BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY 11, 2018 - Granicus

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

MAY 11, 2018

BOARD ROSTER SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY

County Member Alternate Riverside: Andrew Kotyuk (Chair) Brian Berkson* 2 votes Council Member Mayor Pro Tem City of San Jacinto City of Jurupa Valley RCTC Board RCTC Board Debbie Franklin Adam Rush* Council Member At Large Council Member City of Banning City of Eastvale RCTC Board RCTC Board Ventura: Brian Humphrey (Vice-Chair) Ginger Gherardi 1 vote Citizen Representative Mayor VCTC Board City of Santa Paula VCTC Board Los Angeles: Ara Najarian (2nd Vice-Chair) Walter Allen, III 4 votes Councilmember Mayor Pro Tem City of Glendale City of Covina Metro Board Metro Appointee Kathryn Barger Roxana Martinez Supervisor, 5th District Metro Appointee County of Los Angeles Metro Board Paul Krekorian Borja Leon Councilmember, 2nd District Metro Appointee City of Los Angeles Metro Board Hilda Solis Vivian Romero Supervisor, 1st District Council Member County of Los Angeles City of Montebello Metro Board Metro Appointee

SCRRA Board of Directors Roster Page 2

*Alternates represent either member Revised 05.04.18

San Bernardino: Larry McCallon Ray Marquez* 2 votes Mayor Council Member City of Highland City of Chino Hills SBCTA Board SBCTA Board Alan D. Wapner [CURRENTLY AWAITING Mayor Pro Tem APPOINTMENT]* City of Ontario SBCTA Board Orange: Shawn Nelson Laurie Davies* 2 votes Supervisor, 4th District Council Member County of Orange City of Laguna Niguel OCTA Board OCTA Board Gregory T. Winterbottom Richard D. Murphy* Public Member Council Member OCTA Board City of Los Alamitos OCTA Board EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS San Diego Association of Governments: [CURRENTLY AWAITING APPOINTMENT] Contact: Linda Culp Principal Planner – Rail Southern California Association of Governments: Art Brown Council Member, City of Buena Park State of California: Carrie Bowen District Director, Caltrans District 7 Alternate: Paul Marquez Deputy District Director for Planning, District 7

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING FRIDAY, MAY 11, 2018 – 10:00 A.M. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (METRO) BOARD ROOM ONE GATEWAY PLAZA, 3RD FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

AGENDA DESCRIPTIONS The agenda descriptions are intended to give notice to members of the public of a brief general description of items of business to be transacted or discussed. The posting of the recommended actions does not indicate what action will be taken. The Authority may take any action that it deems to be appropriate on the agenda item and is not limited in any way by the notice of the recommended action. The Chair reserves the right to discuss the items listed on the agenda in any order. A person with a disability may contact the Board Secretary’s office at (213) 452-0255 or via email [email protected] at least 72-hours before the scheduled meeting to request receipt of an agenda in an alternative format or to request disability-related accommodations, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION The agenda, staff reports and supporting documentation are available from the Board Secretary, located at One Gateway Plaza, 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012, and on the Metrolink website at www.metrolinktrains.com under the Meetings & Agendas link. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Members of the public wishing to address the Board of Directors regarding any item appearing on the agenda or any item not on the agenda, but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board, may do so by completing a Speaker’s Form and submitting it to the Board Secretary. All speakers will be recognized by the Chairman and will be considered under Item 4 (Public Comment). When addressing the Board, please state your name for the record. Please address the Board as a whole through the Chair. Please note comments to individual Board members or staff are not permitted when addressing the Board. A speaker’s comments shall be limited to three (3) minutes. 1. Call to Order

Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

2. Pledge of Allegiance

3. Roll Call

4. Public Comment

REGULAR CALENDAR

5. Approval of Meeting Minutes – April 13, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting

It is recommended that the Board approve the Minutes of the April 13, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting.

Page 1

6. Contract No. E741-15 – Project Management, Construction Management and Staff Assistance Services – Exercise Two-Year Option – PreScience Corporation, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., AECOM Technical Services Inc., and RailPros, Inc. Continued on-call professional project management, construction management and engineering staff assistance services are needed to support a wide variety of small and large capital and third-party projects for the Authority. It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to: 1) Exercise a single two-year option for Contract No. E741-15, Project

Management, Construction Management and Staff Assistance Services, to a bench of firms as listed below: E741A-15 – PreScience Corporation (PreScience) E741B-15 – Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. (Parsons Brinckerhoff) E741C-15 – AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) E741D-15 – RailPros, Inc (RailPros)

2) Maintain the not-to-exceed contract funding authorization amount of $10 million for contracts E741A-15 (PreScience) and E741B-15 (Parsons Brinckerhoff) and increase the not to-exceed contract funding authorization amount to $15 million for contracts E741C-15 (AECOM) and E741D-15 (RailPros) for the three-year base term and two-year option.

