line (with the exception of capital expenditures as provided in section 4.5 hereof). 6. Environmental 6.1 Within thirty (30) days following the date of this Agreement, Operator and Owner shall cause a mutually acceptable environmental engineering firm to conduct a "phase I" environmental study of the Subject Line under the terms set forth in Exhibit"C" attached hereto, for the purpose of establishing a base-line environmental condition of the Subject Line. Operator and Owner shall each bear one-half of the cost of the study. Owner and Operator acknowledge and agree that such a phase I study is not intended to be a comprehensive environmental review, and that the failure of the study to identify any particular environmental condition shall not preclude either party from taking the position that such condition was in fact present at the time the study was contracted. Operator shall: (a) cause the premises under its control or use, and all Operator's operations thereon, to be conducted in accordance with all environmental laws and orders of any governmental authorities having jurisdiction, (b) obtain, keep in effect, and comply with all governmental permits and authorizations required by environmental laws with respect to the premises under Operator's control or use, and with respect to Operator's operations, and (c), furnish Owner with copies of all such permits and authorizations, including any amendments or renewals thereof, upon request, and notify Owner promptly in the event of expiration or revocation of such permits or authorizations. Operator's indemnity in paragraph Section 2.4 and 8 shall also apply to hold Owner harmless from any claims (including claims for attorneys' fees, court costs, or penalties)relating to any hazardous, dangerous or toxic material, waste, substance, or other pollutant or contaminant (hereinafter collectively referred to as "hazardous material") arising out of, or resulting from (a) Operator's operations, (b) the violation of any law or breach of this agreement by Operator or any of its officers, directors, employees, agents or contractors, - 6 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 (c) the release by Operator of any hazardous material on the premises controlled or used by Operator or involving Operator's operations outside the premises under its control or use. In the event Owner must take action to respond to such claims, Operator shall indemnify Owner for all costs which Owner incurs, including all clean-up and remediation costs, including attorneys' consultants' and contractor's fees to achieve compliance with applicable laws, regulations and orders. 6.2 Owner shall have the option, at Owner's expense, to require an environmental audit of the premises used by the Operator at any time, and shall have a right of entry for same. If Owner at any time has reasonable grounds to believe that Operator is not complying with the terms of this paragraph or that a release of a hazardous substances has occurred or is about to occur, Owner may require Operator to furnish Owner with an environmental audit or site assessment, at Operator's expense, conducted by a qualified consultant acceptable to Owner. If such environmental audit does not disclose noncompliance or a release by Operator, Owner shall reimburse Operator for all costs incurred in connection with such environmental audit. 6.3 Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to abridge the rights of Owner or Operator to pursue the liability of responsible third parties for contamination of the premises, and the Parties agree to undertake reasonable measures to assist each other in any such endeavor. 6.4 Unless Owner specifically agrees otherwise in a writing signed by Owner, Operator shall not store, treat, recycle, manufacture, refine or generate hazardous material on the premises, except as may reasonably be necessary for its own operations, or as incidental to a shipment. Operator shall not dispose of or release hazardous material on the premises. Operator in all events shall conduct its operations so as to comply with all applicable environmental laws and to minimize the likelihood of any releases on, in, above, under, or from the premises. 6.5 Operator shall undertake all investigatory, preventive, and remedial actions reasonably necessary to comply with applicable environmental laws, regulations, and requirements, or to prevent or minimize property damage, personal injury, or damage to the environment, or threat of same, by releases or exposure to hazardous materials in connection with the premises or Operator's operations. Operator shall promptly notify Owner of any spill or release of a hazardous material, any violation of law relating to same, any lawsuit filed or threatened regarding same, any notice, fine or penalty regarding same, and any investigation or proceeding regarding same, arising in connection with the premises or Operation's operations. 6.6 Sixty(60) days prior to the expiration of this agreement, or upon receiving notice of Early Termination, Owner shall have the right(including a right of entry) to conduct an environmental assessment designed to establish the environmental condition of the premises. Upon completion of the assessment, Owner shall provide Operator with a copy of an environmental report that describes the results. The parties agree that there shall be a presumption (which shall be rebuttable) that the assessment shall establish the environmental - 7 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 condition of the premises as of the date this agreement terminates. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed as (a) a presumption or determination that any contamination or hazardous substance disclosed in such assessment was caused by Operator or during Operator's occupancy of the premises; (b) an undertaking by Operator to cure or address any such contamination or hazardous substance; or (c) a waiver by Operator of any claim of responsibility by either party against the other, or any other person or entity, relating in any manner to any such contamination or hazardous substance. 6.7 Notwithstanding any other provision in this agreement, in the event of a breach of this paragraph by Operator, Owner, upon reasonable notice to Operator, and upon reasonable opportunity to cure (which notice and opportunity to cure may be as short as twenty four hours in the event of any emergency) may suspend all or a portion of this agreement, or, if the release involves an imminent danger to the public, may terminate this agreement. Owner may also exercise any remedies otherwise available in law. Nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed as a waiver by Operator of any claim against Owner for wrongful termination or suspension of this agreement. 6.8 Nothing herein shall be construed to constitute a waiver of, or release of, or a limitation upon, the rights and responsibilities of the Owner or Operator in any future action pursuant to the Washington Model Toxics Control Act, RCW Chapter 70.105D, or the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq., as either statute is amended or supplemented, or pursuant to any successor statute. 7. Laws To Be Observed. 7.1 Operator shall keep fully informed of all Federal and State laws, all local laws, ordinances, regulations, injunctions and all final orders and decrees of bodies of tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority, which in any way affect the performance of this agreement, including, without limitation, any laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, or decrees, identified herein. Operator shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws, ordinances, regulations, and all final orders and decrees (to the extent not preempted by federal law) and shall protect, hold harmless and indemnify the Owner against any claim or liability arising from or based on the violation of any such law, ordinance, regulation, injunction, or final order or decree. 8. Liability For Operations,Disclaimer And Insurance 8.1 Upon commencement of rail operation (including any repair or rehabilitation) on the Subject Line by or under the authority of this agreement, Operator shall be responsible for all legal liability arising from said operations, shall defend Owner with counsel acceptable to Owner, and shall hold Owner harmless from same (including claims for attorneys' fees, court costs, or penalties), and shall obtain insurance satisfactory to Owner, for such operations as required by section 8.3,herein. - 8 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 8.2 Owner makes no representations or warranties with respect to the condition of the Subject Line, including the right of way, for any purpose, or with respect to compliance with any environmental laws, or with respect to the existence of, or compliance with, any required permits of any governmental agency. Operator acknowledges to Owner that Operator has fully inspected the premises and is not relying on any statements made by Owner or Owner's agents with respect to the condition of the premises, including any rail, track or other track material, or crossings, and that Operator assumes the responsibility and risks of all conditions, including such defects and conditions, if any, that cannot be observed by casual inspection. 8.3 (i) Operator shall, at all times during the term of this Agreement, obtain and maintain continuously, at its own expense, and promptly supply to such representative of Owner as owner may from time to time designate in writing, evidence thereof, a policy or policies of insurance for railroad purposes, in a form and in amounts acceptable to Owner prior to the initiation of rail service. Operator shall not initiate rail service until Owner approves Operator's insurance coverage. Owner shall not approve Operator's insurance coverage unless it includes, at a minimum, all of the conditions and specification enumerated below: (A) A policy of Comprehensive Railroad Liability Insurance, including coverages known as (1) premises/operations liability (2) products/completed operations (3) personal/advertising injury (4) contractual liability (5) bill of lading (6) foreign rolling stock (7) fire suppression expenses (8) pollution cleanup expenses (9) stop gap or employers contingent liability (B) The maximum deductible or self-insured retention shall be $ , and shall be subject to approval by Owner to ensure conformity with this provision. (C) Operator shall include any subcontractors or agents as insureds under its policies or require such subcontractors or agents to maintain insurance acceptable to Owner, which insurance shall be specified in writing prior to - 9 - 131011/112701 9 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 commencement of work by the subcontractor or agent after consultation with Owner, but shall not be less than general commercial liability insurance in an amount no less than $1,000,000 per incident, $2,000,000 aggregate. (D) Operator shall maintain a policy (or policies) of General Commercial Liability in an amount no less than $1,000,000, and Business Automobile Liability, including coverage for owned, non-owned, leased or hired vehicles written on an insurance industry standard form (CA 00 01) or equivalent. Such policy (or policies) shall provide a minimum coverage of $1,000,000 for bodily injury and property damage per accident. (E) All insurance provided under this agreement shall be endorsed to include the Owner (including any successor Owner), its officers (including elected officials), employees, agents and volunteers as additional insured. In addition, Operator's insurance shall be primary as respects Owner, and any insurance maintained by Owner shall be excess and not contributing insurance with the Operator's insurance. (F) The following clause shall be made part of all said policies of insurance: "It is agreed that in the event of material change or cancellation, this company shall give thirty (30) days prior written notice to the Owner of the property." (A) If any policy is written on a "claims made" form, the retroactive date shall be prior to or coincident with the effective date of this agreement. The policy shall state that coverage is claims made, and state the retroactive date. Claims made from coverage shall be maintained by the Operator for a minimum of six years following expiration or earlier termination of this agreement, and Operator shall annually provide Owner with proof of renewal. If renewal of the claims made form of coverage becomes unavailable, or economically prohibitive, Operator shall purchase an extended reporting period ("tail") or execute another form of guarantee acceptable to Owner to assure financial responsibility for liability for actions, inactions, and services. (iii) As evidence of insurance coverage, the following documents must be provided to Owner prior to use of the Subject Line by Operator: - 10 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 (A) a certified copy of the policy or policies (B) Copies of all relevant endorsements naming Owner as an Additional Insured, showing the policy number, and signed by an authorized representative of the insurance company on Form CG2026 (ISO) or equivalent. (C) copies of all relevant Endorsements Form Lists to the policy or policies showing endorsements issued on the policy, and including any company specific or manuscript endorsements; and (D) for commercial general liability and business automobile liability insurance, a copy of a "separation of insureds" or "severability of interest" clause, indicating in substance that, except with respect to the limits of insurance, and any rights or duties specifically assigned to the first named insured, the insurance applies as if each named insured were the only named insured, and separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought. (iv) All policies shall be subject to approval by Owner as to form, coverage, and being primary to all other insurance. Owner also shall require each company to be rated A-:VII or higher in the current A.M. Best's Key Rating Guide, and to be licensed to do business in the State of Washington, or a surplus Lines carrier authorized to do business in the State of Washington. (v) Operator and its insurer(s) shall waive their rights of subrogation against Owner for damages arising from any risk covered by the required insurance policies or any other coverage maintained by Operator. Operator's insurance shall be primary with respect to any insurance carried by Owner. (vi) Failure to comply with insurance coverage requirements or failure to comply with indemnity requirements shall constitute material breach of this agreement. 9. Representations and Warranties 9.1 Owner represents and warrants that, as of the date hereof and the date upon which operations are commenced under this Agreement: (a) It is a municipal corporation duly organized, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of the State of Washington. - 11 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 (b) This Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by Owner and is the legal, valid and binding agreement of Owner, enforceable against Owner in accordance with its terms. Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement by Owner, nor the compliance and performance by Owner of the terms hereof does or will violate any judgment, order, law or regulation applicable to Owner or any provisions of Owner's charter or enabling statute or result in any breach of, or constitute a default under, or result in the creation of any lien, charge, security interest or other encumbrance upon the Subject Line (other than created pursuant to this Agreement or created by Washington DOT to secure State funds expended on the Subject Line) pursuant to any note, bond, indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, bank loan or credit agreement or other instrument to which Owner is a party or by which the Subject Line is bound, except as such enforceability may be limited by (a)bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors' rights generally, and (b) general principals of equity (regardless of whether such proceeding is considered a proceeding in equity or at law). (c) Owner's execution of and performance under this Agreement does not violate any rule, regulation, order, writ, injunction or decree of any court, administrative agency or governmental body, or any contract to which Owner is a party. (d) Owner, to the best of its knowledge, is in compliance with applicable federal, state and municipal laws, ordinances and regulations, including without limitation, all federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances controlling air, water, noise, Hazardous Materials (as defined in section 6 hereof), solid waste and disposal of Hazardous Materials, substances, waste or other pollutants. As of the date of this Agreement, Owner has not received any notice from any governmental agency of any alleged violation of environmental law, rule, regulation or ordinance or any judgment pursuant to any environmental law, rule, regulation or ordinance relating to the Subject Line, and has no actual knowledge of the existence of violations of environmental law on or affecting the Subject Line (except as disclosed in Appendix "A"). (e) Except as disclosed to Operator in Appendix "A", there are no actions, suits or proceedings pending, or to Owner's knowledge threatened, against Owner or any third party or any portion of the Subject Line in any court or before any federal, state, municipal or other governmental agency, which, if decided adversely to Owner, would prohibit the execution and delivery by Owner of this Agreement, or the performance by Owner of its obligations set forth herein. There is no litigation, arbitration, administrative proceeding or investigation pending, or to Owner's knowledge threatened, against Owner or any third party or the Subject Line. (f) There are no actions, suits or proceedings pending, or to Owner's knowledge threatened against Owner or to any third party based upon injury or death of persons or damage to or destruction of property on or related to the Subject Line. (g) There are no judgments,orders or decrees entered in any lawsuit or proceeding that materially affect, or could reasonably be expected to materially affect, the - 12 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 Subject Line or Owner's ability to conduct operations on the Subject Line as contemplated in this Agreement. 9.2 Operator represents and warrants that, as of the date hereof and the date upon which operations are commenced under this Agreement: (a) It is a validly existing agency of the City of Tacoma, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington. (b) It has full statutory power and authority to enter into this Agreement and, subject to necessary regulatory authority, to carry out the obligations of Operator hereunder. (c) This Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by Operator and is the legal, valid and binding agreement of Operator, enforceable against Operator in accordance with its terms. Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement by Operator, nor the compliance and performance by Operator with the terms hereof does or will violate any judgment, order, law or regulation applicable to Operator or any provisions of Operator's partnership agreement. (d) Operator's execution of and performance under this Agreement does not violate any rule, regulation, order, writ, injunction or decree of any court, administrative agency or governmental body, or any contract to which Operator is a party. (e) There are no actions, suits or proceedings pending, or to Operator's knowledge threatened, against Operator in any court or before any federal, state, municipal or other governmental agency, which, if decided adversely to Operator, would prohibit the execution and delivery by Operator of this agreement, or the performance by Operator of its obligations set forth herein. (f) There are no judgments, orders or decrees entered in any lawsuit or proceeding that materially affect, or could reasonably be expected to materially affect, the Operator's ability to conduct operations on the Subject Line as contemplated in this Agreement. 10. Conditions Precedent 10.1 The following are conditions precedent to Operator's obligations to designate a Commencement Date and to commence rail freight operations hereunder (any one or more of which, except 10.1(a), 10.1(c) or 10 (g)may be waived by Operator): (a) Operator shall have obtained the necessary authority or exemption from the Surface Transportation Board to conduct rail freight common carrier service over the Subject Line, and shall have obtained such judicial, administrative agency or other regulatory approvals, authorizations or exemptions as may be necessary to enable it to undertake its obligations hereunder. 