Amtrak’s State Supported Business Line Suzanne Fike, Business Controller, State Supported Services

2 The State Supported Corridors Business Line Responsible for Operating Agreements with eighteen states partners representing 29 short distance routes across the United States. Record FY 2013 ridership of 15.4M Five routes had ridership of 1M+ – Pacific Surfliner (2.6M) – Capitol Corridor (1.7M) – Keystone Corridor (1.4M) – San Joaquin (1.1M) – Empire Service (1.0M) Five other routes had ridership in the 500K- 1M range – Cascades (845K) – Hiawatha Service (838K) – Newport News Northeast Regional segment (623K) – Lincoln Service (597K) – Downeaster Service (541K) State MaineIndiana MassachusettsMichigan ConnecticutOklahoma VermontTexas New YorkWisconsin PennsylvaniaWashington North CarolinaOregon VirginiaCalifornia IllinoisCCJPA

3 Amtrak State-supported services Section 403(b) of the 1970 Rail Passenger Service Act authorized partnerships to operate trains: – Amtrak ran the service – State could “pick up the tab” for costs associated with the service – Allowed addition of service without incurring additional Federal subsidies First “403(b)” train inaugurated within months Almost 100% ridership growth over the past decade Amtrak State-supported Service Ridership,

4 The Amtrak System, 2014

5 The Amtrak system – state- supported services and the NEC The national system is more than just connectivity – it supports sizeable resource, experience and knowledge bases

6 Areas of responsibility Northeast Caroline Mael South Jay McArthur Midwest Bruce Hillblom West Jeff Snowden (acting)

7 PRIIA 209 Implementation Issues Equipment Capital Working Group –established in SEP 2013 to build a straightforward work plan that will be used to develop a 5-year Capital Investment Program (CIP). –The CIP for Amtrak Equipment Deployed in state supported services is drafted and being prepared for presentation to the Next Generation Equipment Board. Operating Cost Working Group –Need to establish clear definition of route cost versus support fee to allow for proper placement of costs within these two categories. Performance Standards Working Group –Not required by PRIIA –One size does not fit all –Language has been drafted/data based standards have been identified and can be implemented in FY15 Operating Agreements. Main focus for the past year has been to implement and resolve outstanding issues identified during the annual negations of FY2014 Operating Agreements

8 Feasibility Studies for State Partners California Coast Daylight Illinois –Trans Illinois Rail Option Thru-way Bus Option –Additional Frequencies (Carbondale) –Implementation of New Services (Moline and Quad City) CREATE Project –Improve congestion CHI Terminal –Amtrak participates on the Management Committee Indiana Gateway

Partner Satisfaction Survey 64 of 150 surveys returned and included 22 pages of significant issues or concerns including: –On-Time Performance –Transparency, accuracy and timeliness of information and/or invoices We were not prepared for 209 invoice implementation. We are working to provide the States with support documentation/information that meets State requirements but does not violate Amtrak’s confidentiality clauses. (Host RR and Fuel) Established quarterly reconciliations Standardized Reporting –Over 250 reports were being provided to State Partners in OCT 2013 from a variety of sources. –March 2014 States began receiving standardized reports developed from a single data and delivered by a single point of contact

Partner Satisfaction Survey (continued) Inconsistent Customer Service –Over the past year Amtrak has been developing a comprehensive Customer Service training program. –Beginning in the spring of FY2015 Amtrak will launch this training to every employee –Front line supervision will be trained first so that positive behavior can be reinforced as the program is rolled out to all crafts including mechanical. Marketing – Better Communication of Marketing Campaigns/Initiatives –State Marketing Advisory Council concept was introduce to all State partners in July 2014 and will be implemented this fall. –Web based marketing tool that will allow States to customize templates with local branding for route marketing. October/November 2014 annual Partner Satisfaction Survey –Additional smaller survey for annual operating agreement negotiation process

11 Timely Customer Satisfaction Surveys Coming in FY15 CSI/eCSI –OCT 2014 replace CSI with eCSI –Amtrak has fielded CSI and eCSI in parallel during FY14 to understand our options, costs and benefits –18,500 Monthly CSI surveys were mailed out compared to 56,000 eCSI ed. –Time from trip to survey for CSI was 2 to 6 weeks while eCSI was 3 to 9 days. –CSI respondents are heavily weighted to older travelers (77% are over 55) –Based on ridership profiles the age distribution for eCSI is much closer to Amtrak customer. –As expected, overall satisfaction scores for eCSI were lower (77%) than CSI (82%)

12 Benefits of replacing mailed CSI survey Shorter time between trip and survey receipt: significantly reduces the average number of days between the trip and when the customer receives the survey. Respondents more representative of Amtrak customer: Age profile of customers responding to surveys offered through more accurately represent our ridership profiles. Reduce turn-around time: significantly reduces the time between the month of travel and completion of the report for that month. Additional research possible: An methodology provides a tool for additional, unrelated market research that is inexpensive and that can be implemented quickly. FY15: replace CSI mail methodology with eCSI methodology