There is no financial commitment with respect to approving the additional contract authority requested as subsequent work will be authorized only if funding is approved and available through the annual budget or an equivalent process.

Page 15


7. Contract No. SP466-16 – Law Enforcement Services – Recommendation to

Amend Period of Performance and Increase Contract Funding Authorization – County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

Continued multi-jurisdictional on-train and patrol law enforcement services across five counties is necessary to ensure safe and secure environment for customers and employees. It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to amend Contract No. SP466-16 for Law Enforcement Services with the County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department for a three-year base term with one two-year option, and increase contract authority to an amount not to exceed $27,600,000. Contract funding authorization for this contract will be requested through the annual budget process for Fiscal Year 2018-19 and for future fiscal years. With the exception of recollectable work, requested dollars will be budgeted within various line items in the Authority’s operating budget. Recollectable work will be funded by existing third party agreements.

Page 18

8. FY2017-18 Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Resolution for Fare Voucher Program The Authority has submitted an application for funding from the State of California under the FY2017-18 Cap and Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) for the purpose of implementing a Fare Voucher Program. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) administers the LCTOP grant program and requires the Board to adopt a resolution delegating authority for execution of any actions necessary under this grant. An annual resolution is required to apply for the funds. It is recommended that the Board adopt Resolution 18-95 (Attachment A) to authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute for and on behalf of the Authority, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by Caltrans. The Chief Executive Officer may delegate these actions to the Deputy Chief Executive Officer; the Deputy Operating Officer for Project Planning and Delivery; or the Director of Planning. There is no budget impact from authorization of this resolution. No local match is required, and the resolution will allow the Authority to receive the funds.

Page 22


9. Dodgers Express Service – Proposed Pilot Program

Staff is providing a report on the different options to provide special service for select Dodgers games. At the February 9, 2018, Board Meeting, Director Solis, 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian, and Directors Barger and Krekorian introduced a motion for staff to evaluate the feasibility of introducing a Dodgers Express pilot service on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines for the 2018 baseball season and off-season special events. The Board may provide direction for staff to provide service by also identifying funding to operate and market the pilot program. The item has no impact on the Authority’s Board-approved Operation or Capital Budget. The cost will be covered by a Third Party Recollectable agreement, if other grants are not available to provide the service this year.

Page 34

10. San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot As a result of a motion led by Director Solis, with support from Directors Barger, Krekorian and 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) Boards have approved funding for a promotional 25% fare reduction on the San Bernardino Line. It is recommended that the Board receive the recommendations of the Metro and SBCTA Boards and direct staff to implement a 25% fare reduction pilot for an initial period of six months effective July 1, 2018, with an extension for an additional six months following the completion of a Title VI fare equity analysis in October 2018. Promotional San Bernardino Line fares will not be valid for travel on Riverside Line trains. (Riverside Line fares continue to be valid on both the Riverside and San Bernardino Lines.) There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. There are ongoing discussions with affected Member Agencies to ensure a neutral impact to future budgets.

Page 64

11. Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project; Valley Subdivision Mile Post 7.99, Design Review and Project Support Approval is needed to execute a Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project (Project) at mile post 7.99 on the Valley Subdivision.


It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute this Funding Agreement between Metro and the Authority in the amount of $390,300, defining the roles, responsibilities and funding commitments for the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project. This item has no impact upon the Authority’s Board-approved Operations or Capital Budgets. The amount incurred or expended will be borne by Metro.

Page 105

12. Master Cooperative Agreement with the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project Staff is seeking Board approval to finalize and execute a Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) with the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority (Construction Authority) for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project (Project), specifying the procedures that the Construction Authority and the Authority will follow in implementing their respective roles and responsibilities in the design and construction of the Project. It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to finalize and execute this MCA between the Construction Authority and the Authority, in an amount not-to-exceed $4,929,370, at the Construction Authority’s sole cost, defining roles and responsibilities of the Construction Authority and the Authority for the design and construction of the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project. The $4,929,370 for the Authority’s coordination and reviews during the design and construction of the Project will be borne by the Construction Authority, hence there is no impact on the Authority’s Board-approved Operation or Capital Budget.