13 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 (b) No substantive condition unacceptable to Owner or Operator shall have been imposed in connection with the regulatory approvals, authorizations and exemptions required hereunder. (c) There shall be no legislative, judicial or administrative action preventing the performance by Owner or Operator of their respective obligations under the terms of this Agreement. (d) Operator shall have performed due diligence, to its satisfaction, including a high rail inspection of the Subject Line. (e) Operator shall have entered into commercial agreements (intercarrier and interchange) with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company BNSF, for the interchange of rail freight traffic handled by Operator on the Subject Line through the interchange connection point at Roy, Washington, upon such terms that are satisfactory to Operator and such agreements shall be approved by Owner prior to the commencement of operations pursuant to this agreement. (f) Owner shall have acquired a Rail Easement over Mile's Property, and have obtained Surface Transportation Board approval for rail operations over this extension of its rail line. 10.2 The following are conditions precedent to Owner's obligation to designate a Commencement Date (any one or more of which, except 10.2(a) or 10.2(c) of which may be waived by Owner): (a) Operator shall have obtained the necessary authority from the Board to conduct rail freight common carrier service over the Subject Line, as an operator of Owner's line, and shall have obtained such judicial, administrative agency or other regulatory approvals, authorizations or exemptions as may be necessary to enable it to undertake its obligations hereunder. Operator's filings before the Board shall be submitted to Owner for its approval prior to filing. Operator shall bear the cost and expense of all proceedings contemplated by this section. (b) No substantive condition unacceptable to Owner or Operator shall have been imposed in connection with the regulatory approvals, authorizations and exemptions required hereunder. (c) There shall be no legislative, judicial or administrative action preventing the performance by Owner or Operator of their respective obligations under the terms of this Agreement. (d) Operator's representations and warranties shall be true and correct in all material respects, and Operator shall have performed its covenants hereunder to the extent such covenants are required under this Agreement to be performed prior to commencement of operations. (e) Operator shall have complied with the insurance requirements of paragraph 8 hereof. - 14 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 11. Service of Notices 11.1 Notice under this agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly served if delivered to, or deposited in the U.S. mail,postage prepaid, addressed to: OPERATOR OWNER or such other address as may be designated by a Party from time to time by written notice to the other Party. 12. Governing Law/Attorney Fees/Arbitration 12.1 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. 12.2 In the event of any litigation between the parties hereto arising out of this Agreement or Operator's use of the Subject Line, the prevailing Party therein shall be allowed all reasonable attorneys' fees expended or incurred in such litigation, to be recovered as part of the cost therein. 12.3 Mediation (a) Upon the declaration by either Operator or Owner of any legal disagreement, dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to notices, demands, instructions or claims under the terms of this Agreement, or the meaning and construction of this Agreement ("Legal Dispute"), the Chief Executive Officer of Operator and the Owner, or their representatives, shall meet within thirty (30) days of such declaration to attempt through good faith negotiation to reach a common decision concerning the Legal Dispute. (b) Nothing contained in this section 13.3 shall be construed as prohibiting the Parties from agreeing upon an alternative procedure or forum for the resolution of any disagreement, dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach hereof, provided, that such agreement shall be embodied in a written instrument executed by each of the Parties. 13. Defaults The following shall be deemed"Events of Default." - 15 - 131011/112701 15 - 131011/112701 1049/57820001 13.1 Except when a shorter period of time is elsewhere provided in this Agreement, if at any time either Party shall fail to remedy any default or breach with respect to any provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement to be kept or performed by such Party, within thirty (30) days after written notice of such default from the non-defaulting, then, in any such event the non-defaulting Party may exercise any and all remedies available to it at law and in equity. 13.2 If Operator fails to cure an event of default within the time period provided in section 14.1 hereof, Owner may, by proper actions at law or in equity, enforce all of the provisions of this Agreement or, in the alternative or in conjunction therewith, institute an action for damages for breach of contract. 13.3 If Owner fails to cure an event of default within the time period provided in section 14.1 hereof, Operator may, by proper actions at law or in equity, enforce all of the provisions of this Agreement or, in the alternative or in conjunction therewith, institute an action for damages for breach of contract. 13.4 All of the rights and remedies of Owner and Operator under the terms of this Agreement are cumulative and any exercise of any remedy shall not exclude or preclude such Party from any other legal or equitable remedy which it may have. Failure of a Party to enforce any of its rights hereunder upon an event of default shall not operate as a waiver or estoppel against such Party or prevent it from exercising any or all of its rights at any subsequent time for any subsequent or continuing event of default. 14. Entire Agreement. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any or all prior agreements, representations and understandings of the parties. No modification or amendment of this agreement is binding unless in writing and signed by the parties. No waiver of any provision of this agreement shall be deemed or constitute a waiver of any other provisions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement, in duplicate, on the day and year first above written. CITY OF YELM By: Its: TACOMA RAIL By: Its: - 16- 131011/112701 1049/57820001 Activities since last RAC meeting, 3/20/01 • Locomotive Due Diligence— in April; Mayor Rivas, Councilman Cunningham, Joe Williams, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, and two mechanics from Coast Engine & Equipment Co., traveled to Eastern Washington to look at some older locomotives/cars. • Meeting with short line operator— in May; Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Tom Foster of Puget Sound Railroad. • $500,000 grant for connection; (email message attached.) • Meeting with Railroad Industries, Inc., Gary Hunter— on July 27`h; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Mr. Hunter. • Meeting with Tacoma Rail — on July 19`h; Dennis Dean & Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met. • Light Rail Car Information —July 26, 2001; (photos available for review.) • Meeting at Miles Sand & Gravel — on August 2"d; Jerry Trudeau of Miles Sand & Gravel, WSDOT Representatives, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail, John Thompson & Joe Williams all met for the meeting; (minutes from meeting attached.) Memorandum To: Yehn City Council CC: Tacoma Rail,Miles Sand and Gravel,City of Roy From: Rail Advisory Committee Date: 8/6/01 Re: Yelm,Roy Prairie Line It is the hope of the Yeim Rail Advisory Committee,henceforth referred to as the RAC that this Memorandum of Understanding will frame the component issues and initiatives necessary to execute to a successful conclusion the strategic vision enunciated here in part by the RAC for the City of Yelm. It has been a stated goal of the RAC,City of Yelm,City of Roy and Miles Sand and Gravel,to create a viable rail line,which would preserve the existing rail corridor,and expand the existing rail corridor by attempting a connection to the Tacoma Rail Line through property owned by Miles Sand and Gravel. It is understood and NOT taken for granted that the success of the interconnect project occurs only by the participation of Miles Sand and Gravel. In the past Miles has demonstrated a willingness to consider allowing the interconnect to Tacoma Rail through their property south of Roy. Likewise they have a demonstrated interest in shipping aggregate by rail. We appreciate the complexities, which this initiative presents,and we understand the evolutionary nature of business and the market forces,which effect profitability on a daily basis. For this inter-connect initiative to succeed we understand that the following milestones must be successfully addressed: 1. A rail line operator must be secured which gives Miles such terms that Miles can ship aggregate by rail. 2. Miles must locate a re-load site,which facilitates economical movement of aggregates. 3. Miles and Yelm must come to an agreement in regards to Miles dedicating the rail right-of-way on their property to the City of Yelm,or Tacoma Rail. To facilitate item#1 above,it is the recommendation of the RAC that the City of Yelm enter into negotiations with the Tacoma Rail Line to be THE Service Provider for the Yelm to Roy Short Line. The RAC understands that Tacoma Rail has limited resources to apply to a currently unproductive line,and,recommends to the City of Yelm that we negotiate a subordinated fee for maintenance structure with both time and dollar limits. 1 MILES SAND AND GRAVEL MEETING In attendance was Jerry Trudeau from Miles Sand and Gravel, Ray Allred, Finn P. Posner, Stephen M. Anderson, Richard S. Taylor from the Washington State Department of Transportation, Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail, Joe Williams and John Thompson from The Williams Group, LLC. On 08/02/01 at 0930, the above individuals met at the office of the Miles Sand and Gravel Pit in Roy. The meeting was called by Ray Allred and hosted by Jerry Trudeau. Jerry opened the meeting by stating that 20 years ago when Frank Miles acquired the Roy property, it was always a goal to ship aggregates to their Auburn facility via rail. It has never been economically feasible. In the last three months working with Tacoma Rail as intermediary, BNSF was again approached to see if a deal could be rendered. The BNSF marketing rep quoted a per car price of$15,000.00. Miles Sand & Gravel is currently searching for a suitable trans-ship/load site in Lakewood, Tacoma or Fredrickson. Stephen Anderson charged his engineers to assist Miles in locating a suitable route between Tacoma Rail and Yelm to Roy Short Line. J. Williams expressed Yelm's desire for a Y connection to our line to facilitate "smooth transition" of rail service between Yelm and Tacoma. Anderson unconditionally supported this project and thought it was very doable. Williams provided copies of a draft memo to gain input for this document prior to issuance. The only suggested change was item 3 "If Miles' right-of-way is involved." Ray Allred stated that the potential mitigation fees for removing Miles Trucks from 507 would be $30/truck, which is roughly 300k/year for 10 years (33 tons/truck). Subj: Phone call with Ray Allred Date: 7/3/2001 2:01:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time From: shelly@yelmtel.com (Shelly Badger) Reply-to: shellv@yelmtel.com (Shelly Badger) To: willgrpjsw@aol.com (Joe Williams), AGRivas@ywave.com (Adam Rivas), willgrpjgt@aol.com (John Thompson) Hi, I just spoke with Ray Allred, DOT, regarding the message he had left that the Legislature allocated$500,000 for the YelmlTacoma connection. I will share with you all the highlights: *YEAHHH, the $ is there allocated for the project, and not in the capacity where we have to compete with a bunch of other jurisdictions for it, it is there for the spending with certain conditions. *However, before the state is willing to part with it, WE must have a valid plan in place that if the connection is made, that it will be used by either Miles or another business in the Yelm Industrial Area. 'That plan could consist of a quit-claim deed from Miles for the land for the connection (WSDOT cannot spend the $unless it is on publicly-owned land, either by the City or Tacoma) and a commitment from them that they would use the line. *We also would need an agreement with either a short-line operator or the City of Tacoma that our line will be operated. *Miles will need to find a batch plant in Tacoma to make their plan work to use the Tacoma Mountain Line (I am a little fuzzy on this, I need one of you to explain this again). *$ needs to be spent this biennium before 6-30-03. *Either City of Yelm or Tacoma would be the lead on the construction project. As soon as I hear back from Adam, I will confirm the 4 of us getting together next Thursday, July 12 at 9:15 (Adam-change from 9:00 as I said in my voice mail) at City Hall to discuss next steps. "Rollin, rollin, rollin, keep those trains a'rollin...........See ya, Happy 4th of July, Shelly -- ------ --Headers --------�_�� Return-Path: <shelly@yelmtel.com> Received: from rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (rly-yc03.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.35]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v78_r3.8) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:01:38 -0400 Received: from inetl.ywave.com (inetl.yelmtel.com [65.161.32.36]) by rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (v79.20)with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYC36-0703170124; Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:01:24 -0400 Received: from SUPERVISOR (ds13209.ywave.com [209.166.91.2091) by inetl.ywave.com (Postfix)with SMTP id D8F5A2CA23; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <000901c10401$a9322aOO$6cOla8cO@SUPERVISOR> Reply-To: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com> From: "Shelly Badger" <shelly@yelmtel.com> To: "Joe Williams" <willgrpjsw@aol.com>, "Adam Rivas" <AGRivas@ywave.com>, "John Thompson" <willgrpjgt@aol.com> Subject: Phone call with Ray Allred Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:49:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--=—NextPart-000-0006-01 C103C6.FC4569EO" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Tuesday, July 03, 2001 America Online: Willgrpjgt Yelm Roy Prairie Line (YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) Meeting Tuesday, August 7, 2001, 2:00 p.m. Prairie Hotel Conference Room Called to Order Chairman Joe Williams called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Present Shelly Badger, City Administrator, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8405; Fax: 360-458-4348; Email: shelly(a velmiel.com Glen Cunningham, Councilman, City of Yelm President-elect, Yelm Arew Chamber of Commerce PO Box 2005, Yelm WA 98597 Cell: 360-789-9771; Home: 360-458-8744 Lisa Kittilsby, Miles Sand& Gravel PO Box 130, Auburn WA 98071 Adam Rivas, Mayor, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8401; Fax: 360-458-4348 Dana Spivey, Admin. Asst., City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave W, PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Bill Steele, Fire Chief, Yelm Fire District PO Box 777, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-2799; Home: 360-458-3290 John Gibbs Thompson, Williams Group, C.O.O. Yelm City Councilman 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: \%ilh_YWigt(Qi-aol.com ; Office: 360-458-0834; Fax: 360-458-8501 Barry Wilcox, Wilcox Farms 40400 Harts Lake Valley Road, Roy WA 98580 Joe Williams, President/CEO, Williams Group Chairman Yelm Roy Prairie Line Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: willgraiswauaol.com ; Office: 360-458-8533; Fax: 360-458-8501 v Page 2—Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) Meeting,Tuesday,August 7, 2001 Empty Board Seat Mayor Adam Rivas stated that an article was run in the Nisqually Valley News, requesting applications from area residents to fill a vacancy on the RAC,the cut-off date was Friday, August 3, 2001. One letter was received,on August 3'd from Bill Steele. An official appointment letter will be sent to Mr. Steele,but upon learning of the upcoming appointment, Chairman Williams did invite Mr. Steele to the meeting today. State Grant$ Chairman Williams reviewed the notes from the"phone call with Ray Allred"(DOT Rail Office)e-mail message. Mr. Allred was successful in putting Yelm before the state legislature,and the state did allocate$500,000 for the inter-connection of the Yelm Roy Prairie Line to the Tacoma Rail Line. The money needs to be spent this biennium,before June 30, 2003—and before-the state will actually hand over the money for the project,we must have a valid plan in place. Various options will be researched in the coming months. Update since last meeting Chairman Williams reviewed activities which have occurred since the last meeting on March 20,2001. • Locomotive Due Diligence- in April, Mayor Rivas, Councilman Cunningham, Chairman Williams, Ron Ernst from Tacoma Rail and two mechanics from Coast Engine& Equip. Co., traveled to Eastern Washington to look at some older locomotives. (Digital photos enclosed in today's packet.) The condition of the locomotives were not conducive to acquisition. • Meeting with short line operator—in May, Shelly Badger& Joe Williams met with Tom Foster of Puget Sound Railroad, and hi-railed the Yelm Roy Prairie Line. Mr. Foster is interested in possibly submitting a proposal if the City seeks requests for proposals from private short line operators. • $500,000 grant for connection—(Copy of 7/3/01 email attached in today's packet.) • Meeting with Railroad Industries, Inc., Gary Hunter—on July 27`x';Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger&Joe Williams met with Mr. Hunter. (Brochure info. attached in today's packet.) There was discussion about possibly having Mr. Hunter work towards an agreement with BNSF to transport aggregate. Lisa Kittilsby said she knows someone who she could call to check more references on Mr. Hunter. Shelly Badger said she will call Mr. Hunter again, as well as a BNSF marketing person. • Meeting with Tacoma Rail —on July 19`t; Mayor Rivas, Shelly Badger&Joe Williams met with Dennis Dean & Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail. • Light Rail Car Information—July 26, 2001 —(Photos enclosed in today's packet.) • Meeting at Miles Sand&Gravel —on August 2"d; Jerry Trudeau of Miles Sand& Gravel, Washington State Dept. of Transportation Representatives, Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail,John Thompson &Joe Williams met. (Minutes attached in today's packet.) Page 3 —Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Rail Advisory Committee(RAC) Meeting, Tuesday, August 7, 2001 There was discussion. Bill Steele asked Chairman Williams if LASCO is a rail customer? Chairman Williams said no, but Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail has visited with LASCO and they are considering the possibilities. Review E-mail from Tacoma Rail Everyone reviewed the e-mail from Ron Ernst of Tacoma Rail,regarding an agreement, with Tacoma Rail as Yelm's service provider/operator. Mr. Steele asked if it would be considered a"franchise"? Chairman Williams said no,it would be an"Inter- Governmental Agreement." John Thompson stated that the inter-governmental agreement between Tacoma and Yelm would be simple, approximately 1-2 pages long— pretty straightforward. Discussion followed. Ms. Badger noted that we need to ensure in the inter-governmental agreement that BNSF has track-rights onto our line if Tacoma is our operator. Everyone agreed that it is crucial that we hire a service provider/operator as soon as possible. Recommendations to Cily Council Everyone reviewed the memorandum with the recommendation for the RAC to begin negotiations with Tacoma to have Tacoma Rail serve as our service provider/operator. There was discussion. It was the consensus of the RAC to begin negotiations with Tacoma. Chairman Williams asked for a motion. Barry Wilcox made a motion, Glen Cunningham seconded the motion, to recommend that the Yelm City Council authorize the YRPL Rail Advisory Committee to begin negotiations with Tacoma for Tacoma Rail to be our service provider/operator. Motion carried. It was decided that since Chairman Williams will be out of town on August 8`h, Councilman Cunningham will present the RAC's recommendation and update the city council along with Shelly Badger and Mayor Rivas. Chairman Williams adjourned the meeting at 2:55 p.m. Dana Spivey, for Committee Se y Cecelia Jenkins Betts n Patterson LJ 9,Mines '�. A T TO R N E Y S �1 Stephen L. Day eMail: sday@bpmlaw.com September 20, 2001 Joe Williams 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J P.O. Box 5210 Yelm, WA 98597 Re: Tacoma Rail Connection Dear Joe: I have reviewed the materials faxed up by John Thompson. I can draft an initial proposed operating agreement with Tacoma Rail which incorporates my current limited understanding of this proposed transaction. The ROW transfer from Miles to the City of Yelm can be handled as a"railroad easement'. Rather than convey the land as "fee simple"Miles might be more comfortable with a long-term easement. If railroad operation should ever be"abandoned"the property would then revert to the underlying property owner(Miles, or its assignee). In other words Miles would get their property back if railroad operations were ever abandoned. However, to be formally"abandoned" an application must be made to the Federal Surface Transportation Board. Once that process begins a public group can require the land be dedicated for hike or bike activities under the national Rails to Trails Act. The legal fiction underlying that Act is that the rail corridor can be preserved for future use through temporary designation as"rail banked"property. This is what happened to the line from the city of Yelm to its former connection at Tenino Junction. Therefore there is a risk to Miles that its property may be out of their control in perpetuity. Nevertheless, the use of a railroad easement is the typical way of creating railroad right of way on private land. I assume that the city of Yelm is comfortable with the marketing and promotional activities required by the outline provided by Ron Ernst with Tacoma Rail. The maintenance is another issue, and I might suggest a plan whereby the city of Yelm waive the per car income for an initial period and apply that to maintenance on the line. You could cap that in case revenue turns out to 13037810920010956/57820001 One Convention Place Suite 1400.701 Pike Street Seattle WA.98101-3927 A Protessionai Service Corporation www.bpmlaw.com .206.292.9988.fax 206.343.7053 Joe Williams September 20, 2001 Page 2 be better than anticipated. I will try to incorporate these ideas into the proposed operating agreement I will draft for your review. Since this project seems to have been discussed in early August, I assume there is no extreme time deadline in getting these proposals to you. In that case, I will anticipate having rough drafts to you before the first of October. If you need these sooner, please let me know. I plan to prepare the document in email format so that you can get it as soon it is done and to ;:Hake it easier for you to edit and share. Congratulations on bringing this project idea closer to fruition. 