Caltrain 2025 Program Information and Findings March 2008

Transcription

1 Caltrain 2025 Program Information and Findings March 2008 Page 1 of 9

2 Caltrain 2025 Program Information and Findings March 2008 The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of the Caltrain 2025 program and describe highlights of the business case for implementation. In addition, it summarizes the information associated with the grade crossing hazard analysis, signal system attributes, and vehicle collision analysis conducted under the Caltrain 2025 program as of March The work-to-date is part of an ongoing effort to develop solutions to the issues identified in previous meetings with representatives from the Federal Railroad Administration. Appendices provide further detail on the analyses. A. Program Purpose The primary objective of the Caltrain 2025 Program is to attract and retain the maximum level of future ridership by unconstraining the Caltrain system (capacity) while providing a measurably safer transportation network in the most financially effective manner. To achieve this goal, Caltrain is pursuing a methodical, holistic approach in developing safety enhancement strategies that not only consider rail passengers, but the entire transportation environment. The Caltrain 2025 Program is founded on a capital investment strategy crafted to optimize the infrastructure for maximum capacity utilization and return-on-investment, with the lowest risk, and minimal disruption to neighboring communities and the environment. Since 1995, Caltrain has focused much of its capital program on bringing the railroad to a good state of repair, and has made investments in infrastructure to increase operational capacity and improve performance and reliability. Between the years 2009 and 2014, the Capital Program will be focused on the most significant systems enhancements to date - primarily a new signal system and electrification that will add even more capacity and enable the use of high-performance rolling stock. In order to achieve these stated objectives and maximize the benefits of the 2025 Program, Caltrain is focused on using proven methods and technologies that reduce the risks and costs associated with implementing the improvements and operating the system. From 2015 and on, Caltrain will have the flexibility to expand its rolling stock fleet based on demand, and offer competitive rail transit services that will result in increased ridership and revenues. B. The Business Case for Rapid Rail on the Caltrain Corridor Caltrain, the commuter rail system that serves commuters between San Francisco and San Jose/Silicon Valley, has obtained a level of national prominence and made headlines in recent years for its unprecedented growth in ridership (54%), earned revenue per employee(104%), and productivity (See Figure 1). During this time, Caltrain has been recognized by federal and national organizations such as the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) and the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) for these noteworthy accomplishments. It has also been recognized by local organizations, such as SamCEDA, for doing what any successful profit-driven organization would do: Page 2 of 9

3 develop a product/service to attract as many customers as possible by fully exploiting the utility of existing assets and by making strategic improvements judiciously and only where there will be a significant return on the investment. Figure 1: Ridership and Revenue Revenue/Ridership Comparison The results of introducing Baby Bullet express service have been extraordinary and have given Bay Area travelers a public transit option that is more attractive (due to competitive trip times and reliability), more economical, and safer than taking an automobile along highways serving the same corridor. Ridership continues to grow, month-to-month and year-to-year, four years after the inception of the express service that brought a fundamental change to Caltrain operations after 140 years of conventional commuter rail service. Not only has ridership outpaced gradual increases in population and employment, it has also has remained unaffected by fluctuations in gasoline prices and multiple fare increases, confirming that Caltrain service is highly valued and under priced. Recent passenger surveys have indicated that the new riders see Caltrain not only as an economic and efficient transportation alternative, but also recognize the environmental and safety benefits of traveling by rail. In order for Caltrain to meet growing demand for its services, system capacity must be increased. With its current infrastructure, signal system, and rail equipment, Caltrain will not be able to add more trains to its (March 2008) schedule without degrading service and reliability. The current system has reached its optimal ability to operate as many trains as possible (5 trains per hour each direction) during the peak commute period while also delivering the shorter trip times that have resulted in the historical ridership increases of recent years. As employment in the region rebounds, population growth continues, and highway congestion worsens, Caltrain ridership will continue to grow at a slower pace until trains are too full or travel times lengthen significantly, at which time, ridership will plateau or fall. Caltrain requires a capital investment strategy that enables future Page 3 of 9