Page 131

13. Fuel Hedging Program Update – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018

Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s Fuel Hedging program. This report is for the quarter ended March 31, 2018. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 134


14. Comparative Operating Statement Actual vs Budget through the Third Quarter

of Fiscal Year 2018 and vs Third Quarter Actual of Fiscal Year 2017 and Year-End Forecast for Fiscal Year 2018 with Comparisons to Budget and Prior Year Actual The Chief Executive Officer has directed staff to produce quarterly operating statements for the Board’s review. The statements included in this report present the actual results through the third quarter of FY18, which is the nine months ended March 31, 2018, compared to budget, and compared to the prior year actual results for the same period. This report also includes a forecast of the full fiscal year 2018 with comparisons to budget and prior year actuals. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 138

15. FY2017-18 Quarterly Accounts Receivable Status Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 This report presents a status update on the Authority’s Accounts Receivable for the quarter ended March 31, 2018. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 155

16. FY2017-18 Quarterly Investment Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018

Section VII of the Authority’s Annual Investment Policy requires that the Treasurer make a quarterly investment report to the Board, and Section 53646 of the California Government Code encourages local agencies to file this report. This report is for the quarter ended March 31, 2018.

The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 158

17. FY2018-19 Budget Development Update Finance Policy 1.1 provides guidelines for the development of the Authority’s annual budget to ensure that a balanced budget is prepared in a timely basis and submitted to the Board for adoption prior to the start of each new fiscal year. This report


provides a status update on the Fiscal Year 2018-19 (FY19) budget development progress to date. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 166

18. Capital Grant Summary for January through March 2018 Staff is providing an update to the Board summarizing capital grant acquisition, reprogramming and closeout activity for the period from January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018.

The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this status report.

Page 171

19. 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program Grant Application Status Update Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) grant program submittal.

The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this status report. Staff will recommend amendment to the FY19 budget to reflect the projects included the TIRCP award as necessary.

Page 177

20. State and Federal Legislative Update Staff will provide an update on current legislative issues in State and Federal Government Affairs. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 223

21. Positive Train Control Program – Update of Project Status, Including Interoperability with BNSF Railway, Union Pacific Railroad, Amtrak, and North County Transit District Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s Positive Train Control (PTC) Program. Also included are the following exhibits:


Exhibit A: Recent Change Orders to Contract No. H1636-10 Positive Train

Control System with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., (Parsons)

Exhibit B: Recent Change Orders to Contract No. H1655-14 with Wabtec Railway Electronics (Wabtec)

Exhibit C: PTC Project Status Report The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 229

22. Service Improvements to Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles Corridor Staff is providing a report on various efforts and plans underway for improving service on the Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles corridor. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 276

23. Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station Opening

Staff is providing an update on the Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station including station information, grand opening press event information and a marketing outline for introducing the station. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 280

24. Updates to Human Resources Policies and Procedures Staff is providing an update on changes to three (3) other Human Resources policies that were authorized by the Chief Executive Officer under his delegated authority. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 286


25. Compensation Report – FY2017-18 – 3rd Quarter (January 1, 2018 through

March 31, 2018) At its April 11, 2014 meeting, the Board amended Human Resources Policy 2.1 to require staff to make quarterly and annual reports to the Board on compensation matters. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. The FY2017-18 Budget provides the amount for these changes in compensation.

Page 288

26. Update on Vacant Information Technology Positions At the board meeting on Jan 26, 2018, the Board approved increased contract funding authorization for Contract No. SP445-16 - IT Technical Support Services to temporarily fill vacant positions in the Information Technology (IT) department. Upon approval, the Board requested an update on the open IT position within the next three months. The Board may receive and file this report. The increase in contract funding for IT Support Services is included in the Adopted Operations Budget for FY2017-18. Funding for subsequent years will be requested through the annual budget or equivalent process.

Page 292

27. Update on Tierra Del Sol Internship Program Staff is providing an update on its internship program with Tierra Del Sol. The Authority has partnered with Tierra Del Sol’s Workforce Development Program to provide internships for young adults with developmental disabilities, in an effort to provide inclusive opportunities and a pathway to competitive and integrated employment for these young adults. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 294

28. Internship Program Update At the December 8, 2017 Board meeting, Chair Kotyuk requested an update on the Internship Program. Between 2015 and 2017, the Authority has hired an average of fifteen (15) interns per year.