1 look forward to working with you on this final phase. _ e ruly yours, Step en L. Day SLD:sm cc: Shelley Badger, City Manager 130378/0920010956/57820001 ti �I L4 Yelm Roy Prairie Line IE C0 C VV C� Ad Hoc --Advisory Committee Meeting Tuesday, March 20, 2001 2001 Prairie Hotel Conference Room Called to Order President Joe Williams called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Present Ray Allred, Rail Freight Expert, Rail Office, WA State Department of Transportation Public Transportation and Rail Division 310 Maple Park Avenue SE, PO Box 47387, Olympia WA 98504-7387 Office: 360-705-7903; Fax: 360-705-6821; Pager: 360-455-2228 Shelly Badger, City Administrator, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave. W.,PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8405; Fax: 360458-4348; Email: Shelly.&glmtel.com Glen Cunningham, Councilman, City of Yelm President-elect, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce PO Box 2005, Yelm WA 98597 Home: 360458-8744; Cell: 360-789-9771 Dennis Dean,Deputy Director, Tacoma Rail/Tacoma Public Utilities 2601 SR 509 North Frontage Road, Tacoma WA 98421 Office: 253-502-8891;Pager: 253-405-0765; Fax: 253-922-9088 Ron Ernst, Marketing Director, Tacoma Rail/Tacoma Public Utilities Office: 253-502-8897; Cell: 425-785-8796; Fax: 253-922-9088 Cecelia Jenkins, Yelm Roy Prairie Line Advisory Committee, Secretary Executive Director, Yelm Area Chamber of Commerce 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite F,PO Box 444, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360458-6608; Fax: 360-458-6383; Email: info@ye1mchamber.co Adam Rivas,Mayor, City of Yelm 105 Yelm Ave. W.,PO Box 479, Yelm WA 98597 Office: 360-458-8401; Fax: 360-4584348 John Gibbs Thompson, Williams Group, C.O.O. Yelm City Councilman 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J, PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: willgrpig0alaol.con Office: 360458-0834; Fax: 360-458-8501 i 4b t 1 FoosS °f ' a - y St Xt 4 � iin ' A 4•, PL�Pn'.'�I 1,�, (il L.. J.sr.3 '�3 .�(€i'_ 1 t $v,i"`°.JS�;�'y,�^,.a» Page 2 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc -- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Jerry Trudeau, General Manager, Miles Sand & Gravel 1201 M. Street SE, PO Box 130, Auburn WA 98071 Office: 253-922-0327,Ext. 429; Fax: 253-833-3746 Joe Williams, President/CEO, Williams Group Chairman Yelm Roy Prairie Line Advisory Committee 701 Prairie Park Lane, Suite J,PO Box 5210, Yelm WA 98597 Email: willgrpiswaAol.com: Office: 360-458-8533; Fax: 360-458-8501 Rail Development- Discussion Chairman Joe Williams outlined the purpose of the meeting and immediate areas of concern that required action: • Rail Service-Miles Sand& Gravel • Rail service to Yelm's Industrial Area • Light rail services in the future ... will evolve into: - Yelm to SeaTac Services - Yelm to Frederickson Area Services • Partnering- Inter-government Partnerships - City of Yelm - WA State DOT - Miles Sand& Gravel - City of Tacoma/Tacoma Rail Mountain Division • State/Grants vs. Private/Loans Immediate Needs Discussed Miles Sand & Gravel needs to establish service from the Roy plant to Auburn and Lakewood. Miles goal was highlighted: 25 full cars shipped daily and 25 empty cars back to Roy plant daily. Advantages/Discussion: • Reduce number of trucks operating on highways • State mitigation fees for reduction of trucks. • State wants to reduce number of trucks on highway • 507 crossing ... safety • Miles largest producer of gravel on a daily basis • RFQ Process requirements vs. Intergovernmental Agreement - Intergovernmental Agreement(don't have to go out for RFQ) - Port of Tacoma(currently) --Direct negotiations --Approval of all governmental agencies involved required. - tY t -.� ,(. -, ,', ., i.. .... J.. ...a. w. { .f. ii_.r. �.nr�r•`!.� �9t1:�.. l n i.i1'1._l. -Jui . �J.�., - � �. _f _...r i��.... n.,: r',1. .t.. 7 T -�� -G ar•.S �. r,-.�,.i 1 .;, is. -1V • � ,•r F 0��7 ��� �r .e.(1�.�. t._ . .. f.�._.�.. .._ ,.r�.i-il. .�•1. - - - - - -- - '- ---- _ __..-. � ��_ 'fes--•�-�•- . 'yg'.leq►. • F �A✓G.sir i y Page 3 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc-- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Currently Tacoma Rail has agreement with Burlington Northern S.F. & United Pacific ... accesses to both transcontinental servers. A discussion was held regarding BNSF agreement with the City of Yelm. It was noted they may have first refusal rights in the contractual documents. (will be reviewed) The Roy Pocket Gophers and the Murray Creek (stream) that are located on the Miles property were discussed. Service currently provided for the Wilcox Farms station located in Roy was discussed. It was reported that currently 5 to 7 cars per month are shipped from the site. The planned shipment of fertilizer was discussed. The connection problems regarding reaching the Miles' Auburn plant were discussed. The Tacoma Rail Mountain Division currently does not have an agreement in place, which would provide for service to Auburn. The possibility of heading cars to BNSF for movement to Auburn was discussed. It -was reported the Port of Tacoma is the main exchange site for the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division line, and they would not have a problem getting the empty cars back to the Miles facility on a daily basis. Making the turn would probably require a swing shift. The connection would take an estimated 100 trucks per day off the highway. The Frederickson site was discussed. Shipments could be connected with Puget Sound Pacific Railroad to the Grays Harbor area if looking for barge service. Questions-What does Miles want to do? • Interested in determining what it is going to take to make it work? • First interest is getting aggregate to Auburn. The group discussed the empty Shotwell Plant (176th & Canyon) as a possible loading site. Deadline-July 1't Grant Application Items required to be in place to help support the grant application, which has a July 1St deadline, were discussed: • Miles property deeded to City of Yelm. • Agreement in place for service. • Need plan for maintenance on line-- help required. • Study needs to take place ... option on Miles property; connection portion; environmental issues (tender loving care for gophers and Murray Creek/stream) d. , -47 . W F`` -.r ._�� 3.�.� •_'d,t'.`3.. �, itlr.:``.-y p ♦ i^i. t i�{,..` � v3ga "rTy1-'`_ 4 .....•. - ...i ..r,.+....i.;,l�l�.�l-.. .hf.:i,J.! �� .1i. �,S ..AS.1 ... ..�..,.J:.etY[`,. t'.J..J.. c...il � - * `r-'71�'r ... J i r i :e,:..I-,. F .._:! .rt SFA .•..r : ,M 7' It- .i t. �� ,'. I{Q.f T l_ r Y.�..'.. ~� y tali�.. `��r•�-�3i �'�-�.. _ _ �:' - - L� --- - _ a' ti,s'�K,>� :,a,;?�y�.,+1 jL..c a ,mss+ ,E;.,' fAt4Yr��%f*a;5i ..e.:� .9 F'l.e- ... I`.rt 1., d ,..fC •�r�.. w ,yam 1 ;�,. .. .. . � .... _ Page 4 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc -- Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 Study Possible agencies for the study/survey project were discussed: • David Evans & Associate • Harris Group • HDR - Bellevue (Wayne Short) • Strategies&Associates (Ron Ernst) • Companies from California trying to break into Washington market. The importance of working with a group that understands the importance of the environmental concerns as well as railroad needs. Next Steps • Ron Ernst will get names to Jerry Trudeau • Ray Allred will get grant application to Joe Williams & Shelly Badger. • Target concerns: switch our line to Tacoma Rail Mountain Division; switching equipment replacement/repairs; crossing of 507/DOT. • Waiting: Legislators funding allocation for Freight Rail System. Funds needed estimates: $300,000 -bring railroad up to grade & sidings; $200,000 railroad crossing at 507; $600,000-$700,000 grant required. 20% match needed ... land donation counts as match • Miles appeal to Pierce Co. for land use ... getting all the trucks off road key. • Interagency Agreement ... first need to address maintenance component and benefits/costs to City of Tacoma...why agreement with Yelm? Meeting with Tacoma's Public Works Director important. • Visionary ... important that all involved see what can be! • It was noted if the train service is available,the business will follow. • It is extremely important the Miles Sand & Gravel has a site that the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division can serve. • The fact that the City of Tacoma operates a not-for-profit rail line. Their rates are some of the lowest in the country. • In the long term the City of Yelm would like to see some profits come back to the City. • Tacoma Rail Tidelands Division/City of Tacoma receives 8% off top from the line. $800,000 generated to the fund off established line. • No funds received off Tacoma Rail Mountain division yet ...fledgling at this time. Potential there but has not been realized yet. • Generate rail traffic ... will generate $ ... rail asset draws business. • Mountain line operates as part of general fund ... Tidelands as utility. • Important City does not micro-manage, but oversees ... receives reports etc. • 70,000 switches-Tidelands • Started rates to get volume ... 180 to 16,000 switches ... flexibility. • BN Representative - Jerry Johnson signed originally for BN & Rich Batie is whom the City of Yelm worked with during contract negotiations. i r +��t s+` .i�1, t i.� t*�'� t .i''. .- •:,:�y Y�� $F��� .�to L .� L�,✓, 4 .�y?' rr - a >QF V 'i:1.-.,.. �` _.1.1 st .�.J' 4f�r ��:�•.��...1.Y�J..'v .n �•��y � �� ���SYJ_�"•fr.�}i����� F �7YY i'��: �'S!)i�'a ia4�' Of&Y A17000 Any ` �•-�r-,P fa }� to �!.t ��'w�� ata ,<A t��". tt �{�gS 'YT�t ��i' f..L.Y7. 3 - lfxs •tY`�ii � R .. .ji. k:.. -ts 4;�ta4 ..w Sa L:2Tt•..i. "} L ��.. ��f Y .5' �I kt.J .............. ON who 4 � 2 �ts 17 nit , e' t >�.^ r ... 'R , •' ate_ *� - R+ 1 t � TK Y .ice l� _ '4`:l,• }.,Sk. x �4 { fax X33 i x P >- AN TV i _ 'Off"": C k+ LI, -. _...�._.. - - .• - .. .._a .siLY.,a # >.'x3•.3 ni,:V'u.4]."Y.`#c_�Y.a.21�s��r% Page 5 - Yelm Roy Prairie Line(YRPL) Ad Hoc --Advisory Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 20, 2001 • Tacoma Rail will make the contact with BN. • Shelly will have Steve Day review the contractual agreement between BN & City of Yelm for interchange agreement as part of the sale. Any requirements need to be identified. • Shelly Badger will forward copy of the agreement to Dennis Dean. • The Roy area being withheld from the agreement was discussed ... Wilcox and Fort Lewis shipping. Chairman Joe Williams ad'oumed the meeting at 10:15 a.m. Cecelia Jenkins, ommittee Secretary T/MI" 2601 SR 509 North Frontage Road WN00111`11W Mummor Tacoma, Washington 98421 TIT TACOMA RAIL TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES MOUNTAIN DIVISION: Operated for the City of Tacoma March 22, 2000 E(DE a V E D Ms. Shelly Badger MAR 2 3 2000 City Administrator City of Yelm PO Box 479 Yelm, Washington 98597 Shelly: Nice to meet you. Good luck on obtaining the BN track. When might we "scout"the territory to find a good connection for you new railroad? You can reach me at 253.502.8897 or 425.785.8796. Sincerely, Z-- Aon Ernst Tacoma Rail RAIL TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES ughn II -usl^ A - ettaUbUrn�,` MB{olu � l�(tebetuo<ePFk (a�1 ♦ UUP t l Inky PIN ti. d R W �E I lteBaocom • W. a • lin Steffe P41k d f ISI yuapy Piero 0 powsin Tool Ste-Fort ♦ � d(l�na •Ohop _ SWLe t • aninc onvitle fl Buooda ` Ids i Bhtfalla ral _., . NOW hehaGs caon n na ski Lews` for information and rate quotes r he] ■= on Glenoma ca11 253-9 Ta(,Orm •Bois,foR - 1 ^� it ck ±a And CLuI<St .P,& .. • V i Notes Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup November 16, 2005 In Attendance Graeme Sackrison, Intercity Transit Laura Purcell, Bucoda Virgil Clarkson, Lacey Lloyd Flem, WashARP Frank Hensley, Citizen Advisor Loren Herri stad, WashARP T.J. Johnson, Olympia Kirk Fredrickson, WSDOT Ken Jones, Tenino Paul Telford, Port of Olympia Pete Kmet, Tumwater Lon Wyrick, TRPC Jim Longley,Nisqually Tribe Jailyn Brown, TRPC Bob Macleod, Thurston County Karen Parkhurst, TRPC Don Miller, Yelm Dennis Bloom, Intercity Transit John O'Callahan, Tenino Introductions Participants introduced themselves. Tacoma Rail will also be sending a representative to future meetings. Packet Review Additional reference materials, articles and documents were distributed. The North Sound Regional Rail Study was referenced as an example of follow up analysis that could be done if the Regional Council were encouraged to pursue any commuter rail scenarios. WSDOT rail projects in and surrounding the region were reviewed and discussed. Rail System Overview A route overview table was distributed as part of the informational packet. This included information on the various rail segments in the planning basin,junctions joining those segments, and rail-to-trail conversions in Thurston County. Owners, operators, operator classification, speed and typical traffic were also discussed. The Frederickson Junction has been renamed Ray Allred Junction, in honor of a rail colleague who recently passed away. CADocuments and Settings\shelly.YELM\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LKI7FA\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 1 Rail Travel Today Amtrak Amtrak service at Centennial Station includes four northbound and four southbound stops daily. Three of these stops in each direction are provided by the Cascades route between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, B.C. The fourth stop comes from the daily Coast Starlight service between Los Angeles and Seattle. The Coast Starlight is usually behind schedule by several hours due to rail traffic in California and Portland. Expected in July, 2006 another mid-afternoon round trip of the Cascades will serve Eugene to Bellingham. At build-out, 26 Cascades trains per day will call on Centennial Station— 13 northbound and 13 southbound. As the rail corridor improvements are made,travel time from Olympia to Seattle will be about 1 hour and 1.5 hours to Portland. While time of service at Centennial Station is an artifact of Eugene and Seattle departure times, the increased service will provide earlier morning service than the current 10:40 a.m. scheduled northbound departure. The workgroup discussed Cascades funding issues in Oregon and rail improvements needed for the Columbia River crossing. Intercity Transit, Pierce Transit and Sound Transit Sound Transit's Sounder commuter train service from the Tacoma Dome leaves four times weekdays between 5:45 a.m. and 7:10 a.m., with returns between 5:20 p.m. and 6:40 p.m. Sound Transit also provides commuter bus service between Tacoma and Seattle with peak period headways of 10-20 minutes. The Tacoma Link light rail service generally runs every 10 minutes between 5:20 a.m. and 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. Intercity Transit, in coordination with Pierce Transit,provides a.m. and p.m. peak period express bus service between and Olympia and Tacoma, generally with 15 to 30 minute headways. The two transit agencies have an agreement to operate in each other's service district. Together they provide 25 trips in each direction. Pierce Transit also has a route serving Gig Harbor, Tacoma and Olympia. The primary markets include state employees and travelers to downtown Tacoma. Most of Intercity Transit's customers disembark at Lakewood and transfer to local bus service. While DuPont has a Sound Transit park-n- ride station,most of Intercity Transit's DuPont customers travel by vanpool (currently 14 vanpools between Thurston County and DuPont). Demand for a bus stop at DuPont is currently low among Intercity Transit passengers, but they do expect connections, especially if there is future rail service there. Sound Transit, a regional transit authority, is a special tax district separate from the local public transit agencies in Pierce, King and Snohomish Counties. Sound Transit has three operating divisions: ST Express regional bus service, Sounder commuter rail service, and Link light rail. Sound Transit also operates multimodal hubs and park-n-rides. Their Tacoma Dome Station(at Freight House Square in Tacoma) serves ST Express, Pierce CADocuments and Settings\shelly.YELM\Local Settings\TemporaryIntemet Files\OLKI7FA\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 2 s Transit, Intercity Transit and Sounder commuter rail. Link light rail in Tacoma also serves the Tacoma Dome Station. In phase 1 of development, Sound Transit established high frequency regional bus service to downtown Tacoma,medium frequency service to the Lakewood park-n-ride, and less frequent service to the DuPont park-n-ride. Sounder service is also being expanded to South Tacoma and Lakewood. The Lakewood Station design includes a three-story park- n-ride and transit center. The area is also served by the existing SR 512 park-n-ride lot— usually full to overflowing. Sound Transit's phase 2,pending voter approval, proposes increased express bus service between Tacoma and Seattle serving destinations like the Airport and the UW campuses. Development of a commuter rail service from DuPont is also proposed, with a doubling of the park-n-ride capacity there. Primer Review The primer was briefly introduced to the workgroup and members were asked to read it over before the next meeting. The relationship between geography and type of service was stressed. The three types of geography—local,regional and intercity—essentially correspond to: • Local transit(frequent and relatively close stops of local bus service, light rail, metro, and bus rapid transit within a metropolitan area) • Commuter transit(express bus, commuter rail, some bus rapid transit with longer distances between stops and usually many stops along the route but only one or two stops in a central city), and • Intercity transit(intercity bus and rail with great distances between stops and usually one stop in each city served). A table summarizes the attributes of each service. Typical land use density was also reviewed. Communities can wait for needed densities to develop before providing service or may invest earlier to encourage specific types of land use. Because of the permanence associated with train depots and fixed rail transit, developers and financiers are often more willing to invest in relatively dense mixed uses surrounding train depots. The workgroup discussed increased northbound commuting out of Thurston County. Local conventional wisdom held that this occurred because there weren't enough jobs in our community. Realtors and developers participating in the Vision/Reality analysis said that commuters chose to live in Thurston County for more affordable housing with a rural character, yet maintain their jobs in Pierce and King Counties. The upshot is that Thurston County is becoming a bedroom community to central Puget Sound. CADocuments and Settings\shelly.YELM\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet Fi1es\OLKI7FA\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 3 Next Meeting The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, December 21, 2005, 7:00 to 8:30 a.m. at the TRPC offices. CADocuments and Settings\sheIIy.YELM\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet Files\OLKI7FA\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 4 4 m .'aCw"'Tc.��-e� rw ?'e uw•o ���,F n".";� " ?a vtv�rr,�C�.a)>,�.�v�.�r�.�;�� \\ a,a• �C � a '�c n 21, \ \vim \y �. uawa'Powa�x r � cvwa ''� ��+\�v �'.'a \�z �,�aa� \��'•� � � �\,`' �,� AGENDA ITEM #4 � W � Na41� k�pu3t � �^crs--a-. A . .w`�?� :�.��\jm�` \•M \,� � •� q, Rr x�: m'�.,\. .x�� 'trS.. $:��o\h�.a a\�?a"; �ta�1\Y:,-•�v.e:.�:a1.... ,kx<�\\,�.'� :�v. a \��;. \ Thurston Pe81ondl PldnnIH8 Council MEMBERS: City of Lacey MEMORANDUM City of Olympia City of Rainier City of Tenino TO: Transportation Policy Board City of Tumwater City of Yelm FROM: Jailyn Brown, Associate Planner Town of Bucoda Thurston County DATE: July 6, 2005 Intercity Transit LOTTAIIiance SUBJECT: Passenger Rail Workgroup Thurston County PUD No.1 Griffin School District North Thurston Public Schools PURPOSE Olympia School District Confederated Tribes of the Describe the general scope of work for the Passenger Rail Workgroup and assess Chehalis Reservation interest in participation. Nisqually Indian Tribe Summary: • The 2025 Regional Transportation Plan listed passenger rail as a topic to assess Associate Members: in more depth as part of the future work program. Puget Sound Regional Council A Regional Rail Plan is under development. Its scope includes passenger rail.Thurston Conservation District Timberland Regional Library • A workgroup of TPB and Regional Council members is being formed to scope Charter Member Emeritus: the passenger rail issues and bring forward an assortment of viable options for The Evergreen State College TPB and the Council to consider in more depth. o The workgroup is anticipated to meet monthly for about a year to conduct its analysis and develop findings. • TRPC's Chair has appointed Graeme Sackrison to lead this policy maker effort. Lon D.Wyrick Executive Director BACKGROUND In 2004, the Regional Council adopted the 2025 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). In the recommendations, the RTP identified several work program priorities for future analysis. This list included a look at passenger rail and public transportation. The task from the RTP is to examine the role passenger rail will play in the region's future transportation system and develop a preferred rail strategy. 