4 improvements to service to meet demand in order to retain and grow its share of the transportation market. Caltrain is developing a program of solutions that can deliver the following benefits: 1. Safety Enhancement 2. Improved Service for Its Customers 3. Less capital-intensive approach to system improvements 4. Lower Operating Costs 5. Lowest Risk Embedded in these objectives is the recognition that the ultimate solutions must be defensible from a business perspective. The agency has a responsibility to its current and future funding partners to invest their dollars wisely by making sure resources are put toward investments that provide the most benefit to the maximum number of users, and also that the return on their investment is acceptable and achievable. Caltrain continues to explore multiple avenues for funding the program and will be working throughout the rest of 2008 to better define how the program will be financed. C. Grade Crossings Analysis From the very beginning of discussions with FRA, it was clearly articulated that improving safety and reducing hazards (and risk) associated with grade crossing collisions are high priorities. The Caltrain 2025 Team conducted a comprehensive hazard analysis of its grade crossings to test a methodology for identifying hazards, recommending mitigations, and evaluating the effectiveness of the mitigations. The objective of the proposed modifications to the highway grade crossings is to improve the safety at all crossings by significantly reducing the probability of a collision between the train and road traffic to a level that would significantly improve safety for train crews, passengers and roadway vehicle occupants. As a portion of the comprehensive solution, Caltrain proposes to upgrade all 44 crossing on the Caltrain right of way between the San Francisco and Tamien stations; the improved safety levels detailed herein are based on implementing permitted FRA Supplemental Safety Measures (SSMs) only at these crossings. Additional Safety Measures (ASMs) have been examined and may be appropriate, however, they have not been considered for this phase of the analysis. For all crossings it is assumed that the modifications would occur by 2014 (when the electrification project is complete) and that Caltrain would operate a mix of FRA compliant and non-compliant rolling stock. Methodology The levels of improvements at the highway grade crossings are expressed in terms of a Safety Improvement Factor resulting from the proposed modifications at the crossing relative to the safety of the crossings in their current configuration. The safety Page 4 of 9

5 improvement factor is expressed as the reciprocal of the probability of a collision occurring. The probability of a collision occurring at a crossing was calculated by using the change in the Quiet Zone Risk Index as the result of an improvement to the crossing. The FRA Quiet Zone Calculator was used to calculate the Quiet Zone Risk Index in conjunction with the Risk Reduction Effectiveness Rates specified for the permitted FRA Supplemental Safety Measures in 49 CFR Part 222 Quiet Zone rule. The decision to use the FRA s Quiet Zone Calculator was made after considering alternative available methods. While Caltrain is not developing quiet zones, the validity of the Risk Reduction Effectiveness Rates developed by the FRA for the permitted FRA Supplemental Safety Measures, and the Quiet Zone Risk Index, calculated by use of the Quiet Zone Calculator, for each crossing before and after the upgrades, provided the Caltrain team with the most relevant quantitative information available within the industry. The proposal to use the FRA s Quiet Zone Calculator and SSMs to calculate the probability of a collision at the grade crossing and hence the safety of the modified crossing relative to the current (March 2008) configuration was reviewed and endorsed by a broad range of industry specialists. Findings The analyses performed to date conclude that the proposed SSM upgrades, would improve the crossing safety by a factor of at least 3. This determination was achieved by calculations considering the application of the FRA recognized Supplemental Safety Measures and the corresponding FRA Risk Reduction factors. The achieved level of safety is may be further increased by incorporating or considering ASM upgrades where it is achievable as reasonable cost to benefit. Caltrain recognizes the value of the System Safety work of the FRA and APTA in developing the Severity/Probability guidelines for Hazard Analyses. The quantitative methodologies create a firm base for the analyses that supports the risk management process. This approach sets the foundation to begin that process and establishes formulas for credible analyses whenever data is available. D. Communications Based Overlay Signal System Caltrain is engaged in an extensive investigation of currently available signaling and train control technologies to determine their ability to conform to established Caltrain 2025 requirements. The results of this research has identified three basic technology groups thus far: (1) conventional coded track circuit based cab signaling, (2) communications based overlay signaling, and (3) pure communications based train control. Caltrain evaluated these signaling alternatives based on three key areas of performance, risk and cost. Page 5 of 9