The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 296

29. Mobile and Online (Web-Based) Ticketing Project Update Staff is providing an update on the progress to date and key milestones associated with the delivery of the Mobile and Online Ticketing Project. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 299

30. Ticket Vending Machine Availability and Performance Update

Staff is providing an update on ticket vending machine (TVM) availability and performance. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 305

31. Tier 4 Locomotive Update and Delivery Status This report is a monthly update to the Board on the status of the Tier 4 Locomotive Program and information during revenue service. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact because of this report.

Page 308

32. Performance Update on Contract No. OP136-10 – Operator Services – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018

Staff is providing an update on Contract No. Op136-10 Operator Services with the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak). The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 312


33. Quarterly Report on Bus Bridge Response for Unplanned Service Disruptions

– Quarter Ended March 31, 2018

Staff is providing an update on alternate bus bridge provider response during the third quarter (January to March 2018) of FY18. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 317

34. Federal Railroad Administration Inspections, Exceptions and Violations Update Staff is providing a quarterly update on violations received from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). This update will summarize the inspections, exceptions, violations and fines received in the first quarter of the calendar year 2018, January through March. The Board may receive and file this report. The fines assessed to the Authority in the amount of $18,925 are included in the Adopted Operational Budget for FY2017-18.

Page 324

35. Internal Audit Department Update The following status of audit activities of the Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) at the Authority is for informational purposes. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no immediate budget impact resulting from this status report.

Page 327

36. Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company – Contract No. MS222-09R (#2018-02-CA) The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) Contract No. MS222-09R (#2018-02-CA). The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 331


37. Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (#2017-14-IA)

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (#2017-14-IA). The Board may receive and file this report. There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 345

38. Performance Audit: Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA) The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit: Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA). The Board may receive and file this report. The Corrective Action plan in connection with Recommendation #7, as reflected on the detailed report, could potentially reduce monthly service costs related to courier service. There is no additional budgetary impact as a result of this report.

Page 367

39. Corrective Action Status Update – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 The following status of all audit related corrective actions being monitored and tracked by the Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) at the Authority is for informational purposes. The Board may receive and file this report. There is no immediate budget impact resulting from this status report.

Page 384

40. Chief Executive Officer’s Report Authority Update

41. Board Members' Comments

42. Chair’s Comments


CLOSED SESSION

43. Closed Session

a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION –

Initiation of Litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(4) – (1 potential case)

44. ADJOURNMENT

NEXT BOARD MEETING: JUNE 8, 2018

Check agenda for meeting location

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING April 13, 2018

ITEM 5

BOARD MEMBERS/ALTERNATES IN ATTENDANCE: Votes RCTC: ANDREW KOTYUK (Chair) 1 (2 votes) DEBBIE FRANKLIN 1 Brian Berkson VCTC: BRIAN HUMPHREY (Vice-Chair) 1 (1 vote) Ginger Gherardi METRO: ARA NAJARIAN (2nd Vice-Chair) 1 (4 votes) KATHRYN BARGER 1 PAUL KREKORIAN 1 Roxana Martinez Vivian Romero1 1 SBCTA: LARRY MCCALLON 1 (2 votes) Ray Marquez 1 OCTA: SHAWN NELSON2 2 (2 votes) EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS SCAG -- State of California Paul Marquez, Alternate STAFF/PRESENTERS: ARTHUR T. LEAHY, Chief Executive Officer ELISSA K. KONOVE, Deputy Chief Executive Officer ROD BAILEY, Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Dispatch and Operator Services) DON DEL RIO, General Counsel GEOFFREY FORGIONE, Associate General Counsel HASAN IKHRATA, Chief Executive Officer, Southern California Association of Governments 1 Director Romero left during the discussion of Item No. 14. 2 Director Nelson arrived during the discussion of Item No. 6.

1

Board of Directors Board Meeting Minutes – April 13, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Page 2

WHITNEY O’NEILL, Senior Manager, Government and Regulatory Affairs MICHELLE STEWART, Senior Manager, Operations CHRISTINE WILSON, Senior Manager, Finance DENNY ZANE, Executive Director, Move LA KARI HOLMAN, Assistant to the CEO/Board Secretary Meeting minutes are prepared in a format that corresponds with the Board Meeting Agenda, which is incorporated by reference with these minutes. Board Agendas are available online at www.metrolinktrains.com under the Meetings and Agendas link or from the Board Secretary at (213) 452-0255. 1. Call to Order

The April 13, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting was called to order by Chair Kotyuk at 10:08 a.m. at the Metro Board Room, One Gateway Plaza, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012.