2404 Heritage Court SW#B Olympia,WA 98502-6031 (360)786-5480 FAX(360)7544413 www.trpc.org Providing Visionary Leadership on Regional Plans, Policies and Issues MEMORANDUM r Page 2 July 6, 2005 The Council has also undertaken the development of a Regional Rail Plan to provide a comprehensive overview and foundation of rail related issues, opportunities, vision, and action items. The scope of that effort is broad, encompassing history, existing conditions, right-of-way preservation, passenger rail, freight rail, safety and efficiency issues, finance and regulation. Background research on several of these topics is underway. Recent planning efforts are supported by issue specific work the Council conducted previously, including development of a railroad right-of-way preservation strategy (and the urban trails plan, which together helped preserve threatened rail corridors for public use) and exploration of the FAR (Freight Access by Rail) corridor concepts for commuter and freight rail. A Passenger Rail Workgroup of policy makers from the Regional Council and TPB is being formed to scope the needs of and options available to the community, bringing forward an assortment of feasible opportunities for more in-depth consideration by TPB and the Council. The workgroup is anticipated to meet monthly for about a year to conduct its analysis and develop findings. ISSUES Our community has a number of rail corridors, some very busy, others little used and several converted to other uses. A wide variety of stakeholders possess diverse views on how these corridors should be used. As a result, a variety of ideas and proposals have emerged over the years. It will be important to develop a fundamental understanding of how the complex rail system operates and which rail transit options are appropriate to apply to different opportunities. This understanding will play into the range of choices brought back to TPB and the Regional Council as well as explaining the options to the stakeholders and the public. The workgroup will need to address a wide variety of rail transit needs and opportunities, such as intercity service, commuter travel, local mobility and tourism. Some discussion of transit alternatives (e.g. buses and personal rapid transit) and adjuncts (e.g. park-n- rides and transit oriented development) will undoubtedly also arise. The workgroup will be challenged to acknowledge and perhaps even list related issues TPB and the Council may need to address, but to keep focused on the rail transit issues. REQUESTED ACTION No action from TPB is requested at this meeting. TRPC's Chair has appointed Graeme Sackrison to lead this policy maker effort. Mr. Sackrison represents Intercity Transit on our TPB and represents TRPC to the Puget Sound Regional Council's TPB. If TPB members are interested in participating in the Passenger Rail Workgroup they should contact Mr. Sackrison. 75:sm Message Page 1 of 1 Shelly Badger From: Shelly Badger Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 8:30 AM To: 'Jailyn Brown' Subject: RE: Two more rail items I will touch bases with Mayor Rivas upon my return from vacation (July 11th) and let you know. I agree, it would be nice to have Yelm represented. No word from Nortrak. I am going to try to touch bases with them before I go. If any news, I will share. Thanks! Shelly Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator shellyb(5-ci.yelm.wa.us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 -----Original Message----- From: Jailyn Brown [mailto:brownj@trpc.org] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 1:43 PM To: Shelly Badger Subject: Two more rail items Shelly -- TRPC is forming a passenger rail workgroup of policymakers to scope the regional opportunities and return a list of viable options to the Council for further consideration. The Chair has asked Graeme Sackrison to head this up, but no answer yet (we think he may be out of town). An item is on the Council agenda for July 8. No action, but a call for members to let Graeme know if they're interested. This will be a once a month meeting (probably 7 a.m. -- ugh) for about a year. TPB will get a similar heads up at their July meeting. Probably have official appointments in August. It would be great to have Yelm represented if there's interest. I was wondering if there's any word about Nortrak? Thanks -- Jailyn Jailyn Brown, Associate Planner Thurston Regional Planning Council 2404 Heritage Court SW #B Olympia, WA 98502 (360) 786-5480 brownj@trpc.org This email and any attachments are for the use of the addressed individual. If you have received this email in error,please notify our systems manager. TRPC has taken responsible precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email,however we do not accept responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. 6/28/2005 Message Page 1 of 2 Shelly Badger From: Shelly Badger Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 3:23 PM To: 'Jailyn Brown' Subject: RE: Passenger Rail Workgroup See my responses below in green. Have a great weekend. Shelly Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator she lyb dici-yelm.wa.us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 -----Original Message----- From: Jailyn Brown [mailto:brownj@trpc.org] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 4:01 PM To: Shelly Badger Subject: RE: Passenger Rail Workgroup Shelly -- I haven't actually spoken with Councilman Miller, but Graeme has. And I've been in follow up email contact with him. I sent the workgroup a year's worth of meeting dates. I'll attach that form FYI. Regional Council is making the formal appointment of TRPC and TPB members to the passenger rail workgroup tomorrow. I listed Don as a workgroup member acting as a TRPC alternate. I'll try to send the staff report with this email too. Very good. How about I add you to the email list for the for the workgroup? I'm doing the same thing for Lester Olson who's tracking the participation of County Commissioner Macleod. Yes, please do. I think it would be very useful for you to follow up with Don about representing Yelm. Bob Isom approached him initially, and then he spoke with Graeme, but I don't really know what Don's been told. This workgroup will be a great opportunity to spotlight Yelm, the unique rail opportunities there, and development in your area generally. I agree, great opportunity for Yelm. I will connect with Don and talk with him a bit more about the importance of it. You're welcome to join us too (the bad news -- meetings are the third Wednesday of the month from 7-8:30 a.m. beginning in October). I'm sure either Graeme and/or I would be happy to come out to Yelm too, if folks need a briefing. I'd like a chance to meet Don before our October meeting, so I'll probably be out your way some time next month, if I can schedule an appointment with the Councilman. Perhaps we could all get together, if that would be useful. Not sure if I will be able to add another committee at this point, but may attend from time to time based on the agenda, so receiving the e-mails for the workgroup will be an excellent way for me to gauge my time. I think it would be great if you and I met with Don prior to the first meeting. Go ahead and schedule thru me. Thanks so much! Shelly The process is open and flexible. Let me know what works for you and we'll get it done. Thanks -- Jailyn Jailyn Brown, Associate Planner Thurston Regional Planning Council 8/5/2005 Message Page 2 of 2 2404 Heritage Court SW #B Olympia, WA 98502 (360) 786-5480 brownj@trpc.org This email and any attachments are for the use of the addressed individual. If you have received this email in error,please notify our systems manager. TRPC has taken responsible precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email,however we do not accept responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. -----Original Message----- From: Shelly Badger [mailto:shellyb@ci.yelm.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 2:55 PM To: Jailyn Brown Subject: FW: Passenger Rail Workgroup Jailyn, I see in the July 13th TPB minutes that Councilman Don Miller had called Graeme about the Passenger Rail Workgroup. Do I need to follow up with him about representing Yelm on this committee? I have not spoken with him about it, so wanted to check with you first about timing and status. Thanks, Shelly Shelly Badger Yelm City Administrator shell b ci.yeInrl us P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 360-458-8405 -----Original Message----- From: Jailyn Brown [mailto:brownj@trpc.org] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 1:43 PM To: Shelly Badger Subject: Two more rail items Shelly -- TRPC is forming a passenger rail workgroup of policymakers to scope the regional opportunities and return a list of viable options to the Council for further consideration. The Chair has asked Graeme Sackrison to head this up, but no answer yet (we think he may be out of town). An item is on the Council agenda for July 8. No action, but a call for members to let Graeme know if they're interested. This will be a once a month meeting (probably 7 a.m. -- ugh) for about a year. TPB will get a similar heads up at their July meeting. Probably have official appointments in August. It would be great to have Yelm represented if there's interest. I was wondering if there's any word about Nortrak? Thanks -- Jailyn Jailyn Brown, Associate Planner Thurston Regional Planning Council 2404 Heritage Court SW #B Olympia, WA 98502 (360) 786-5480 brown]@trpc.org This email and any attachments are for the use of the addressed individual. If you have received this email in error,please notify our systems manager. TRPC has taken responsible precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email,however we do not accept responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. 8/5/2005 C M-0 AGENDA ITEM #8 Thurston1 1 dnnin8 Council MEMBERS: City of Lacey City of Olympia City of Rainier MEMORANDUM City of Tenino City of Tumwater City of Yelm TO: Thurston Regional Planning Council Town of Bucoda Thurston County FROM: Jailyn Brown, Associate Planner Intercity Transit DATE: July 29, 2005 LOTTAIliance Thurston County PUD No.1 Griffin School District SUBJECT: Passenger Rail Workgroup Appointment North Thurston Public Schools Olympia School District PURPOSE Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation Nisqually Indian Tribe Appoint a Passenger Rail Workgroup. Summary: Associate Members: • A workgroup of Regional Council and Transportation Policy Board Puget Sound Regional Council (TPB)members is being formed to scope the passenger rail issues and Thurston Conservation District bring forward an assortment of viable options for the Council to consider Timberland Regional Library g fd p in more depth. Charter Member Emeritus: • This effort is consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan RTP and The Evergreen State College g1 p (RTP) the Unified Planning Work Program(UPWP)established by the Council. • The workgroup is anticipated to meet monthly for about a year, beginning October 19, 2005. • The Chair appointed Graeme Sackrison to lead this policy maker effort. Lon D.Wyrick Additionally, 11 policy makers from TRPC and TPB have volunteered to Executive Director participate. BACKGROUND In July, the Regional Council discussed developing a workgroup of TRPC and TPB, members to scope the passenger rail needs of and options available to the 2404 Heritage Court SW#B community, bringing forward an assortment of feasible rail travel opportunities Olympia,WA 98502-6031 for more in-depth consideration by the Council. The workgroup's analysis will (360)786-5480 support the work program laid out by the Regional Council in the 2025 Regional FAX(360)754-4413 Transportation Plan (RTIP) and the 2006 SFY Unified Planning Work Program www.trpc.org (UpWp), Providing Visionary Leadership on Regional Plans, Policies and Issues MEMORANDUM Page 2 July 29,2005 A wide variety of rail transit needs and opportunities will be addressed, such as intercity service, commuter travel, local mobility and tourism, exploring diverse views of various stakeholders on the best use of the region's rail corridors. The workgroup will develop an understanding of how the complex rail system operates and which rail transit options are appropriate to apply to different opportunities, guiding the range of choices brought back to the Regional Council for consideration. Some discussion of transit alternatives and supportive infrastructure is also expected. The aim is to provide decision makers with the information needed to eventually craft a vision for high capacity transportation. The findings of this investigation will build a foundation for wider public discussion and decision making — conducting a rational and reasonable analysis, driven by facts and data. The workgroup's efforts will focus the discussion on more likely options available to the region. TRPC and TPB will receive regular reports as their analysis unfolds. Organizations that can support the workgroup's inquiries are being invited to present and participate in the discussion. Many other organizations and individuals are interested in monitoring TRPC's rail-related activities, including those of the workgroup, so a periodic newssheet and web resources will be developed to keep them informed. The workgroup will meet on the third Wednesday of the month, 7:00 to 8:30 a.m., beginning October 19, 2005, in the Regional Council board room. The effort is anticipated to take about a year to complete. An article from The Olympian regarding development of this workgroup is attached. REOUESTED ACTION: Appoint a Passenger Rail Workgroup,including the following TRPC and TPB members: Graeme Sackrison,TPB,Intercity Transit,Workgroup Chair Bob Macleod,TPB,Thurston County Don Miller,TRPC Alternate, City of Yelm Doug Mah,TPB Chair Frank Hensley,TPB, Citizen Advisor Jim Longley,TRPC/TPB,Nisqually Indian Tribe John O'Callahan,TPB, City of Tenino Ken Jones,TRPC Chair Laura Purcell, TRPC,Town of Bucoda Pete Kmet,TPB, City of Tumwater T.J. Johnson,TRPC,City of Olympia Virgil Clarkson,TRPC, City of Lacey 75:Ib Attachment Monday, July 18, 2005 • THE OLYMPIAN RAIL Thurston County commuting What's next? PanelContinued from Page One destinations A regional group of elected officials is "One of the difficulties is that all the ex- 2005 2015 2025 forming to study the possibility of passen- er rail.Members would meet month) amples we use—Metro in Washington,D.C., O =" s€v'. i starting in September for as long as a year. e ore BART in the Bay area and Sound Transit— Lewis 2,900 3,100 W 3,300 S we're talking about really large metropolitan . s The group will took at the history of passen- areas with large populations and employment n d.rRoo ��. �' ger rail and the different types of rail sys centers,"Sackrison said."Here,we're talking Pierce` 15,000} o- 22,700 -30,000 terns then compile a list of existing rail track about two to three modest-size cities:' tea, rz � �» h in this area.It will look at the need and de • The notion appeals to some residents,while ' � � mand for rail,and see if it's feasible to build iona others say it's a waste of money. Kitsap 300 500 600 a system here. Those who favor it say it would reduce con- 3� �; a. Details such as how much it would cost, (`r/ gestion on Interstate 5,making it easier to getM to work a ballgame or other activities on time. Other 1,400 1,800 2,000 how frequently trains would run and how much tares would are not in this initial Olympia resident Mark Messinger regu- Total 30,100 43,700 55,700 0 larly passes on employment contracts that phase.Opportunitieess for public participation rai 1 e a Would require a daily commute into downtown will follow if officials agree to move forward Seattle.He welcomes the idea of passenger rail Source:Thurston Regional Planning Council with the idea. and would use it to get to work,Sea-Tac Air- port and nearby cities. *Does not include military personnel for planner for the region.The number of BY KATHERINE TAM "Do I think there is a need?Defmitely.Would commuting to Pierce County,which is projected commuters is expected to increase 5 percent THE OLYMPIAN I ride it?Yes,"he said to a question posed to The at 2,400 commuters from 2005 to 2025 per year, reaching 55,700 people in two Olympian's Reader Network."I would be able decades. A regional group of elected officials is to seek employment contracts with clients in Messinger and others who favor the idea Aside from driving,there are few options for forming to explore a crucial question for Tacoma and Seattle.I would certainly prefer to weren't optimistic about how such a project reaching Tacoma and Seattle now.Four Am- South Sound commuters:Could a pas- make my travel time productive than to just would get funded. trak trains run north and another four run senger rail system that would carry res- grip the steering wheel as rush hour traffic And the cost,fares and frequency are a lev- south daily through Centennial Station on idents around the county or from the creeps along at an average speed of 35 mph:' el of detail that won't be part of the regional Yelm Highway. About 42,300 passengers Olympia area to Tacoma and Seattle have Others said money would be better spent group's discussion now,Sackrison said.It will boarded trains there in 2004,said Sarah Swain, a future here? fixing roads and boosting ridership on Inter- come after officials determine the demand spokeswoman. The group is scheduled to begin in- city Transit's buses,which are often empty. and feasibility. Some residents say the station isn't cen- vestigating the issue in September. The South Sound does not need a rail tran- Officials will look at passenger rail within ttally located,and the schedule isn't conducive Thurston County's population is ex- sit system nor can taxpayers afford to fund the county and service that would head north to commuting for work.The fust train leaves pected to rise 50 percent by 2025,and pas- such a costly venture,"said Gregg Reynolds of to Pierce and King counties—where most at 10:30 am. senger trains already are operating in Taco- Johnson Point."Most such systems around the commuters go and where riders could connect Another option is Intercity Transit's ex- ma,so some elected leaders say it's time to nation were built way above promised budget to existing trains run by Sound Transit.Those press routes to Tacoma,where riders connect study the potential for passenger rail. costs and are underutilized on a daily basis. trains go as far north as Everett. , to metro buses or the passenger rail that serves The public has raised the idea beforle,but "One strong reason for under-usage is that Officials point to the county's growing pop- Pierce and King counties known as The this will be the first time a group will study rail stations are too far from most people's ulation as one rgason passenger rail is worth Sounder,said Meg Kester,IT spokeswoman. the issue in detail,said Graeme Sackrison, homes and work or shopping destinations,"he exploring.Abov;224,000 people call Thurston IT s express routes had a combined 365 board- a Lacey city councilman who will lead the added."The tyranny of a rail service schedule County home; the number is expected to ings a day in May. group.Key issuessuch demand and in dictates when one can travel,frequently in- climb to 348,000'peciple by 2025. The Sounder train that travels from Tacoma frastructure must be explored,he said. terfering with a person's flexibility to panic- "It's pretty obvious we're looking at mass to Seattle six times per weekday gets about ipate in other activities." transit at a much larger scale,"said TJ Johnson, 3,900 riders daily.It will increase to 18 trains a To succed,trains must run fairly regularly, an Olympia councilman who will sit on the rail day by 2007,said spokesman Geoff'Patrick. have reasonable fares, and stop at a place study group."It's a good time to ask the ques, that's easy to get to,unlike Amtrak's Centen- tion of what role Could passenger rail play." Katherine Tam covers the city of Olympia for nial Station on Yelm'Highway south of Lacey, Already 30,100 residents drive to other The Olympian.She can be reached at 360- people on both sides agreed, counties for work,said Pete Swensson,a sen- 704-6869 or kathetam@olympia.gannett.com. READER RESPONSES ON RAIL PROPOSAL Members of The Olympian's Reader Network shared their thoughts on the potential for passenger rail locally.Here is a sample of the responses: "I would even go out of my way to rearrange my schedule to fit the rail schedule....From social equalizing to gas saving, rail systems connect the cul- tures of various areas,and cross all class boundaries." —Jim Shulruff,Olympia "Mass transit is,by any meas- ure,the only way to deal with the future.But the future has not yet come to Thurston County....Be- hemoth buses drive our streets all but empty of passengers.Let's talk about a local light rail when the bus lines are strained to han- dle its passengers." —Robert Narby,Olympia "That is a misconception when you say you would leave your car at home.You would ac- tually leave it in a parking lot somewhere away from home where vandalism is rampant." Fred,Gustafson,Shelton "This begs the question of cost,of course,which has to be carefully studied.Also requiring much study would be passenger connections to destinations along and at both ends of any route.Doesn't make any sense to get from A to B if you can't get around once you're there. Assuming these kinds of difficul- ties could be overcome,a rail system would offer a great deal to relieve highway congestion and make travel in the region more enjoyable and convenient." —Dick Nichols,Tumwater "We already have too many large empty IT buses congesting our local roadways.Why add trains to the problem?Rail makes more sense for a regional connection to Tacoma and Seat- tle.But local service in Olympia ought to be put on the same dusty shelf where the Seattle monorail is headed." —Stenhen Daniels-Brown. Passenger Rail Workgroup Schedule �J Third Wednesday of the Month 7 to 8:30 a.m. Regional Council Board Room October 19, 2005 November 16, 2005 December 21 , 2005 January 18, 2006 February 15, 2006 March 15, 2006 April 19, 2006 May 17, 2006 June 21 , 2006 July 19, 2006 August 16, 2006 September 20, 2006 Shelly Badger AGENDA Yelm Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup Wednesday,January 18, 2006 * 7-8:30 a.m. 2424 Heritage Court SW, Room A (I" Floor) Olympia, WA 98502 (360) 956-7575 1. 7:00—7:10 Packet Review Jailyn Brown 2. 