6 Pure communications based train control (CBTC) is characterized by train detection that is not dependent upon the use of track circuits and typically exhibits performance capabilities that can potentially approach theoretical limits. However, track circuits are typically still required for broken rail detection. Caltrain s preliminary findings indicate that this technology provides operating performance that far exceeds its (Caltrain s) operating requirements. When selected, pure CBTC is often applied to green field mass transit configurations where mixed traffic and the need to coexist with nonequipped trains is not a priority. This technology is estimated to have higher costs and risk. Furthermore, the mixed traffic challenges that exist on the railroad influenced Caltrain to screen out this alternative as non-viable. Conventional cab signaling is a proven and mature technology that, in theory, is capable of meeting many of the Caltrain 2025 operational performance needs. The complexity and cost of this technology are significant, particularly considering that in order to provide the required improvement to the railroad s operating performance, it is necessary to substantially increase the number of signal blocks. In addition, cab signaling does not readily provide the ability to support efficient operations that are composed of a mix of trains with varying performance characteristics without a profound increase in complexity and cost. Its lack of a target stop point capability, renders it unable to provide the required utility for intelligent highway crossing solutions. Due to its high cost and performance and functional limitations, the results of Caltrain s analysis determined that this alternative is not a viable solution. Communications based overlay signaling is emerging as the fastest growing signaling technology with a multitude of new applications being installed around the world. Noteworthy examples include ETCS in Europe (stemming from the EU interoperability mandates), and GE Transportation System s ITCS in China (which in this application is actually an extension of the domestically developed overlay system into a pure CBTC system). In the United States, the industry is pursuing several overlay signaling technologies, some of which are now approaching or have already achieved maturity. These initiatives are consistently characterized by a combination of common factors, the most prominent of which are low cost, enhanced performance, improved safety and a broadening recognition of the importance of interoperability. Overlay signaling technology delivers a level of performance that can approach that of the pure CBTC system if the traversal time of the train over the underlying signal system blocks are not unusually long. The performance of an overlay signaling system integrated with Caltrain s existing fixed block wayside signal system will provide a substantial performance improvement on Caltrain. It is important to note that this approach also retains the ability to rely on the vital detection and interlocking functions provided by Caltrain s existing signal system which significantly simplifies and reduces the cost and risk of this technology solution. Retaining full utility of the existing signal system provides the ability to continue to detect and safely control the movement of non-equipped freight trains or trains that experience a temporary loss of overlay functionality will fall-back to the wayside signal system. This factor weighs heavily in favor of adopting this technology. Page 6 of 9

7 Additionally, overlay signaling is capable of being readily extended to effectively support Caltrain s intelligent highway crossing needs with minimal development risk. The specified approach is based on current practices derived from conventional wayside signaling practices. Caltrain s analysis of the train control alternatives described above concluded that overlay signaling is the low cost, low risk, solution that meets the criteria for performance and functional requirements. Appendix B describes further the benefits of the various features of the CBOSS system, and addresses how it can provide train-totrain protection, overspeed protection, roadway worker protection, and contribute to temporal separation from freight. E. Vehicle Collision Analysis This section presents the results of the vehicle collision analyses performed to date, including some comparisons between European (UIC) and North American equipment. The vehicle under consideration for this analysis is a European double deck Electric Multiple Unit (EMU), the Siemens Desiro, that is designed for high voltage AC overhead contact traction power. Alstom and Bombardier also produce similar EMU models. These vehicles are not designed to FRA/APTA requirements, but are designed to European Standard EN and EN The EN15227 standard is intended to take full advantage of crash energy management (CEM) technology to absorb energy during an impact, while protecting the crew and passengers. Essentially all passenger equipment in Europe and in many other countries of the world is being designed to this crashworthiness standard. These trains are also designed to additional standards (e.g. EN12663) that cover conventional requirements, such as buff strength, anticlimbing, side strength, glazings, etc. A full comparison of all FRA regulations will be prepared during the waiver request process. Analyses Performed to Date The initial collision analysis effort has focused on grade crossing collisions. Idealized collision scenarios have been used based on work being done in the U.S. and Europe. Results of these analyses were provided to the Caltrain 2025 hazard analysis to be used in determining outcome severity values for a number of scenarios. One-dimensional, lumped mass calculations were performed for four scenarios using data provided by European carbuilders for CEM equipment, and data from the ongoing studies performed by the FRA and Volpe Center for compliant equipment. The term conventional is used to indicate a vehicle that complies with the latest release of 49 CFR Part 238, including the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on collision and corner post energy absorbing capability. The term CEM below refers to a European trainset that complies with EN 15227, including Crash Energy Management features. A series of impact speeds were analyzed to bracket performance. Four-car trainsets were used in all simulations. The four collision scenarios analyzed were: Conventional (compliant) train into an automobile CEM train into an automobile Page 7 of 9