2. Pledge of Allegiance

Director Krekorian led the group in the pledge of allegiance. 3. Roll Call

The Board Secretary called roll to confirm a quorum of the Board was present. 4. Public Comment

At this time, Chair Kotyuk inquired if the Board Secretary had received any Request to Speak forms, and it was confirmed that no requests were received. The Public Comment period was then closed.

Chair Kotyuk welcomed Ray Marquez, Alternate for San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to the Board. He noted that Director Marquez serves as Council Member, City of Chino Hills and has been a council member since 2013 and served as Mayor in 2017. He stated that Director Marquez also served as a member of the following: Chino Hills Incorporation Committee which sought to establish Chino Hills as a city Chino Hills Planning Commission Chino Hills Parks and Recreation Commission Chino Valley Independent Fire District

Director Marquez thanked the Board and looked forward to working with them and the Authority.

2


REGULAR CALENDAR 5. Protest by Conduent Transport Solutions, Inc. – Contract No. H1660-18 –

Ticket Vending Devices Chair Kotyuk stated that at the last Board meeting, the Board authorized the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to award a contract for new Ticket Vending Machines to Innovation in Transportation (INIT). Thereafter, on March 30, 2018 the second ranked proposer and incumbent, Conduent Transport Solutions (Conduent), filed a timely protest. The CEO provided a memo to the Board on April 12, 2018 which summarized the protest. Pursuant to the Authority’s Policy, and statutory requirements, a protest must be submitted in writing and must specify the complete basis for the protest. Conduent therefore was limited to its protest as set forth in its March 30, 2018 letter. Staff led by the CEO examined Conduent's written protest. Under its rules, Conduent had a right to appear before the board and be heard. Chair Kotyuk then outlined the order of presenters: 1. The CEO and Protest Officer would present their recommendation regarding the

protest. 2. A representative of Conduent would have a reasonable opportunity to present its

protest. 3. The CEO and Protest Officer could respond briefly as necessary. 4. The Board would hear any public comment on this specific agenda item. 5. The Board would deliberate and decide whether to reject or uphold the Protest. Chair Kotyuk then stressed that the Board’s charge was only to evaluate the CEO’s recommendation and then either reject or uphold the protest. This was not the time to reconsider any earlier decision regarding this contract. Chair Kotyuk then called on Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer for his comments. Arthur T Leahy stated that he did not think the facts supported Conduent’s protest and recommended that the protest be rejected. He then turned the discussion over to the Protest Officer to provide detailed rationale. Elissa K. Konove, Protest Officer stated that Conduent's Protest was based on four arguments, as set forth in its March 30, 2018 protest letter. She quickly summarized all four arguments so that the Board had a complete understanding of the protest and could make a fully informed decision. It was her view that all four arguments were essentially different ways of getting at the same point, namely that the Authority did not provide Conduent sufficient notice prior to final award of the contract and staff did not agree with that position. It was important to note that Conduent did not suggest that the Authority’s procurement process itself was flawed or unfair to Conduent or that the Authority should not have determined INIT to be the highest

3


ranked proposer. The protest was purely related to the Notice of Award following the completion of the procurement. Conduent's four arguments were as follows: 1. Conduent asserted that the Board improperly awarded the contract at its

meeting on March 23, 2018—without the statutorily required 15 day waiting period;

2. Conduent asserted that it never received any notice of the award of the contract

to INIT and so the Authority failed to provide it with its right to protest the award; 3. Conduent asserted that the Authority violated Public Contract Code procedures

by failing to make certain documents immediately available to the public, limiting its ability to protest; and

4. Conduent asserted that the Authority violated Conduent's due process rights by

failing to provide advance notice of the recommended award and by failing to make certain documents available for inspection.