7:10—7:45 Past& Present Plans Review Jailyn Brown 3. 7:45 — 8:30 Tacoma Rail Ron Ernst Presentation and Discussion Next Meeting Wednesday, February 15, 2006 Notes Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup December 21, 2005 In Attendance Graeme Sackrison, Intercity Transit Lloyd Flem, WashARP Virgil Clarkson, Lacey Marty Minkoff, Sound Transit Frank Hensley, Citizen Advisor Ron Ernst, Tacoma Rail Ken Jones, Tenino Paul Telford, Port of Olympia Jim Longley,Nisqually Tribe George Barner, Community Representative Doug Mah, Olympia Jailyn Brown, TRPC Don Miller, Yelm Karen Parkhurst, TRPC John O'Callahan, Tenino Dennis Bloom, Intercity Transit Laura Purcell, Bucoda Introductions Ron Ernst, Tacoma Rail and George Barner, community representative were introduced. Packet Review Articles and meeting notes were distributed. The Olympian article on commuting and the findings of the Vision/Reality Task Force were discussed. Rail Experiences Members were invited to share their experiences of passenger rail systems. A wide variety of light and commuter rail systems were discussed—Dallas, Minneapolis, Houston, , Salt Lake City, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Vancouver, B.C., Portland, Tacoma, New York City, Kyoto, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Amsterdam, Shanghai, and Germany. The quality of service and type of development around stations were highlighted. Various types of ticket management options (sales, collection and enforcement) were noted. A regional Puget Pass allows customers from Snohomish to Thurston Counties to use a single pass for various transit systems. The next step underway is development of a smart card with an eye toward adding other types of complementary services in the future. Sound Transit is using a barrier-free fare collection system. Approximately 1/3 of the trains are checked for fare evasion every day. The evasion rate is estimated at less than 0.5%. Cleanliness, safety and on-time delivery of service were significant aspects of the systems discussed. In the U.S. timeliness can be a challenge because commuter rail lines typically share right-of-way on freight rail lines. For light rail sharing right-of-way with streets, train-car conflicts caused accidents in some communities. Train monitoring and CADocurnents and Settings%rownj\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK136\Notes PRW 12-21-2005.doc 1 traveler information systems are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Some train services were praised and others panned for their ease of use and reliability. Some train stations,particularly in dense urban settings, provided a wide range of amenities and encouraged community and economic development. This was noted for light rail and for major commuter rail stops. Tacoma is a local example, with the museums, hotels, UW campus and other amenities located close to the light rail line and within easy transfer to Sound Transit and Amtrak. The interaction of modes—train, bus and boat—was also emphasized. Sound Transit Commuter Rail [PowerPoint slides from the presentation will be distributed with the January packet of materials.] History The beginnings of Sound Transit's commuter rail are rooted in a 1987 feasibility study conducted by Metro. In 1993, the Regional Transit Authority(RTA) was established in King, Snohomish and Pierce Counties. At a second ballot in 1996 voters approved the Sound Move package of projects. Work began on establishing the commuter rail service. By June 1998, Sounder commuter rail received a finding of no significant environmental impact for the service between Seattle and Tacoma. The track improvement agreement with BNSF was reached in principle for the Seattle-Tacoma segment in April 1999, but not finalized until May 2000. Regular service began in September 2000. By July 2002, Sounder carried its one-millionth passenger and in September added a third round trip between Tacoma and Seattle. To the north, in February 2000, the Sounder record of decision for Everett was received. The agreement with BNSF to extend service to Everett and buy the Lakewood subdivision wasn't reached until December 2003, the same month of Sounder's Seattle— Everett inaugural round trip. The RailPlus program began in October 2004, expanding service for Everett passengers through a flexible ridership program with the Amtrak Cascades. In June 2005, a second Sounder North round trip was added. By the end of 2005, Sounder carried 4 million riders since beginning service in 2000, with 1.25 million of those boardings in 2005. Ridership has steadily increased, with a perceptible spike in ridership coinciding with rising gas prices. Today, daily ridership exceeds 5,000 on the south route (4 round trips now, ultimately 9) and 600 on the north route (2 round trips now, ultimately 4). CADocuments and Settings\brownj\Local Settingffemporary Internet Fi1es\0LKB6\Notes PRW 12-21-2005.doc 2 Agreements Sound Transit has agreements with BNSF and Amtrak to construct, operate and maintain the service and related amenities. For operations, BNSF provides the train crews and controls train movement through centralized dispatching from Ft. Worth, Texas. Sound Transit establishes the train schedules, handles customer information and fare collection, manages the stations,park-n-rides and transit centers, and provides security. For maintenance,Amtrak provides preventative maintenance, layover service, storage,parts management and fueling. Sound Transit coordinates overnight storage, wayside power and vehicle signage. In construction, BNSF builds the track, signal and grade crossing improvements (these improvements have benefited both freight and passenger rail movement and safety). Sound Transit is responsible for obtaining permits and building stations,park-n-rides and transit centers. Sound Transit has 3 different agreement structures with BNSF. The Seattle to Tacoma agreement($350 million)associates specific construction improvements with service increases and access for 40 years. The first phase of construction, designed to establish 4 round trips, is completed. The second phase in underway, with approximately 40% of the work done. It will allow 9 round trips. The third phase is planned but not funded and would allow 15 round trips. The Seattle to Everett agreement($258 million) includes 4 perpetual easements, one easement for each round trip. BNSF retains all other rights and right-of-way. Each easement has a specific set of improvements that share risk between the parties—Sound Transit must obtain the permits and BNSF performs the construction. As Sound Transit certifies the permits for each easement it starts a clock for completing improvements. Because the line runs along Puget Sound, the environmental issues are substantial. This is a high volume freight corridor with limited capacity. The third agreement—from Tacoma to Lakewood($32 million)—is different from the others in that Sound Transit purchased the Point Defiance By-Pass/Lakewood Subdivision right-of-way and commuter rail rights. BNSF retained a perpetual freight easement(which it has subcontracted to Tacoma Rail). BNSF will also coordinate service with Amtrak and continue to control train movements through its centralized dispatching in Ft. Worth. Challenges Past challenges included the impact of I-695;permitting projects in multiple jurisdictions and resolving conflicts in regional and local goals; completing station construction; and building ridership on the Everett to Seattle route with only one round trip. Current challenges include: • On-time performance. Performance is good on the Tacoma-Seattle route, and getting better with construction improvements. This Sounder route runs 95%on-time. The CADocuments and Settings\brownj\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LKB6\Notes PRW 12-21-2005.doc 3 BNSF dispatcher has new capacity to shift freight and passenger trains around each other. Performance on the Everett-Seattle route is more challenging. BNSF is experiencing unprecedented freight volumes on this line causing frequent schedule conflicts. Sound Transit's agreement with BNSF requires dispatch to prioritize Sounder trains. The parties are working to clarify the definition of priority. Some months on-time performance dropped to 90% with delays of 20 minutes or more. This discourages discretionary riders. Sound Transit is working on options. • Park-n-ride capacity. Sound Transit is a victim of its own success. Sumner, Puyallup and Tacoma Dome are experiencing 90% occupancy. It's really a station access issue and policy issue—is it the best public policy to provide 1 space per rider? • Ticket vending. Sounder has a barrier free system with complex equipment. • Regional fare collection. The Puget Pass is an example. More is needed. A regional smart card would be useful and is under development. Lessons Learned Everything costs more and takes longer than anticipated. Clearly identify risks at the onset and how to manage them. For example, figure on the impact of increasing costs in creating a funding plan. The railroad insists on this. The public sector's ability to pay is not what motivates the railroads. Ultimately, the key lever is political support. For example, Senator Murray played a crucial role as an impartial third party that could help both sides be reasonable. Parking/Access is fundamentally important and there's no one right answer. Kiss-n- ride,park-n-ride,bus service...it's all expensive. Analogous to ferry service, consider the expense of close in parking versus shuttle service to parking located further away. A Thurston/Olympia Connection? A variety of issues must be considered: • Annexation requirements. If the region, or part of it, became part of the RTA, it must be contiguous, the local jurisdictions must endorse it, voters must approve a new tax, and the Sound Transit agreement would need to be updated. That agreement calls for sub-area equity. That is, revenues generated in a sub area may only be spent in that area. How robust would the region's tax base be? How much would it cost to extend the service and what would be the cost sharing arrangement? What additional facilities (such as layover facilities) would be needed? If service came to DuPont (a possibility in the developing Sound Transit 2 package), would the Thurston region still need to annex and have another stop here? • Interlocal agreements. Both parties must want the agreement. Sound Transit's policy is not to increase their risk nor decrease service. Some policy issues to address include defining direct and indirect cost recovery; latecomer allocation, and CADocuments and Settings%rownj\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\OLKB6\Notes PRW 12-21-2005.doc 4 indemnification. Operational challenges would include maintaining on-time performance, train and track capacity, and layover facilities. • Other considerations if the region provided its own extension service with a connection to Sound Transit. The region would need to negotiate access rights with BNSF and Amtrak (Centennial Station). BNSF may require capacity improvements. An access agreement with Sound Transit for the Lakeview Subdivision would also be needed. Track and station compatibility must be considered. What are the alternative options (bus, light rail...)? In the North Sound supporters are exploring a Bellingham to Everett commuter rail service. The stakeholders have similar interests. To begin, it is important to understand current and future travel demand patterns and volumes. Is ridership potential sufficient to warrant the investment? How do alternative investments (like improving 1-5) stack up? The analysis needs to show a strong revenue stream and strong ridership base. How will the region grow? What's the best conveyance to serve that growth? Strong federal and state support is needed even to get the railroad to the negotiating table, and then to reach an agreement. Olympia has an advantage being the state capital because legislators are interested in riding the train to here. Discussion Potential options for light rail, HOV and other options along 1-5 were discussed, as was a potential express bus connection to DuPont or Lakewood. Now is a good time to contact the Sound Transit chair with a letter of support for the DuPont Sounder proposal in the Sound Transit 2 package development. Annexation and sub-equity were discussed,with their relationship to public transit benefit areas. The relationship between Sound Transit and Tacoma Rail was explained. Opportunities for transit oriented development, such as is taking place at and around King Street Station, were touched upon. The importance of educating future generations about transportation choices, including rail, was stressed. Next Meeting The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 15, 2006, 7:00 to 8:30 a.m. at the TRPC offices. CADocuments and Settings%rownj\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LKB6\Notes PRW 12-21-2005.doc 5 Meetings l/18/06 Sound Transit Commuter Rail Story PowerPoint Presentation by Marty, Minkoff on 12/21/05 l WIEL E So nd Transit Commuter Rail Story 1 Table of Contents • What has been Sound Transit's experience specific to Sounder commuter rail? — History and Chronology — Ridership — Today's Service — Agreements and Costs — Challenges — Lessons Learned • How might Thurston County connect with Sounder? — Annexation — Interlocal agreements- Contracts — Thurston Extension w/connections to DuPont or Lakewood — Relevance of North Sound Activities — Food for Thought • Conclusion A Brief History and Chronology • August 1987 — King County Metro study deems commuter rail feasible for serving south King County. • September 1993 — Three county Regional Transit Authority (RTA) launched. • October 1994 — RTA adopts Regional Transit Master Plan Phase One transit ballot proposal. • March 1995 — Voters reject Phase One proposal. • May 1996 — RTA Board adopts Sound Move, the Ten- Year Regional Transit Plan. 2 1 1 1 • November 1996 — Region's voters approve Sound Move proposal by 56.5 — 43.5 %. .� • June 1998 — Sounder commuter rail receives "FONSI" for Tacoma Seattle service. • April 1999 — Agreement ._. reached for track improvements between > Tacoma and Seattle. Q ID • August 1999 — First groundbreaking ceremonies (Auburn and Seattle's King Street Stations). • November 1999 — First Sounder locomotives arrive. 3 ' i I • February 2000 — Sounder Record of Decision for Everett. • May 2000 — Historic Sounder construction and service ` agreement reached with BNSF. r, • September 2000 — Sounder begins regular commuter services;} between Tacoma and r Seattle. • Leadership changes between 2001 and 2002 — tumultuous times for the Agency. • September 2001 — Sounder celebrates is first anniversary. • July 2002 — Sounder , commuter rail carries it one-millionth passenger. - 4 • September 2002 — Third round trip added to Tacoma/Seattle run. • December 2003 — Agreement reached to extend service north to Everett and buy Lakewood subdivision. • December 2003 — Sounder reaches Everett with first Round Trip. Y ;oUNDTRANS(T_ • October 2004 RailPlus program starts. • June 2005 — Sounder North second round trip begins. • December 2005 — Sounder carries 1 .25 million riders during 2005 — 4 million total since opening. 5 Quarterly Ridership 350000 300000 250000 —_ — ----_-- ■ First 200000 ■ Second 150000 E Third i 100000 0 Fourth 50000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Current average weekday boardings: North line 612 South line 5,165 Today's Service • Four round trips Tacoma to Seattle • Two round trips Everett to Seattle 6 4 44- Agreements and Costs BNSF-ST Agreements - Operations BNSF provides: • Train Crews — Locomotive Engineer, Conductors • Centralize Dispatch from Ft Worth, TX ST coordinates: • Train Schedules and special services (Seahawks, Mariners) • Customer notification I • Fare collection • Stations, P&R's, Transit Centers • Security 7 Amtrak-ST Agreements — Maintenance Amtrak provides: • Preventative Maintenance • Layover Service • Storage • Spare Parts Management • Fueling ST coordinates: • Overnight Storage Facilities • Wayside Power (pending) • Vehicle Signage BNSF-ST Construction Agreements BNSF provides: • Centralized Dispatch • Track and Signal Capacity Improvements, with related Grade Crossing s. improvements ST coordinates: • Environmental Permits • WUTC/Class I City Railroad Permits • Stations, P&R's, Transit Centers 8 BNSF-ST Agreements Seattle to Tacoma - $349 M • Phase I work done — 44 RT's • Phase II work 40% done completion will allow 9 RT's • Phase III not funded - completion would allow 15 RT's BNSF-ST Agreements Seattle to Everett - $258 M • STp urchased: -Easements for 4 round-trips -BNSF retains all other rights and right-of-way • Characteristics: -High volume freight corridor with limited capacity -Shared risk QST permitting BNSF construction 9 BNSF Agreements Tacoma to Lakewood - $32 M • ST purchased: - Rail corridor ROW - Commuter rail rights • BNSF retained: - Freight rail operation ' M - Coordination with Amtrak - Dispatching 10 Past challenges -=; Impact of 1-695: tunding p • e,rmitting • 'Station Construction r • Buildir, ridership with only"CS Current-challenges _ s - •On-time perform •Park & Ride caps •Ticket vending m •Regional Fare Collection - 11 Lessons Learned • Everything costs more and takes longer than anticipated • Clearly identify risks going in and how you will manage them • Business deal with the RR not driven by your financial capacity • Parking-Parking-Parking A Thurston/Olympia Connection ? 1 . WWI , .. :' . 12 Annexation Requirements • Board membership • Areas that may be annexed • Adoption by RTA Board and ` City/County councils • Tax vote by area citizens Interlocal Agreement(s) • Cannot increase cost or risk to ST, or adversely impact service • Policy Issues — Defining Recovered Costs — "Latecomer" Allocation — Indemnification • Operational Challenges — Maintaining On-Time Performance — Train and Track Capacity — Layover Facilities 13 Thurston Extension with Connection to Sounder at DuPont or Lakewood • Access rights for your rail vehicles to use BNSF mainline • Access rights to use Sound Transit tracks • Need compatible tracks and stations • DuPont and Lakewood joint use agreement • What are alternative bus options—costs and benefits Relevance of North Sound Activities • Stakeholders have similar, interest in bringing rail to their , communities. , • Need to understand i current and future travel t demand patterns and volumes • Need strong revenue stream and strong ridership base - 14 • How will your Region Grow ? • What is the "best" transportation conveyance to meet demand—now and into the future ? • How do rail options compare with other modes ? • Is there strong Federal and State Legislative Support—financial and other ? Conclusion 15 Articles 1/18/06 Images Depict Rail Days News TribuneWebsite the ne6v tnbune.4041,.. PRINTER-FF Tacoma,WA-Monday,January 9,2006 <Back to F Images depict rails days STEVE MAYNARD;The News Tribune Last updated:January 9th,2006 08:00 AM(PST) Braving danger and frigid weather,workers in the 1880s blasted with black powder and drilled through the Cascade Mountains to bring transcontinental railways to King and Pierce counties. The trains carried settlers and freight from Chicago and points east to the burgeoning Washington Territory.They eventually turned settlements like Auburn into boom towns. "The railroads brought the people here,"said retired railroad worker Dave Sprau,guest curator for an exhibit of rare photos that opens Wednesday at the White River Valley Museum in Auburn. The exhibit,which runs through April 23, is called"Cascade Crossings:Transcontinental Railroads Enter King County." The scenes include hundreds of men proudly posing at the completion of track across Stampede Pass on June 1, 1887. Their success shortened the previous transcontinental route to the Puget Sound through Portland by at least 24 hours. Another photo shows a steam locomotive rumbling through Snoqualmie Pass in 1912, passing 12-foot-tall snow banks. In a 1929 shot, railway workers stand on a locomotive at Stevens Pass before a new tunnel opens. Most of the 44 photos have not been shown publicly before.About a third are from Sprau's private collection. Others are from the White River Valley Museum and the Museum of History and Industry in Seattle. The photos tell a story of"a mighty construction effort pitting man against mountain,"said Patricia Cosgrove, director of the Auburn museum. They show the results of blasting and drilling to lay down tracks.The first method used switchback tracks,zig-zagging up and over mountains.Tunnels soon followed. Carving through the Cascades led to the boom of the railroad industry in Auburn with the building of a freight house and railroad yard in 1912.To this day, Cosgrove said, "Auburn is at its core an old railroading town." Sprau,61,worked with BNSF and its predecessor railways for 38 years in Tacoma, Seattle and Havre, Mont. His jobs included telegrapher, locomotive fireman and dispatcher before he retired in 1998. Sprau lived in Ravensdale near Maple Valley until two years ago. He started saving photos years ago to preserve the history of the once-mighty railways. "In the course of my job, I realized things are disappearing,"Sprau said. "It just motivated me to start collecting." The black-and-white photos focus on the completion of three transcontinental crossings across the Cascades by three competitors: •Northern Pacific Railway through Stampede Pass in 1887. •Great Northern Railway across Stevens Pass in 1893. •The Milwaukee Road through Snoqualmie Pass in 1909. http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/v-printer/story/5447036p-4917402c.html 1/9/2006 iiiC iNcwh iiiuuiiC - iiiiagus urpict raiih uays kpilnt) rage /_ or The Stampede Pass crossing continued on through Enumclaw, Buckley and Tacoma.The Palmer cutoff near Black Diamond to Auburn was built in 1900, leading to the railroad yard in 1912 that added 600 jobs and sent then-tiny Auburn soaring. Railroad construction not only brought settlers to the territory that became Washington state; it also provided much-needed jobs for