 |
Supervisor Arnold on SMART vs. NCRA -Who is Telling the Truth?
Author: Mitsy, ESQ.
Date: 08-22-2008 - 11:28
From the Press Democrat
A troubled rail relationship
By JUDY ARNOLD
Published: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 5:31 a.m.
There is a commonly held assumption that the impacts of freight rail service on Novato and Sonoma County would be lessened if SMART is approved in November, because SMART has the authority to control the North Coast Railroad Authority in its freight operations. However, the NCRA has ceded most of its authority to its operator, the Northwestern Pacific Company (NWP). It is therefore critical to highlight for the public several comments submitted by the NWP on the draft environmental impact report by SMART.
I believe these comments clearly lay the groundwork for demands and possible lawsuits that the politically powerful and well-connected NWP intends to pursue. The fact is that the private, for-profit entity, NWP, is relying on SMART's improvement of the tracks so that it can run freight from Eureka to Napa unimpeded.
Here are some excerpts from the NWP comments in the draft EIR. (To read the entire comments, go to: www.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/fseir_2-0_sets_c25-c29.pdf)
Regarding freight-passenger train operations and separation. The NWP states that SMART "assumes that freight trains would operate primarily during off-peak passenger service time periods . . . which makes freight operations subordinate to regularly scheduled passenger commute operations."
NWP states "several legal agreements clearly provide that such priority shall not materially adversely affect NWP performance of its common carrier obligations." NWP also states that newer signal systems would allow trains as close as three to four minutes behind preceding trains, and that SMART's assumption of 30-minute headways would reduce the capacity of the NWP line to only two trains per hour in each direction.
Meanwhile, SMART states, without qualification, that freight operations will be subordinate to passenger operations and reiterated its commitment to provide 30-minute headways.
Which one is true?
Regarding hours of freight operation and system capacity: NWP claims SMART's proposed freight-train schedules are unrealistic, especially if NWP operates a solid-waste train which will necessitate cooperation and connection schedules with the Union Pacific. NWP asserts that it must provide adequate rail freight service to the shippers and receivers on the NWP line, not all of which can be anticipated at this time.
SMART maintains that freight could be accommodated without night trains, likely with the elimination of the midday passenger train. Which one is true?
Regarding time separation between trains: SMART states they will receive a federal Rail Authority waiver to operate passenger trains on the same track as freight. They also state that such a waiver would be granted under strict time separation, or with new technology known as Positive Train Control (PTC) or else eliminate the midday passenger train.
NWP calls SMART's assumption of PTC "unrealistically optimistic" and asserts that, without train control, NWP freight operations would be shifted largely to night operations under the time separation scenario.
SMART states that the cumulative analysis does not assume PTC and reiterates that the midday train would most likely be eliminated to achieve sufficient time separation and allow for midday freight service.
Which one is true?
Regarding public safety: The NWP raises questions and concerns about the setbacks planned for the bike and pedestrian path along the rail line from Cloverdale to Ignacio. Looking at other rail line requirements, NWP believes a 100-foot setback is required where speeds are in the 70 mph to 90 mph range for safety reasons. (SMART's operating plan calls for 80 mph.) SMART plans bike-lane setbacks of between 15 and 40 feet with safety structures where necessary. Which one is true?
These comments from NWP and SMART clearly demonstrate that theirs is a troubled relationship. NWP seems poised to take an adversarial position against SMART on these issues. Novato and Sonoma County need to seriously question and demand answers from SMART and NWP before November.
Judy Arnold is a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors.
A troubled rail relationship
By JUDY ARNOLD
Published: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 4:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Friday, August 22, 2008 at 5:31 a.m.
There is a commonly held assumption that the impacts of freight rail service on Novato and Sonoma County would be lessened if SMART is approved in November, because SMART has the authority to control the North Coast Railroad Authority in its freight operations. However, the NCRA has ceded most of its authority to its operator, the Northwestern Pacific Company (NWP). It is therefore critical to highlight for the public several comments submitted by the NWP on the draft environmental impact report by SMART.
I believe these comments clearly lay the groundwork for demands and possible lawsuits that the politically powerful and well-connected NWP intends to pursue. The fact is that the private, for-profit entity, NWP, is relying on SMART's improvement of the tracks so that it can run freight from Eureka to Napa unimpeded.
Here are some excerpts from the NWP comments in the draft EIR. (To read the entire comments, go to: www.sonomamarintrain.org/userfiles/file/fseir_2-0_sets_c25-c29.pdf)
Regarding freight-passenger train operations and separation. The NWP states that SMART "assumes that freight trains would operate primarily during off-peak passenger service time periods . . . which makes freight operations subordinate to regularly scheduled passenger commute operations."
NWP states "several legal agreements clearly provide that such priority shall not materially adversely affect NWP performance of its common carrier obligations." NWP also states that newer signal systems would allow trains as close as three to four minutes behind preceding trains, and that SMART's assumption of 30-minute headways would reduce the capacity of the NWP line to only two trains per hour in each direction.
Meanwhile, SMART states, without qualification, that freight operations will be subordinate to passenger operations and reiterated its commitment to provide 30-minute headways.
Which one is true?
Regarding hours of freight operation and system capacity: NWP claims SMART's proposed freight-train schedules are unrealistic, especially if NWP operates a solid-waste train which will necessitate cooperation and connection schedules with the Union Pacific. NWP asserts that it must provide adequate rail freight service to the shippers and receivers on the NWP line, not all of which can be anticipated at this time.
SMART maintains that freight could be accommodated without night trains, likely with the elimination of the midday passenger train. Which one is true?
Regarding time separation between trains: SMART states they will receive a federal Rail Authority waiver to operate passenger trains on the same track as freight. They also state that such a waiver would be granted under strict time separation, or with new technology known as Positive Train Control (PTC) or else eliminate the midday passenger train.
NWP calls SMART's assumption of PTC "unrealistically optimistic" and asserts that, without train control, NWP freight operations would be shifted largely to night operations under the time separation scenario.
SMART states that the cumulative analysis does not assume PTC and reiterates that the midday train would most likely be eliminated to achieve sufficient time separation and allow for midday freight service.
Which one is true?
Regarding public safety: The NWP raises questions and concerns about the setbacks planned for the bike and pedestrian path along the rail line from Cloverdale to Ignacio. Looking at other rail line requirements, NWP believes a 100-foot setback is required where speeds are in the 70 mph to 90 mph range for safety reasons. (SMART's operating plan calls for 80 mph.) SMART plans bike-lane setbacks of between 15 and 40 feet with safety structures where necessary. Which one is true?
These comments from NWP and SMART clearly demonstrate that theirs is a troubled relationship. NWP seems poised to take an adversarial position against SMART on these issues. Novato and Sonoma County need to seriously question and demand answers from SMART and NWP before November.
Judy Arnold is a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors.
Supervisor Arnold on SMART vs. NCRA -Who is Telling the Truth?