She noted that the Board action at the March 23, 2018 meeting was to "authorize the Chief Executive Officer to award Contract subject to resolution of any protest timely filed." Accordingly, the Chief Executive Officer had not yet awarded the contract, pending resolution of this protest. The Authority emailed a Notice of Recommended Award to Conduent on March 20, 2018. The Authority also posted the recommendation on its website on March 20, 2018. On March 28, 2018, Conduent's lawyer sent a records request to the Authority, referencing the March 20, 2018 staff report. It therefore must have received the Notice at some point prior to March 28, 2018, further undermining its assertion that it did not receive any Notice of the proposed award. Conduent misstated the Authority’s statutory obligations. The Authority did not need to affirmatively provide documents to the public. Rather, it must make them available upon request and the Authority did just that. In fact, the Authority provided a comprehensive set of documents to Conduent, in accordance with its legal obligations. Lastly, the Authority did provide advance notice of the recommended award and did make available to Conduent all documents necessary in order to scrutinize the evaluation process and determine that the Authority conducted a fair process that treated all proposers equally. In addition, and consistent with its statutory right, Conduent had been afforded a due process opportunity to be heard by the Board with regard to its protest prior to final contract award. Arthur T. Leahy stated that he conferred with General Counsel, who agreed, and who further advised that the protest was without legal merit as well, and was his recommendation therefore that the Board deny and reject the protest in its entirety.

4


At this time, Chair Kotyuk provided Conduent with an opportunity to speak on this protest. No one from Conduent came forward to speak. There were no public comments received on this item. Chair Kotyuk inquired if there were any questions or comments on this item from members of the Board. 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian inquired of General Counsel if there was agreement with the CEO’s recommendation. Don Del Rio, General Counsel responded that counsel was in full agreement to reject the protest and noted that all the documentation requested by Conduent had been provided to them. Upon a motion by Director Franklin and seconded by Director McCallon the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board denied and rejected the protest in its entirety.

6. Southern California Association of Governments – Current Topics Hasan Ikhrata, Chief Executive Officer thanked the Board for allowing him to come and speak on a recent study on transit ridership conducted by University of California Los Angeles that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) had commissioned. He commented on the following topics: Between the years 2000 – 2015, the region added 2.3 million people and an

estimated 2.1 million cars on the roads. Increased car ownership in the 2000’s than in the 1990s which is one reason why transit ridership has experienced a decrease.

Since 1990 there have been no additional freeways constructed. Transit ridership continues to decline, but investments should continue to be made to create a transit system that works for all. Freeway capacity has been reached.

Estimate employment forecast throughout the SCAG region to add 4.1 million people between 2018 and 2040. There is an urgency to figure out how to handle the expanded employment and commute needs of the near future.

He supported the use of Senate Bill 1 funds to invest in transit and noted that investment in transportation and Metrolink was a good move. He addressed impacts of first and last mile connections with means of Uber and Lyft and bike rental service options. Hasan Ikhrata spoke of affordable housing constraints in the Orange and Los Angeles counties and stated that people are moving farther out, however, are employed in those two counties. Hasan Ikhrata stated, for example, if 1 in 4 persons would take transit just twice monthly that would double the number of transit riders. He noted that as a new neighbor and transportation partner, there was an opportunity to help make a difference in the communities. He mentioned that the

5


Southern California Optimization Rail Expansion (SCORE) program would be one of those programs, but funding matches need to be identified to move that program forward. He concluded that he had testified in Sacramento before the Assembly Transportation Committee in Sacramento, Tuesday, April 3, on the High Speed Rail funding of approximately one half billion dollars ($0.5B) and was excited to begin to see those monies that were committed to Southern California several years ago. Hasan Ikhrata stated that there was still much work to do with investments in rail and to be ready should High Speed Rail happen. He again thanked the Board for letting him speak and asked if there were any questions. Chair Kotyuk stated that the Board supported his discussion and noted that it felt as though the Authority was alone in fighting for the corridor and infrastructure needs, and stated that interconnection with light rail in the communities and other transportation support was needed. Director Nelson shared his comments on the lack of support SCAG provided for the need of legislation as it related to construction of business building near train stations. He noted that SCAG had committed to conduct a study on that request, which never took place. He expressed his frustration on getting reports on HSR, which may be years down the road, while not addressing issues that could have an immediate impact on helping people use public transportation to arrive at their jobs should business have incentives to build near/next to a train station – for example, the Anaheim / Santa Ana area. Hasan Ikhrata responded agreed and noted that investments in transit should also include getting people to where the jobs already are without having them transfer several times. He added that the Director’s study was requested, and that there was more needed to invest in transit and provide ease of access to employees. He noted that neither SCAG nor the Authority was responsible for land use. Director Nelson replied that SCAG provides support for many causes that they do not have authority over and remarked that there is no legislature to support land developers to build office buildings near train stations and did not understand why the SCAG organization did not support that recommendation. ACTION: The Board received and filed this report.