immigrants. Great Northern from Minnesota hired mostly Swedish and Norwegians,Sprau said. Northern Pacific primarily employed Chinese and Italians and Milwaukee Road hired many Yugoslavians, he said. "People were coming here and they were looking for work,"Sprau said. "The railroads were being built. It was just a natural." But blasting through mountains was dangerous with little medical help. People who were injured were often put on stretchers until they got better or died, Sprau said. These railways and their depots declined in the 1920s as automobiles became common and then again in the 1950s when airline travel became competitive,Sprau said. Milwaukee Road went bankrupt in 1977 and folded in 1980. Great Northern and Northern Pacific merged in 1970 to form Burlington Northern. Still another consolidation in 1995 resulted in BNSF. Most routes in the Puget Sound region primarily are used now for hauling freight.And while trains still cross Stampede and Stevens passes, Sprau's photos harken to an era when the railroads were king. Museum volunteer Charlie Clarke of Auburn watched with wonder as Sprau showed slides of the exhibit to museum workers Friday. Clarke said he loves the photos because they show exactly what the buildings and people were like then."You see men working and they're actually wearing suits,"he said. "I thought it was great." What:"Cascade Crossings:Transcontinental Railroads Enter King County,"an exhibit of 44 rare railway photos When:Wednesday through April 23 Where:White River Valley Museum,918 H St.S.E.,Auburn Hours: Noon to 4 p.m.,Wednesdays through Sundays Admission: $2 for adults,$1 for children, all students and seniors 60 and older.Wednesdays are free for everyone.Photo collector Dave Sprau will lecture Feb.3 and historian Bob Kelly will speak March 3. More information: Call 253-288-7433 Steve Maynard,The News Tribune Originally published:January 9th,2006 02:30 AM(PST) e_ Privacy Policy User Agreement Contact Us I About Us I Site Mao I Jobs ot7.The TNT I RSS fll�tlf�$*"t�»t• 1950 South State Street,Tacoma,Washington 98405 253-597-8742 l '�+ ©Co ri ht 2006 Tacoma News, Inc,A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company i. http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/v-printer/story/5447036p-4917402c.html 1/9/2006 Articles 1/18/06 • Rains in Washington state trigger mudslides, disrupt train service • Rail safety gains continue, says FRA • New mudslides cause further train outages in Washington state • N.Y. Republican state senators want to bring rails up to speed • American Indian tribe sues railroads, other firms over 1860's government land grants • BNSF under fire for dumping mudslide debris in Washington • California bullet train left at station in governor's strategic plan Trains.com Newswire TRAINS News Wire for January 11, 2006 Rains in Washington state trigger mudslides, disrupt train service SEATTLE - Heavy rains triggered mudslides that delayed freight trains and halted Amtrak service between Vancouver, B.C., and Portland, Ore. on Tuesday—the second rail disruption in less than a week, according to an Associated Press story in the Seattle Post Intelligencer and information from BNSF spokesman Gus Melonas and Amtrak. Other slides spilled onto Interstate 5 between Olympia and Tacoma and forced evacuation of a University of Washington fraternity annex in Seattle. High winds cut power to thousands of homes in northern Idaho and some scattered areas in eastern Washington. So far, no injuries have been reported. Melonas said mud, rocks, and trees fell onto tracks in three places yesterday but never completely shut down the railway. One slide was 3 miles south of Tacoma where the easternmost BNSF main track, also used by Union Pacific and Amtrak, was covered with a 2'/2-foot deep, 15-foot long wide path of debris, but the adjacent main track was unaffected.A track crane with a bucket ditched the slide to reopen the track. After that, the crane moved by rail 3 miles north of Edmonds to work on a similar-sized slide, which again only covered the easternmost main but did not impact the other.The third slide was 8 miles north of Edmonds where debris was evident but did not cover either track. For precautionary measures, BNSF issued a 48-hour moratorium on all passenger trains. Passengers on the Seattle section of Amtrak's Empire Builder, which operates between Chicago and the Pacific Coast(a section for Portland, Ore., splits at Spokane), were bused between Everett and Seattle in both directions. The eastbound Empire Builder, train 8,was to originate in Everett. Cascades trains between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C.–Nos. 510, 516, 513, 517,were canceled and passengers provided alternate bus service. The only exception was a Cascade train brought down from Bellingham,Wash. to Everett for positioning when the line reopens for passengers. The moratorium also affected Sounder commuter trains between Seattle and Everett, which run on BNSF. South of Seattle, the southbound Amtrak Coast Starlight, train 11, originated at Portland instead of Seattle yesterday and was to do so again today.The northbound Coast Starlight,train 14, terminated in Portland yesterday also will today. Alternate bus transportation is being provided between Seattle and Portland. Heavy snowfall in the mountains prompted temporary lane closures on Interstate 90 over Snoqualmie Pass on Tuesday, as Washington State Transportation Department crews did avalanche control work. Meanwhile, the National Weather Service issued wind advisories,flood warnings, and a winter storm warning for portions of eastern Washington as a warm, moist storm moved through the region. In Seattle, Tuesday was the 23rd consecutive day of measurable rain.The record, set in 1953, is 33 days. More than 10 inches have fallen since the back-to-back rainy days started Dec. 19.With more rain in the forecast for the next several days, the National Weather Service issued flood warnings for a handful of western Washington rivers. Most were expected to crest in the next day or two, with only minor flooding of low-lying areas. Rail safety gains continue, says FRA WASHINGTON—Key measures of rail safety continued to show improvements through the first 10 months of 2005, according to preliminary January-October 2005 data released by the Federal Railroad Administration on Jan. 9.This is the ninth consecutive year-to-date FRA report to show improvements in the train accident rate for the railroad industry, which is already the safest way to move goods across the country. The FRA report showed that rates for employee casualties and highway-rail grade crossing incidents also showed reductions from the first 10 months of 2004. "This is very good news,"said Association of American Railroads President and CEO Edward R. Hamberger."It reflects the industry's total commitment to operating as safely as we can." He noted that railroads hired thousands of new employees and invested several billion dollars to improve infrastructure during 2005. "These investments in people, track and equipment are paying off in improvements to both safety and efficiency." According to the FRA data, the train accident rate was down 11.3 percent during the first 10 months of 2005 compared to 2004, while the employee casualty rate was down 13.9 percent.The grade-crossing incident rate was down 8.2 percent. Both the employee casualty rate and the grade crossing incident rate are on track to be the lowest on record. Improvements were also reported in most major causes of train accidents, with the rate of accidents caused by human factors down 17.5 percent; equipment defects, down 20.6 percent; and signal problems down 17.1 percent.The FRA also reported that the yard accident rate had declined by 15.7percent. TRAINS News Wire for January 12, 2006 New mudslides cause further train outages in Washington state SEATTLE- Owing to two more railroad-related mudslides in the Pacific Northwest today, one south of Tacoma and the other close to Edmonds,Wash.,Amtrak announced that its host in the area, the BNSF Railway, has extended a passenger-train ban through Friday, Jan. 13.This affects Amtrak trains operating between Vancouver, B.C. and Portland, Ore., plus Sounder commuter trains between Seattle and Everett. Sounder trains operating between Seattle and Tacoma are not affected. Bus service is replacing Amtrak Cascades trains 510, 516, 513, and 517 between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C. Passengers on the Seattle section of Amtrak's Empire Builder, which operates between Chicago and the Pacific Coast(a section for Portland, Ore., splits at Spokane),will continue to be bused between Everett and Seattle in both directions.The eastbound Empire Builder, train 8,will continue to originate in Everett. South of Seattle, the southbound Amtrak Coast Starlight for Los Angeles,train 11, continues to originate at Portland instead of Seattle.The northbound Coast Starlight, train 14, is terminating in Portland, and Amtrak is providing alternate bus transportation between Portland and Seattle.Amtrak hopes to return to its normal Seattle-area schedule by Friday. BNSF freight trains continue to operate through the affected area. N.Y. Republican state senators want to bring rails up to speed ALBANY, N.Y. -The train ride from New York City to Albany could be cut to a zippy two hours under a plan engineered by Republican state senators, according to a story in the New York Daily News. "People are realizing that an updated rail system in New York State makes a great deal of economic sense," said Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Queens), a member of a high-speed rail task force created by Senate GOP leader Joe Bruno(R-Rensselaer). The task force is calling for a single state authority to take responsibility for the roughly 150 miles of track between the city and Albany now overseen by CSX, Amtrak, and Metro-North. Such a move would make Amtrak as well as freight runs far more efficient and reliable by unifying the signals and switches, the task force said. The trip is supposed to take 2'/z hours, but 40 percent of the trains are late, statistics show. The panel issued a report last week calling for an immediate investment of$22 million to create the new authority and make track improvements so that service could be speeded up by 2008. Ultimately, the Senate wants the federal government to pay 80 percent of a $1.8 billion statewide rail upgrade that would convert the system to high-speed trains and encourage the production of rail cars by New York manufacturers. As Padavan sees it, such an investment is crucial for New York to regain its competitive footing. "Our rail system has been left to flounder, despite the fact that we have some of the best transportation experts in the industry right here in our state,"the senator said. Bruno's rail study group has already begun talks with CSX and Amtrak on ways to realign how the routes are managed.The task force estimates that bringing high-speed rail to New York could create 12,000 construction jobs and boost the state's economic output by$2 billion a year. American Indian tribe sues railroads,other firms over 1860's government land grants RENO, Nev.-An American Indian tribe is suing the Union Pacific Railroad and seven other landholders, claiming the companies stole land in vast stretches of the West in violation of a 1860's treaty between the tribe and the U.S.government,according to an Associated Press story in the Las Vegas Sun. The civil lawsuit,filed on behalf of the Western Shoshone National Council,chief Raymond Yowell, and six national council members, concerns lands the government granted to UP and predecessor railroads.The suit,filed late Tuesday in a U.S. District Court in Reno by lawyer Robert Hager, seeks a declaration that the Western Shoshone nation holds title to land, minerals,and water in so-called"checkerboard" land sections the government granted to the railroad in the 19th century.The action seeks"past and future damages for waste and trespass"and calls for the companies to"disgorge all monies and things of value"obtained as a result of controlling the lands. The defendants, in addition to Union Pacific,are the BNSF Railway; three mining firms: Newmont Gold Co., Barrick Goldstrike Mines Inc., Glamis Gold Inc., and Nevada Land Resource Co.; and two electric utilities: Sierra Pacific Power Co.and Idaho Power Co. The lawsuit would void the transfer by the United States from 1862 to 1869 of millions of acres of land to Union Pacific, part of the nation's first transcontinental railroad, and attempt to recover profits from the subsequent sale, exchange, lease, development,and other uses of those lands, Hager said in a statement. The newspaper said the United States was not named as a defendant,although Hager, on behalf of the Western Shoshones, has sued to stop the government from developing a planned nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Hager said the tribe has asked a U.S. District judge in Las Vegas to reconsider his dismissal of a lawsuit seeking to block the Yucca project based on the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863.Judge Philip Pro ruled last year the federal court in Las Vegas lacked jurisdiction. Hager said the two actions were related because the Western Shoshone have never relinquished title to the lands. TRAINS News Wire for January 13, 2006 BNSF under fire for dumping mudslide debris in Washington SEATTLE—BNSF Railway is being investigated for using a crane to dump debris from two mudslides into Possession Sound and Puget Sound in Washington,according to a story in The Daily Herald of Everett, Wash. Railroad workers were filmed by local television stations last week using a crane to scoop mud,tree limbs,and other debris from the side of the tracks and drop it into the water. "We're following up on that and investigating that activity,"said Larry Altose, a spokesman for the state Department of Ecology. If fines are imposed, the railroad could face$10,000 a day per violation. "It's very premature at this stage to say we're considering a fine,"Altose said, adding that the railroad stopped the dumping after being contacted by the state. The dumping occurred south of Old Town Mukilteo in Possession Sound and off north Seattle in Puget Sound,Altose said.The site of a third slide in Pierce County is also being investigated. Railroad officials confirmed that workers dropped debris and dirt into the water at two locations, but said they had permission from federal authorities to do so. "We recognize the importance of the environment and are complying with the established guidelines,"said Gus Melonas, a spokesman for the railroad. BNSF did not place any large logs in the water, he said, adding that a large tree and a root ball were placed on the shore temporarily, and then removed. Melonas said the railroad has had an agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers since the 1990s that allows it to release debris in a waterway during an emergency. "It complies with a memorandum of understanding that allows, in emergency situations such as we're experiencing, to eliminate a source that threatens interstate transportation," he said. An agency spokeswoman said the corps does have an agreement with the railroad that allows emergency dumping in Puget Sound.Though federal agreements may exist, intentionally dropping muddy debris into Puget Sound or Possession Sound violates the state Clean Water Act, said Altose of the Department of Ecology. The mud makes the water turbid, which can affect the ability of fish to breathe, he said. It can also damage shoreline habitats for crab and for small feeder fish that salmon depend on. California bullet train left at station in governor's strategic plan SACRAMENTO-Construction of a bullet train to zip commuters from Sacramento to San Diego at speeds up to 220 mph would be derailed indefinitely under Gov.Arnold Schwa rze n egger's new strategic growth plan, according to a story in the Sacramento Bee. The governor's plan jeopardizes a project that has consumed an estimated$30 million in public funds, but one whose soaring price tag has raised questions about its viability. The stage is set for a fight in the Legislature over high-speed rail, which was projected to cost up to$37 billion, break ground in 2007 and begin serving passengers 10 to 12 years later. "We're going to have to haggle it out with the governor,"said Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shaffer. "We've never given up the fight." The newspaper said Schwa rzenegger's$222 billion package of transportation, education,flood control, public safety, and other planned improvements over the next 10 years gives no money to high-speed rail. State Finance Director Mike Genest said construction of the 700-mile line simply does not seem practical in the near future. Schwarzenegger also is asking the Legislature to pull from the November ballot a$10 billion bond measure to begin bullet-train construction. "Under our calculations, we could not afford this entire package of infrastructure if we also did the$10 billion for high-speed rail, and we don't see that being affordable in this 10-year cycle," Genest said. Schwarzenegger proposes to maintain an office, staff, and governing board for high-speed rail, but not to commit construction funds. "There is still hope for high-speed rail,"Genest said. "There may be other ways to finance it.There may be other routes they can pursue. We do think it's a visionary idea, maybe kind of far in the future." But Mehdi Morshed, executive director of the High-Speed Rail Authority, said the project will die if the state won't help pay for it. Asked if alternative funds were available, Morshed said, "Not that I know of; even if there was federal money, it would require a state match, and there's no state match. "There's really no good reason to keep things going if the state's not putting any money into it." Documents 1/18/06 Synopses of Rail Planning Documents Abstract Options for Passenger Rail in the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor Planning Report 1995 To: Washington State Department of Transportation Oregon Department of Transportation British Columbia Ministry of Employment & Investment For: Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor Technical Oversight Committee By: Morrison Knudsen Corporation The report is an analysis the engineering and operational issues of the 466 mile corridor stretching from Eugene, OR to Vancouver, B.C. along the principal main line rail route. At the time, 6 to 7 million people lived within 10 to 20 miles of the railroad, with a 40% growth in population and a 50% growth in jobs expected in the corridor in next 20 years. Washington and Oregon commissioned several studies in preceding years and began specific rail upgrades to expand intercity passenger rail service. At that point, $80 million had been committed by the states and Burlington Northern through cooperative agreements. The report provides a cohesive review of the entire corridor, allowing more cost-effective,prioritize, incremental infrastructure investment. These investments provided incremental service improvements. The report compares the $2.4 billion investment needed to add one freeway lane each way from Seattle to Portland(at$6.5 million per lane mile)to the rail improvements of$507 million($2.7 million per mile) In four phases spanning 20 to 25 years,passenger rail running time is expected to be reduced from nearly 4 hours to under 3 hours for Vancouver to Seattle; from nearly 4 hours to 2.5 hours for Seattle to Portland; and from 2.5 hours to 1.75 hours for Portland to Eugene. This assumes a maximum operating speed of 125 m.p.h. The corridor includes some new and alternative alignments, as well as the use of tilt train technology. The number of daily round trips was planned to substantially increase and ridership was expected to increase from approximately 600,000 annually in 1995 to upwards of 2.8 million in 2015. Proposed improvement included upgrades to existing track for increased frequency and speed; construction of new,parallel track; and new bypass routes in key areas. First priority was for low-cost improvement to bottlenecks and choke points. Second, capacity and efficiency projects were proposed to provide incremental improvements. Last,the mega projects, such as the British Columbia and Oregon bypasses were to round out the plan. Of interest to the Thurston Region were the bypass options to work around the bottleneck at Point Defiance. Considered were: • the Lakeview branch(diverging from the mainline at the Nisqually River, running parallel to 1-5 through Lakewood and on to Tacoma station) • and the Prairie Line (now the Yelm-to-Tenino Trail, then branching from the mainline at Tenino,proceeding through Yelm to Roy and on to Lakewood,joining the Lakewood line and following the same route to the Tacoma station). Though no option was selected in the report, the Lakeview branch appeared preferable to the Prairie Line because it was shorter, saved more time, was less expensive ($150 million) and maintained a stop at Centennial Station. However, some grade crossings would remain because of the proximity to I-5 and numerous cross streets. The report points to the need for additional environmental analysis and a corridor wide, coordinated public involvement effort. Strategies for governance, cost sharing and funding were reviewed. The investment required through all four phases for the entire corridor totaled $1.8 billion. Funding sources were not identified. The operations and maintenance subsidy, with increasing service levels implemented over the years, was projected to be about $10 million in 1995 and ranged from $8 to $27 million in 2015. Annual investments in the program ranged (based on a 20 or 32 year program) in first phase from $47 to $68 million annually to the last phase from $106 to $167 million annually. N i Abstract High Speed Rail Passenger Service Western Washington Corridor Economic Feasibility Study December 1984 For: Washington State Legislative Transportation Committee By: Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade &Douglas, Inc. and the Washington State Transportation Center Commissioned by the Washington State Legislature in the 1983-1985 biennium, the study looked at existing and future conditions along the rail corridor from Vancouver, B.C. to Portland, OR. It assessed potentially applicable high speed rail technology, laid out a set of alternative alignments and technologies, and evaluated the economic feasibility of implementing high speed service. The analysis relied on existing data with order-of-magnitude patronage and capital cost projections. The legislative subcommittees requested that a potential upgrade to existing Amtrak service be evaluated as part of the alternatives. The study found that upgraded Amtrak service was technically feasible, using the existing rail corridor with upgrades to improve speeds. Other high or super speed technologies investigated would require establishing a new right-of-way and new or upgraded facilities. Much higher speeds could be reached on such a dedicated system. The potential intercity rail market consisted of 50 plus mile trips -16% of the intercity travel occurring along the corridor, highly dependent on private automobiles. The cost of the alternatives ranges from upgraded Amtrak (top speed 100 m.p.h.)at $687 million to super speed rail (top speed 250 m.p.h.) at over$12 billion. The report recommended: 1. Establish state goals and objectives for rail passenger service in major travel corridors,including the Western Washington Corridor. A clear legislative and WSDOT mandate was needed. The report recommended establishing a task force to advise on an appropriate long-term role for rail passenger service. 