8 Conventional (compliant) train into a highway truck CEM train into a highway truck In addition to the one-dimensional analyses conducted by our team, results from Sample EN analyses conducted by Siemens have been presented, showing how the CEM systems perform under various collision scenarios. In the case of the simulated 69 mph collision of the Siemen s Desiro with the highway truck, the significant crush and eventual rotation of the truck into the cab car are evident. Nevertheless, there is no predicted intrusion into the cab car s occupant volume. Both Alstom and Siemens have analyzed the scenario described in the recent FRA NPRM, in which the end of a cab car must be able to sustain an impact with a 10,000 lb coil (as one method to demonstrate energy absorption). In both cases, the coil does not penetrate the operator s space. In fact, there is substantial energy absorption capability remaining for both cars. Findings The analyses performed to date show that a European CEM vehicle, that is, a vehicle designed to the EN15227 standard, provides at least an equivalent level of safety for a representative set of grade crossing collisions compared to an FRA-compliant cab car. While these are not the only collision scenarios that could be imagined, they provide a reasonable benchmark to compare vehicles. Table 1 - CEM Relative to Compliant Equipment Performance in Grade Crossing Collisions Impact Object Speed Probability European CEM Automobile All High Meets Standard Truck 30 Low Meets Standard Truck 50 Low No Standard Available Truck 70 Low No Standard Available Steel Coil 20 Very Low Exceeds Standard F. Next Steps Caltrain recognizes the value of the System Safety work of the FRA and APTA in developing the Severity/Probability guidelines for Hazard Analyses. The quantitative methodologies create a firm base for the analyses that supports the risk management process. This approach sets the foundation to begin that process and establishes formulas for credible analyses whenever data is available. Page 8 of 9

9 Caltrain has a Hazard Analysis Process in place that is an 882 model based upon the FRA Collision Hazard Guidelines and APTA System Safety Program Plan requirements. Caltrain s Hazard Analysis Process will use quantitative data whenever it is available and has established a comprehensive methodology for expertise selection for qualitative needs in each phase of the Hazard Analysis process. Caltrain has an interactive internet based software that facilitates the process, tracks mitigation corrective actions, retains supporting documentation and media, and produces multiple reports at all levels of the process. Caltrain will be performing a two year system-wide Hazard Analysis during That system-wide analysis will be a combined product of a number of smaller Hazard Analyses for individual projects and hazards. Some of the individual Hazard Analyses will have expedited timelines as needed and will be issued prior to the final System-wide Report. The first Hazard Analysis that will be performed will be a part of the supporting documentation with mitigation proposals for the Caltrain 2025 waiver request. This fulfills a number of FRA and APTA requirements, but more important, it is simply good Hazard Management and an intelligent and effective Safety Practice. The Caltrain System-wide Hazard Analysis is cyclical and a living process that will continue and be revisited as the infrastructure of Caltrain evolves and surrounding environments change. The process will produce resource effective mitigations for the safest and most efficient operation for Caltrain s passengers and the public entities through which we travel. Caltrain is committed to use the most advanced analytic methods to determine the best solution to the enhance safety and performance at highway crossings that will give Caltrain, regulators and the general public confidence that due diligence has been performed to identify and provide the safest practicable solutions possible. Page 9 of 9