7. Move LA – Vision2020 Initiative Denny Zane, Executive Director of Move LA delivered a report on Move LA’s Vision2020 initiative. Director Nelson commented that Orange County would not likely support a sales tax measure and asked for a list of projects that would done in Orange County before asking for a vote. Denny Zane responded that the list would not be decided by Move LA but that the county itself would outline its list of projects. Director Nelson asked how the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) fit into this

6


plan. Denny Zane replied that the SCAQMD would only be included for clean air support and would not have approval over goods movement. He added that legislature would outline how the money would be awarded and spent. Director Nelson stated that it would be the intention of SCAQMD to control how the monies would be spent. Denny Zane responded that his organization would never support a measure that would give the SCAQMD funding for infrastructure, but noted that half of the money would be used for infrastructure and the other half would be used for clean air. Director McCallon stated that based on the handout provided on survey results that in his opinion the survey was skewed and noted that those who responded were computer literate and took the time to respond to the survey. He stated that 58% of those who took the survey had a college degree or higher, which in his view did not represent the composition of the counties. Director McCallon added that the funds from other transportation measures that had previously passed stayed within the county with defined projects identified to the communities of a county. He did not believe that a clean air tax could be included with transportation measures. Denny Zane responded that the objective of a good clear project list would need to be included in the measure and that this presentation was to serve as a high-level overview. Director McCallon stated that both he and Director Nelson were opposed to this initiative. Director Barger expressed that she also had concerns regarding this initiative. Chair Kotyuk remarked that he did not believe there would be support on this initiative and stated that there were concerns from everyone.

ACTION: The Board received and filed this report. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is available upon request from the Board Secretary.

8. Approval of Meeting Minutes – March 23, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting

Upon a motion by Vice-Chair Humphrey and seconded by 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board approved the Minutes of the March 23, 2018 Board of Directors Meeting.

7


9. Contract No. JO121-18R – Fencing, Gates and Signage Services – Recommendation to Award – Ferreira Construction Company Chair Kotyuk inquired if there were any questions or comments on this item. No additional comments were received. Upon a motion by Director Barger and seconded by Director McCallon the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board authorized the Chief Executive Officer to award Contract No. JO121-18R for Fencing, Gates and Signage to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Ferreira Coastal Construction Co. Inc., dba Ferreira Construction Company, in an amount not-to-exceed $4 million. Award is subject to resolution of any protest timely filed.

10. Design Service Agreement with City of Palmdale for SR 138 (Palmdale

Boulevard) 5th Street East to 10th Street East Improvements Project, Valley Subdivision Mile Post 68.40 Chair Kotyuk inquired if there were any questions or comments on this item. Director Martinez requested that staff set up a meeting to discuss some railroad crossing issues and appreciated the collaboration between the Authority and the City. Upon a motion by Director McCallon and seconded by Director Franklin the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute a Design Service Agreement (DSA) between the City and the Authority in the amount of $290,950. The DSA shall define roles, responsibilities and funding for Authority’s review of the City’s design and supporting services as well as the design of the railroad signal system improvements for the project, all at the City’s sole cost. The DSA has previously been executed by the City.

11. Construction and Maintenance Agreement with Caltrans for the Interstate 5

Freeway Widening Project, Phase 2 – El Toro Overhead and Northbound Off Ramp

Chair Kotyuk inquired if there were any questions or comments on this item. No additional comments were received.

8


Upon a motion by Director Barger and seconded by Director McCallon the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board authorized the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute a Construction and Maintenance (C&M) Agreement between Caltrans and the Authority in the amount of $2,500,000. The C&M Agreement will define the roles, responsibilities and funding for the Caltrans construction and Authority’s supporting services for the I-5 Freeway Widening Project, Phase 2 at the El Toro Overhead and northbound off ramp, all at Caltrans sole cost.

12. Transmittal of the Preliminary Fiscal Year 2018-19 Budget and Two-Year

Projection Christine Wilson, Senior Manager, Finance, provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report and requested approval of staff’s recommendation. Director Gherardi stated that should Proposition 1 not pass in November 2018 would there be any fallback position to operate should the bill not get approved. Arthur T. Leahy stated that the Authority would have contingencies. Director Franklin expressed concern to spending money and the member agencies abilities to sustain increases should ridership not grow and wondered how staff would continue the marketing plan. Arthur T. Leahy stated that at the February Budget workshop the marketing plan was discussed in detail and noted that staff would keep the Board informed on the marketing plans success and if adjustments need to be made. Director Franklin understood the request, but voiced her concern on the outcome. Upon a motion by Director McCallon and seconded by 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board approve the transmittal of the Preliminary Fiscal Year 2018-19 (FY19) Budget to its Member Agencies for their consideration and approval.