2. Determine the appropriate level of service and establish a program of upgrading Amtrak rail passenger service to achieve state-set goals and objectives in a cost- effective manner. The study found a growing high speed passenger rail market that could be fostered through improvements in speed, safety, station amenities, and local access via public transportation and parking. Additional study was needed to determine level of service, financing, and management. 3. Based upon the goals and needs identified from actions contained in the first two recommendations, evaluate the basis of state funding to upgrade existing Amtrak service and better integrate local public transportation with rail passenger service. The state's role in funding such a service and potential federal contributions needed to be investigated. Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET), sales tax and state gas tax were suggested as potential sources. 1:\Rail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-1984 High Speed Rail Feasibility Study.doc 4. Preserve existing rights-of-way which may be used for public transportation corridors in the future. Although the system couldn't be funded right away, the future value of these corridors was noted. The old interurban Puget Sound Electric Railway— now the Interurban Trail along the Green River—was an example. 5. Recognize, in the State's long-range planning process,the potential for higher speed intercity rail passenger systems. Studies in Western Washington indicated that high and super speed rail service could generate enough revenue to offset operation and maintenance costs, and even repay a small amount of the capital costs. The enormous capital costs of such systems made them infeasible. The state's constitution also constrained a role for the state in improving and promoting passenger rail. 6. Monitor social-economic and technological conditions as triggers to higher speed systems. Conditions impacting the future high speed rail include changes in auto ownership,the ratio of air fare to rail fare, and corridor population densities. Also noted were fuel prices and fuel efficiency, highway congestion, and income levels. Technological advances in high speed rail service could also improve feasibility. J:\Rail\Passenger RailWbstract-1984 High Speed Rail Feasibility Study.doc Abstract High speed Ground Transportation Study L �&,w December 1992 To: Governor Washington State Legislature Washington State Transportation Commission For: High Speed Ground Transportation Steering Committee By: Gannnett Fleming, Inc. The Washington State Legislature, in 1991, directed a comprehensive assessment of the feasibility of high speed ground transportation system in the state. To support the analysis, a steering committee and the Office of High Speed Ground Transportation (in WSDOT) were formed. The two major corridors analyzed were Portland-Seattle-Vancouver, B.C. and SeaTac- Moses Lake-Spokane. Increasing congestion of road and air facilities were significant concerns prompting the study. Intercity travel was projected to increase 75% by 2020. A third mode was deemed an important alternative. The study found it compatible with regional transportation plans and supportive of growth management objectives. The Vancouver, B.C.—Portland corridor presented the best near term development opportunity, and the Seattle—Spokane corridor offered the most advantageous long term opportunity for truly high speed service. The report also found significant ridership potential, even using conservative congestion assumptions for highways. Farebox revenues were projected to cover operation and maintenance within 12 to15 years of beginning service, and generate a surplus after that. The report also stated that there were no fatal environmental flaws with high speed ground transportation,that it need not depend on petroleum fuels, that it was cost effective with respect to other modes, and that it provided reliable, all-weather service. However, the marginal ridership gains associated with maglev did not justify the much higher cost and risk associated with that technology. Capital costs for a 185 m.p.h. high speed ground transportation system were projected to run from $14.48 to $19.26 billion for both corridors — comparable to the estimated $20 billion to duplicate I-5 and I-90 in 1992. At an annual rate of$500 million, the 590 mile system would take 30 to 40 years to complete. Both gas and sales tax were investigated as funding options (the gas tax option requiring a constitutional amendment). Several policy actions were required to proceed, including a major state funding commitment, formation of a single entity to implement the program, and development of public/private partnerships, as well as building public support. Commitments to support other modes were needed too — improving transit, upgrading the interstate and major arterials, and expanding the airport system. The report recommends maintaining the state's commitment to upgrade Amtrak service and take additional action to build support for high speed ground transportation. Three goals were presented: 1. Commit to high speed ground transportation implementation by 2020 — Seattle to Portland in 2 hours 30 minutes by 2000, in 2 hours by 2010, and in 1 hour 45 minutes by 2020 with service extended to Everett. 2. Add high speed service from Everett to Vancouver, B.C. 3. Implement high speed service between Seattle and Spokane. A phased approach was laid out, with progress occurring on all three goals. DRAFT Abstract Draft Washington State Long Range Plan for Amtrak Cascades Ongoing in 2006 By: Washington State Department of Transportation This draft plan update, undergoing review now, describes the vision and incremental implementation process for improvements to infrastructure and service of the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor and Amtrak Cascades service. In 1992, the corridor was one of five federally designated high speed rail corridors in the United States. The designation helps the region compete for federal funds to assist the state with planning and implementing improved passenger and freight rail service throughout the corridor. The corridor extends 466 miles on the BNSF mainline from Eugene, OR to Vancouver, B.C., with 297 miles in Washington State. Currently, the maximum allowed passenger train speed on the corridor is 79 m.p.h., as set by the Federal Rail Administration. To increase speed, improvements to tracks, crossings, train control and signal systems are needed. The state plans to incrementally advance Amtrak Cascades service, improving safety, reliability and frequency while reducing travel times. The plan, at build-out, calls for 13 round trips per day between Portland and Seattle, with travel time reduced from 4 hours to 2.5 hours. In 1993, when improvements were begun, Amtrak Cascades annual ridership was 95,000 passengers per year between Portland and Seattle. That climbed to 345,000 by 2003. At build- out, a projected 2 million passengers per year will use the service between Portland and Seattle (3 million overall in the corridor). Future needed improvements include crossing upgrades, increases in speed, enhanced train control, new train equipment, improved stations (including access and connections), and track upgrades. The physical improvements are expected to last 50 to 100 years. Build-out will require a $5 billion investment. Operations and maintenance ranges from $20 million annually today to $83 million at build-out (in today's dollars). Farebox recovery is expected to increase to 99%by build-out, with the maximum subsidy of$15 million which gradually decreases until build-out. Revenue sources and timeframe are still under discussion. Specific to the Thurston Region, ridership at build-out in Olympia/Lacey is projected at 180,250 annually. Improvements include: • Crossovers at Centennial Station to provide flexibility for trains to move between tracks when entering the station and ensuring that passengers can exit the train at the station platform without crossing other tracks. The estimated project cost is $3.4 million, with $2 million allocated in the 2003 state legislative transportation package. • Crossover at Tenino provides flexibility for trains to move between tracks and helps keep passenger rail service on-time. This $3.4 million project received $2.9 million in the 2003 state legislative transportation package. J:\Rail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-2006 WS LR Plan for Amtrak Cascades.doc DRAFT • Hannaford to Nisqually Third Main Track is a new 26 mile main line next to the existing double tracked main line, extending from the Thurston/Lewis County line to Nisqually. The new track will allow passenger trains to operate at 110 m.p.h., reducing travel time between Portland and Seattle. The physical condition of the existing tracks and local geography prevent the train from traveling at high speeds. Estimated construction will cost $315 million. [The project extends from Hannaford to Chehalis in Lewis County at the additional cost of$66 million.] • Point Defiance Bypass (in Pierce County just north of the Thurston County border) includes improvements to the line recently acquired by Sound Transit for Sounder service. Amtrak Cascades and Coast Starlight will also travel this route, bypassing the curvy mainline tracks and the single track tunnel choke point at Point Defiance. The project cost is $233 million, with $21 million included in the 2003 state legislative transportation package. J:\Rail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-2006 WS LR Plan for Amtrak Cascades.doc Abstract Washington Commerce Corridor Feasibility Study December 2004 To: Washington State Legislature For: Washington State Department of Transportation By: Wilbur Smith Associates The Washington Commerce Corridor was conceived as a north-south alternative to I-5 facilitating the movement of freight, goods, people and utilities. The willingness and ability of the private sector to build and operate the proposed corridor was assessed. The proposed corridor extends from Lewis County to the Canadian border. The study posed two questions: • Is there sufficient demand for the corridor? • Can it be built? The energy sector was not interested in developing the corridor. Passenger rail service could not contribute to the financial feasibility of the corridor. While the corridor follows active and inactive/abandoned rail lines, the freight rail companies were primarily focused on east-west mainline improvements as their priority investments. Neither would car tolls be a significant source of revenues. The traffic patterns associated with auto and freight rail did not fit the north-south long haul orientation of the corridor. Truck tolls needed further exploration. A sizable share of the southern segment of the corridor(1-90 to Chehalis)may be supportable by truck tolls and public subsidy. The proposed alignment of the corridor had significant natural constraints with a fatal flaw through the Cedar River Watershed. The corridor would impact several small rural and agricultural based communities. Regulatory and land use issues presented obstacles, potentially requiring changes to local comprehensive plans. The state's existing environmental review process was not equipped to handle a project of this scope,posing a significant pre-construction risk for the private sector. These factors were found to significantly undermine the feasibility of the corridor at the conclusion of the study. The corridor was estimated to cost between $42 and $50 billion. Right-of-way costs represented about 40% of total costs. Roadway costs represented a 70% share, rail 11% to 17%, energy(power and pipeline) 10%to 14%, and trails 3%. The cost of the corridor greatly undermined the feasibility of a private sector entity bundling all modes into a single corridor even if users generate revenue. Feasibility would be improved from a cost standpoint by targeting only the components most likely to generate revenue. The legal and institutional issues included the need for robust state legislation allowing public-private initiatives and for a single purposed entity vested with the powers and authority to oversee the project. Co-locating utilities and transportation in the same corridor was also restricted. J:\Rail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-2004 Washington Commerce Corridor Feasibility.doc The report recommends: • Reduce the complexity, scale and length of the corridor strategy. • Pursue a multimodal freight based corridor strategy. • Conduct a detailed feasibility analysis of a public/private truck freight corridor. • Create more robust public-private state legislation. • Create a single entity to coordinate creation of state significant energy corridors. • Develop a streamlined environmental review and permitting process. Specific to the Thurston Region,potential corridor alignments followed the Prairie Line (beginning at Tenino through Yelm, then connecting to Tacoma Rail), Tacoma Rail's branch from Fredrickson to Chehalis (from Grand Mound to Yelm), and a third alignment on Tacoma Rail's branch from Fredrickson to Morton that skirts Thurston County passing directly from Lewis to Pierce County. JARaihPassenger RaiRAbstract-2004 Washington Commerce Corridor Feasibility.doc Abstract Statewide Rail Capacity and System Needs Analysis Ongoing in 2006 To: Washington State Legislature For: Washington State Transportation Commission By: Cambridge Systematics In the 2005 session, the Washington State Legislature commissioned the Washington Transportation Commission to complete three studies, including one on statewide rail capacity and needs. The purpose of the study is to: • Assess the state's freight and passenger rail infrastructure needs • Review the state's current powers, authorities and interests in passenger and freight rail • Recommend policies for state participation and ownership in rail infrastructure and service delivery. The report is due to the legislative transportation committees by December 1, 2006. The Transportation Commission recently selected Cambridge Systematics to complete the work. The scope of work includes ten key tasks— 1. Review the role of rail in the state and national economy. 2. Determine the current status, future plans, capacity constraints and needs of the state's passenger and freight rail, including their interaction. 3. Analyze the state's major freight-rail-dependent supply chains and their impediments. 4. Investigate the current and future operating practices of the rail industry. 5. Explore the positioning of the state's rail program in national studies and funding possibilities. 6. Develop the conceptual approach underlying the rationale of state participation in private rail investment. 7. Develop a menu of practical policy options for implementing alternatives. 8. Develop a rail asset management plan for state owned assets. 9. Summarize recommendations and plans for implementation. 10. Incorporate public involvement in the rail plan implementation. The project budget is $1.15 million, including contingency funds and a new position in WSDOT to manage the project and its implementation. J:\Rail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-2006 WTC Rail Study.doc DRAFT Abstract Railroad Right of Way Inventory for Thurston County December 1989 By: Thurston Regional Planning Council The Railroad Right of Way Inventory gathered available data on how right of way was originally acquired,possible future uses, track condition, current use, and information about the abandonment process. The information was gathered to form a basis for policy concerning future right of way. At the time,railroad rights of way in Thurston County were controlled by Burlington Northern, Union Pacific and Chehalis Western. The Burlington Northern and Union Pacific were common carriers—hauling general freight for hire. The Chehalis Western was a private carrier hauling logs for Weyerhauser Timber Corporation, their parent company. Originally(in the late 1800's and early 1900's) a number of companies acquired rail right of way in the region, however, ownership was consolidated over the years to the three rail companies. The Inventory explores the County Auditor's files and Assessor's maps to understand how the rights of way were assembled. Rail acquisition instruments were varied and sometimes complicated—congressional land grants,warranty deed, right of way deed, quit claim deed, adverse possession,decree, and bargain sale and deed. The way in which the right of way was originally acquired had consequences for future purchase and use. Resource maps—commercial and industrial zoned lands,parks, recreation areas and bikeways— were used to investigate potential current and future needs and uses of the rail rights of way. Use as potential roadways and utility corridors was also examined. Track condition and frequency of use were evaluated. The mainline had 45-50 freight trains per day plus 6 passenger trains. Centralia-to-Aberdeen [now Puget Sound &Pacific] had 4 trains per day. Gate-to-Belmore and Tenino-to-Yelm had no traffic , while the St. Clair had 7 cars per week[the average train had 20 cars]. The Union Pacific line to Olympia had no more than several cars per day. The Chehalis Western Tacoma-to-Centralia Line [now Tacoma Rail] still had traffic,but the Vail-to-Woodard Bay Line [now the Chehalis Western Trail] was not used. The abandonment process, through the old Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), was also reviewed. Railroad right of way was then assessed by potential for abandonment. The Union Pacific Line from Centralia to Aberdeen had been recently abandoned (1987). Several Burlington Northern lines were identified as potential abandonment candidates—Gate-to-Belmore,Yelm-to-Tenino, and the St. Clair line. The stability of the Chehalis Western lines was difficult to judge at the time,however part of the Vail-to-Woodard Bay Line had already been sold. The lines were also assessed by future use/value and ease of acquisition. The report ended by recommending that policies and strategies be developed to either keep the threatened rail lines open or to acquire the rights of way for other uses. The report said it could be used as a basis for action in the interim, should abandonment be proposed for any corridor. It further recommended JARailiPassenger RaiMbstract-1989 TRPC RR ROW Inventory.doc DRAFT the lines should be prioritized by value and that financing options should be explored. A watch dog mechanism was advised so that jurisdictions would receive adequate notice to take timely action. JARailTassenger RaiMbstract-1989 TRPC RR ROW Inventory.doc DRAFT Abstract The Railroad Right of Way Strategy Report 1990, Revised 1991 and 1992 By: Thurston Regional Planning Council Railroad Right-of-Way Advisory Committee Concern over several pending rail line abandonments in Thurston County prompted TRPC to investigate ways to preserve rail lines and rights-of way. Many communities across the U.S. were undertaking similar efforts. TRPC formed a Railroad Right-of-Way Advisory Committee to identify short and long term strategies for each of the rail corridors in the County. The committee found that the corridors were too important to allow them to break up and that continued use as active freight and passenger rail lines was a priority. Promoting industrially zoned land adjacent to rail was noted. The committee also recommended that future rail corridor use be incorporated into each local jurisdiction's comprehensive plan in the transportation, recreation and utilities sections. They also stressed the necessity to take action before official abandonment occurred to keep contiguous linear corridors in tact. Coordination with the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation was encouraged since they often receive first inquiries when a move to abandon was made. Filing notice of interest and intent to preserve the rail corridor with the ICC was also encouraged. The National Trail System Act established a tool for maintaining rail corridors for recreational use and possible future transportation purposes. As the least expensive method for acquiring rail corridors, it was the recommended mechanism to use. The committee also encouraged the exploration of joint(shared)uses for rail corridors. The committee supported cooperation among the Port, cities and County to acquire threatened corridors. In 1990,the Port of Olympia agreed to serve as the interim lead agency—filing the interim trail use applications with the ICC in case of a move to abandonment occurred before the rail strategy was accepted in 1991. This role for the Port reflected its interest in maintaining the corridors and its legislatively mandated ability to acquire, construct,purchase, lease, contract for and operate rail services, equipment and facilities—both passenger and freight. The committee also recommended the Port of Olympia assess the viability of short line operations for freight or passenger rail. Interest was expressed in using existing rail corridors for vintage trolley operations, attracting transit funding and serving as a nucleus for any future modern light rail system. The committee suggested exploring an employee tax,motor vehicle excise tax and sales tax in the public transportation benefit area to support these efforts. The committee encouraged the development of tourist rail operations as well. A seasonal steam train brought tourists to Offut Lake Resort for dinner and other potential tourist attractions were suggested. The action recommendations of the 1991 report included many coordinated efforts among the Port, cities, County and other interested parties: JARail\Passenger RailAbstract-1992 TRPC RR ROW Strategy.doc DRAFT 1. Negotiate acquisition of the Tenino-to-Yelm corridor using the National Trails System Act. 2. Preserve the Gate-to-Belmore corridor. 3. Acquire the abandoned Fones Rd to Olympia Post Office corridor. 4. Investigate acquisition and continued operation of the Fones to Lake St. Clair line. 5. Include rail recommendations in the comprehensive plans. 6. Prevent encroachment into rail right-of way. Ongoing actions included: • Find a solution to the trestle on the Lacey to Deschutes River corridor that severs the connection of the planned trail. • Monitor and support WSDOT's efforts to increase Amtrak service for use by commuters. • Investigate &where possible integrate streetcar/trolley operations in traffic congestion reduction programs. • Support steam train operations. • Encourage movement of freight by rail rather than road. • Coordinate corridor usage with the Urban Trails Plan developed by Olympia, Lacey& Tumwater. • Continue to monitor moves to abandon rail lines. JARail\Passenger Rail\Abstract-1992 TRPC RR ROW Strategy.doc DRAFT Abstract Freight Access by Rail (FAR) Corridor White Paper April 2000 For: Washington State Department of Transportation By: Transit Systems Management The Resource Group HDR Engineering, Inc. In 1999, the Washington State Legislature funded a study to explore whether improved use of South Sound rail corridors could: • Relieve congestion on I-5. • Improve freight movement. • Extend planned commuter rail to Olympia. • Build on existing public rail investments. • Provide economic development opportunities. The white paper presents preliminary findings and recommended next steps. The focus is between downtown Olympia and Tacoma/Lakewood. The report assumed that to provide commuter rail service in Olympia(and provide for future Amtrak service expansions), capacity would need to be freed up on the BNSF mainline by tapping underutilized rail lines to absorb some of the freight movement. The report examines two freight and four passenger rail alternatives, assessing the physical and operational features, and estimating the costs for improvements. The freight rail alternatives included: • Fl: Tacoma Rail Mountain Division. The alternative proposed a new connection between the mainline and Tacoma Rail in Chehalis. Traffic would move north through Grand Mound, Maytown, Rainier, Yelm, Roy and Fredrickson, to connect with the Union Pacific rail yard in Fife, with another new connection to the BNSF mainline in Tacoma. The track conditions require slow speeds and the steep grade in Tacoma (hence the name Mountain Division) made train movements challenging, requiring additional locomotive power. The alternative was found to be potentially feasible. Improvements were estimated at $52 million. • 172: Tacoma Rail Mountain Division and the PNWRC Point Defiance Bypass/BNSF Prairie Line. Like Fl, the route begins with a new connection between the mainline and Tacoma Rail in Chehalis. Traffic would move north through Grand Mound and Maytown on the Tacoma Rail Mountain Division. Then a new connection at either Rainier or Roy would transfer traffic to the Prairie Line. Traffic would move from Rainier or Roy to Lakewood, where the Prairie Line joins the Point Defiance Bypass (to be used for commuter rail). The route would continue on to BNSF's rail yard(called Reservation) in Tacoma. Day-to-day freight operations were expected to be difficult due to the need for coordination with Sound Transit and Amtrak. The Point Defiance Bypass was expected to accommodate three passenger trains and hour in each direction. The alternative was deemed impractical and no cost estimate was provided. Four commuter rail options were explored in the FAR Corridor report, including: MRailTassenger RaiMbstract-2000 FAR White Paper.doc DRAFT • PI: Saint Clair Line from Olyrnpia to Lakewood/Tacoma. In 1987 the rail line between downtown Olympia and Fones Road was abandoned as part of an I-5 improvement program. [Note: Another section from Fones Road to Union Mills Road was recently vacated, and now much of the old rail alignment is becoming the Olympia and Lacey Woodland Trails.] A commuter route would run from Olympia along the St. Clair to the mainline,where it would turn north, then northeast onto the Point Defiance Bypass and on to Lakewood/ Tacoma. Track,bridges and most of the grade were removed between I-5 and downtown Olympia. The alignment also passes through Lacey's business district on Pacific. [Note: Lacey recently removed much of the track in construction of the Pacific/Lacey one way couplets.] Travel time from Olympia to Tacoma was estimated at 41 minutes and build-out improvements at $128 to$151 million. It was deemed feasible but expensive. • P2: Union Pacific Olympia Line to Lakewood/Tacoma. Service would begin in downtown Olympia, travel southeast on the Union Pacific Line past the brewery to the mainline,then travel north on the mainline to Centennial Station, continuing north to the connection with the Point Defiance Bypass, then northeast to Lakewood/Tacoma. This is the only rail access to Olympia and is used by both BNSF [now Tacoma Rail] and Union Pacific [now Tri-City and Olympia]. The Union Pacific Line has two tunnels between Olympia and Tumwater and speed is restricted to 10 m.p.h. The report estimates it would take 26 minutes to travel from Olympia to Centennial Station,plus travel time from Centennial to Lakewood/Tacoma. Build-out improvements would cost $162 million. It was deemed infeasible. • P3: Union Pacific 013mpia Line to Amtrak Station. Like P2, service would begin in downtown Olympia, travel southeast to the mainline,then north on the mainline to Centennial Station. The alternative assumes connecting service is made at Centennial Station. The trip would take 26 minutes plus dwelling time at the station waiting for the connecting service. The alternative was estimated to cost$62 million. It was deemed infeasible. • P4: Commuter Service on the BNSF Mainline and Point Defiance Bypass. Service would be provided from Centennial Station, running north along the mainline, then northeast on the Point Defiance Bypass to Tacoma. Centennial Station access was an issue, otherwise the route would require few physical improvements. Commuter service at build-out was estimated at$109 million. This alternative was called"...attractive as a starter commuter rail service"because of relatively low start up costs, accessibility to Lacey residents and rapid growth in eastern Thurston County. The study recommended: • Negotiations should continue to use Tacoma Rail Mountain Division for freight and conceptual improvements/costs should be outlined. • Commuter rail should focus on travel from Centennial Station to Tacoma on the Point Defiance Bypass. • TRPC should work with the City of Olympia and the East-West Greenway Trail committee to assure that the St. Clair line was preserved for future high capacity transportation use. • The region should start forging partnerships with Sound Transit for potential service and equipment for commuter rail to Olympia. JARailTassenger RailiAbstract-2000 FAR White Paper.doc Shelly Badger AGENDA Yelm Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup Wednesday, December 21, 2005 * 7-8:30 a.m. 2424 Heritage Court SW, Room A (1st Floor) Olympia, WA 98502 (360) 956-7575 1. 7:00—7:10 Packet Review Jailyn Brown 2. 7:10—7:30 Rail Experiences Graeme Sackrison Discussion 3. 7:30— 8:30 Sound Transit Commuter Rail Marty Minkoff Presentation and Discussion Next Meeting Wednesday, January 18, 2006 Notes Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup November 16, 2005 In Attendance Graeme Sackrison, Intercity Transit Laura Purcell, Bucoda Virgil Clarkson, Lacey Lloyd Flem, WashARP Frank Hensley, Citizen Advisor Loren Herri stad, WashARP T.J. Johnson, Olympia Kirk Fredrickson, WSDOT Ken Jones, Tenino Paul Telford, Port of Olympia Pete Kmet, Tumwater Lon Wyrick, TRPC Jim Longley,Nisqually Tribe Jailyn Brown, TRPC Bob Macleod, Thurston County Karen Parkhurst, TRPC Don Miller, Yelm Dennis Bloom, Intercity Transit John O'Callahan, Tenino Introductions Participants introduced themselves. Tacoma Rail will also be sending a representative to future meetings. Packet Review Additional reference materials, articles and documents were distributed. The North Sound Regional Rail Study was referenced as an example of follow up analysis that could be done if the Regional Council were encouraged to pursue any commuter rail scenarios. WSDOT rail projects in and surrounding the region were reviewed and discussed. Rail System Overview A route overview table was distributed as part of the informational packet. This included information on the various rail segments in the planning basin,junctions joining those segments, and rail-to-trail conversions in Thurston County. Owners, operators, operator classification, speed and typical traffic were also discussed. The Frederickson Junction has been renamed Ray Allred Junction, in honor of a rail colleague who recently passed away. JARail\Passenger Rail\PRW Meetings\Notes PRW 1 I-16-2005.doc 1 Rail Travel Today Amtrak Amtrak service at Centennial Station includes four northbound and four southbound stops daily. Three of these stops in each direction are provided by the Cascades route between Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver, B.C. The fourth stop comes from the daily Coast Starlight service between Los Angeles and Seattle. The Coast Starlight is usually behind schedule by several hours due to rail traffic in California and Portland. Expected in July, 2006 another mid-afternoon round trip of the Cascades will serve Eugene to Bellingham. At build-out, 26 Cascades trains per day will call on Centennial Station— 13 northbound and 13 southbound. As the rail corridor improvements are made, travel time from Olympia to Seattle will be about 1 hour and 1.5 hours to Portland. While time of service at Centennial Station is an artifact of Eugene and Seattle departure times, the increased service will provide earlier morning service than the current 10:40 a.m. scheduled northbound departure. The workgroup discussed Cascades funding issues in Oregon and rail improvements needed for the Columbia River crossing. Intercity Transit, Pierce Transit and Sound Transit Sound Transit's Sounder commuter train service from the Tacoma Dome leaves four times weekdays between 5:45 a.m. and 7:10 a.m., with returns between 5:20 p.m. and 6:40 p.m. Sound Transit also provides commuter bus service between Tacoma and Seattle with peak period headways of 10-20 minutes. The Tacoma Link light rail service generally runs every 10 minutes between 5:20 a.m. and 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. Intercity Transit, in coordination with Pierce Transit,provides a.m. and p.m. peak period express bus service between and Olympia and Tacoma, generally with 15 to 30 minute headways. The two transit agencies have an agreement to operate in each other's service district. Together they provide 25 trips in each direction. Pierce Transit also has a route serving Gig Harbor, Tacoma and Olympia. The primary markets include state employees and travelers to downtown Tacoma. Most of Intercity Transit's customers disembark at Lakewood and transfer to local bus service. While DuPont has a Sound Transit park-n- ride station,most of Intercity Transit's DuPont customers travel by vanpool (currently 14 vanpools between Thurston County and DuPont). Demand for a bus stop at DuPont is currently low among Intercity Transit passengers, but they do expect connections, especially if there is future rail service there. Sound Transit, a regional transit authority, is a special tax district separate from the local public transit agencies in Pierce, King and Snohomish Counties. Sound Transit has three operating divisions: ST Express regional bus service, Sounder commuter rail service, and Link light rail. Sound Transit also operates multimodal hubs and park-n-rides. Their Tacoma Dome Station (at Freight House Square in Tacoma) serves ST Express, Pierce JARail\PassengerRail\PRW MeetingsWotes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 2 Transit, Intercity Transit and Sounder commuter rail. Link light rail in Tacoma also serves the Tacoma Dome Station. In phase 1 of development, Sound Transit established high frequency regional bus service to downtown Tacoma, medium frequency service to the Lakewood park-n-ride, and less frequent service to the DuPont park-n-ride. Sounder service is also being expanded to South Tacoma and Lakewood. The Lakewood Station design includes a three-story park- n-ride and transit center. The area is also served by the existing SR 512 park-n-ride lot— usually full to overflowing. Sound Transit's phase 2, pending voter approval, proposes increased express bus service between Tacoma and Seattle serving destinations like the Airport and the UW campuses. Development of a commuter rail service from DuPont is also proposed, with a doubling of the park-n-ride capacity there. Primer Review The primer was briefly introduced to the workgroup and members were asked to read it over before the next meeting. The relationship between geography and type of service was stressed. The three types of geography—local, regional and intercity—essentially correspond to: • Local transit (frequent and relatively close stops of local bus service, light rail, metro, and bus rapid transit within a metropolitan area) • Commuter transit (express bus, commuter rail, some bus rapid transit with longer distances between stops and usually many stops along the route but only one or two stops in a central city), and • Intercity transit(intercity bus and rail with great distances between stops and usually one stop in each city served). A table summarizes the attributes of each service. Typical land use density was also reviewed. Communities can wait for needed densities to develop before providing service or may invest earlier to encourage specific types of land use. Because of the permanence associated with train depots and fixed rail transit, developers and financiers are often more willing to invest in relatively dense mixed uses surrounding train depots. The workgroup discussed increased northbound commuting out of Thurston County. Local conventional wisdom held that this occurred because there weren't enough jobs in our community. Realtors and developers participating in the Vision/Reality analysis said that commuters chose to live in Thurston County for more affordable housing with a rural character, yet maintain their jobs in Pierce and King Counties. The upshot is that Thurston County is becoming a bedroom community to central Puget Sound. JARail\Passenger Rail\PRW Meetings\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 3 Next Meeting The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, December 21, 2005, 7:00 to 8:30 a.m. at the TRPC offices. JARail\Passenger Rail\PRW Meetings\Notes PRW 11-16-2005.doc 4 Documents 12/21/05 Glossary Addendum #1 DRAFT 12/18/05 Glossary —Addendum 1 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company, BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company is a United States Class I freight railroad that owns the primary north/south railway corridor between Portland and Tacoma. BNSF is one of two Class I carriers that provides transcontinental rail service to Washington State. In addition to the main line, BNSF also owns the St. Clair and Mottman branches in Thurston County as well as a portion of the Prairie Line and the freight rights on the Pt. Defiance Bypass in Pierce County. Junction An intersection of railroads where trains may move from one branch to another. Puget Sound & Pacific Railroad, PS&P, PSAP Puget Sound& Pacific Railroad is a shortline railroad owned by Rail America, Inc. PS&P owns a rail network and provides freight rail service on Washington's Olympic Peninsula, including service to the Port of Grays Harbor. PS&P's track runs through the southwest portion of Thurston County in the Rochester and Grand Mound communities. Rail America Rail America, Inc. is a shortline and regional rail provider based in Boca Raton, Florida. Included in Rail America's 47 holdings in the U.S. and Canada are two in Washington State—Puget Sound& Pacific Railroad (serving the Olympic Peninsula) and Cascade & Columbia River Railroad (serving communities north of Wenatchee). Railroad Classification Federal law establishes three classifications of railroad companies operating in the United States, based on annual revenues. Class I railroads earned $250 million or more in adjusted annual operating revenues over the past three years. In 2004, seven railroad companies operating nationally were designated Class I railroads, including BNSF and UP that operate in Washington State. Class II railroads (often referred to as regional railroads) earned $20-$250 million in adjusted annual operating revenues, and Class III railroads (usually called shortlines) earned less than $20 million in adjusted annual operating revenues. Washington State has no Class II railroads, but an array of Class III railroads operate here. In the Thurston region these shortline operators include Puget Sound& Pacific Railroad, Tri-City& Olympia Railroad Company, and Tacoma Rail. Shortline Shortline is a term commonly used to refer to railroad operators providing local, often customized freight rail service where larger railroads can no longer serve economically. Under federal law, a shortline is a Class III railroad with adjusted annual operating revenues less than $20 million. In the Thurston region, three shortlines service industrial and commercial customers—Puget Sound & Pacific provides rail service on the Olympic Peninsula, Tri-City& Olympia is the Port of Olympia's contracted rail operator, and Tacoma Rail serves Thurston customers on its Capital Division to Quadlok(St. Clair) and Mottman/East Olympia, as well its Mountain Division in south Thurston County. Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup 1 J:\Rail\Rail Plan-General\Glossary Addendum l.doc DRAFT 12/18/05 Sound Transit, ST Established in 1993, Sound Transit is the central Puget Sound regional transit authority established to plan,build and operate a high capacity transit system within the region's most heavily traveled corridors in Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties. It's first plan, Sound Moves (approved by voters in 1996), included a mix of nearly 100 capital and service projects—high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane access improvements, ST Express bus routes, Sounder commuter rail, and Link light rail. The mass transit system implemented under Sound Moves transports 10 million people a year. Sound Transit 2, the second plan, is under development and includes 80 potential projects that extend the system,provide more frequent service, and increase intermodal capacity at transit stations. Tacoma Rail, TRMW, TMBL Tacoma Rail, a shortline, is a municipally owned operating division of Tacoma Public Utilities. It is governed by a 5-member public utility board appointed by the Tacoma City Council. Tacoma Rail's TMBL Tidelands Division (formerly known as the Tacoma Municipal Belt Line) has switched freight between the customers at the Port of Tacoma and the transcontinental railroads since 1914. It's TMBL Capital Division began operation in 2004 serving more than 20 former BSNF freight customers on the Belmore/East Olympia Line (Olympia Industrial Lead),the Quadlok Line (St. Claire Line), and the Lakeview Line (Pt. Defiance Bypass or Lakeview Subdivision). Tacoma Rail's TRMW Mountain Division (separate from the TMBL service)began operating on 132 miles of City of Tacoma owned track in 1998—the city contracts with Tacoma Rail for operations. The Mountain Division serves Frederickson, Morton and Chehalis, with a branch running through south Thurston County from Yelm through Maytown and south through Grand Mound. Tri-City& Olympia Railroad Company, TCRY Tri-City&Olympia Railroad Company is a shortline railroad established in 2000 and based in Richland Washington. TCRY serves the Ports of Benton and Olympia rail freight transportation. In the Thurston region, Tri-City& Olympia usually operates between the Port's Marine Terminal through downtown Olympia to 7th Avenue and Jefferson Street. Union Pacific Railroad,UP Union Pacific Railroad is a U. S. Class I freight railroad providing transcontinental service to Washington State. Between Portland and Tacoma, UP operates on the BNSF tracks. UP also owns a short portion of track branching from the main line at East Olympia and running into downtown Olympia. Thurston Passenger Rail Workgroup 2 J:\Rail\Rail Plan-General\Glossary Addendum Ldoc Articles 12/21/05 • Back on Track • Commuter Trains Could Connect the West's Far-Flung Cities • Reading, Riding and Relaxing • A City Center in the Suburbs • Light Rail Moves Inland from The "Left Coast" High Country News