Chair Kotyuk announced that the agenda would be taken out of order. 16. Automated External Defibrillators and Combat Application Tourniquets

Michelle Stewart, Senior Manager, Operations, provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report and requested approval of staff’s recommendation.

9


2nd Vice-Chair Najarian inquired as to who was expected or intended to use the Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs). Michelle Stewart stated that the AED would be placed in the train and accessible to anyone who could understand the instructions. She noted that the machine provides step by step verbal instructions and the user would not need to be trained in first aid. 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian asked if one were to use the machine if it could cause harm to the recipient. Vice-Chair Humphrey who serves as a first responder stated that the machine would not provide a shock to someone if it was not required. Vice-Chair Humphrey thanked staff for identifying the funding to provide the AED machines onboard trains. He spoke on the Combat Application Tourniquets (CATs) program which said that it has been used for approximately the last two years, noting that the National Football League has CATs at all stadiums and Homeland Security was in the process of enforcing CATs at rail stations. Vice-Chair Humphrey requested that when staff was to refill the train first aid kits to please add the CATs at that time. He encouraged everyone to visit the website: stopthebleed.org for more information. Upon a motion by 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian and seconded by Director Franklin the Board approved the recommendation. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously. ACTION: The Board approved the expenditure and an amendment to the FY2017-18 Capital Budget of up to $207,600 for the purchase and installation of Automatic Electronic Defibrillators (AED) on 57 Metrolink cab cars, to be funded by the approved PTMISEA fund allocation.

13. Assembly Bill 2417 – Staff Recommendation

Whitney O’Neill, Senior Manager, Government and Regulatory Affairs, provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report and requested approval of staff’s recommendation. Director Barger commented that she would need to oppose this recommendation. She had concerns related to the composition of the Board and believed that keeping San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) as a non-voting member at this time would suffice as the SBCTA had not yet provided funding. She noted that members representing the cities of Pomona, San Dimas, and Glendora all expressed concern on this action. Director McCallon corrected for the record that the SBCTA had provided funding in the amount of $39 million. Upon a motion by Director Barger and seconded by Director McCallon the Board approved the recommendation as amended. There was no opposition and the motion passed unanimously.

10


ACTION: The Board adopt the position of Oppose Unless Amended on AB 2417 to encourage the author to include SBCTA as a full voting member of the Construction Authority Board of Directors.

14. Assembly Bill 1234 Meetings Attended by Members of the Board of Directors

Whitney O’Neill, Senior Manager, Government and Regulatory Affairs, provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report. ACTION: The Board received and filed this report.

15. State and Federal Legislative Update

Whitney O’Neill, Senior Manager, Government and Regulatory Affairs, provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report. Director Franklin requested staff to return to the Board to provide an update on Assembly Bill (AB) 1912 and the possible impacts to the Authority. Whitney O’Neill responded that staff was currently in discussions with General Counsel on this item and would include information on the bill in their next monthly report. ACTION: The Board received and filed this report.

17. April 5, 2018 Service Delay Rod Bailey, Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Dispatch and Operator Services), provided a brief background on this item as detailed in the staff report. Arthur T. Leahy remarked that the day was a very bad day and noted that it started with an equipment problem but became magnified when staff reversed a decision made by the field crew. There were lessons learned and he committed that this error would not be repeated. Chair Kotyuk recounted the issues and ensured that a corrective action plan be implemented. Director Franklin asked if the failure was a Tier 4 locomotive and staff confirmed it was. Director Franklin wanted to ensure that there was a policy in place to aid when trains were 30 minutes late, one hour late, etc., and how staff would need to react when those incidents occur. Arthur T. Leahy reiterated that the incident was a result of a poor judgement call to overturn the recommendation of those in the field and it had been made clear to staff that whatever the decision is from the field crew – that would serve as the final decision.

11


Chair Kotyuk commented that staff needs to remember that the Authority serves the people onboard the trains and it is critical not to forget that. Director Berkson remarked that when the Board hears reports that ridership has decreased, there needs to be a focus to keep negative impacts to the passengers to a minimum. He requested that staff bring back to the Board its Quality Service Policy and have a thorough discussion on that policy on possible instant reimbursement and other options. Chair Kotyuk wanted the passengers of trains 401 and 403 to know that the Board also apologized for that incident. Director Krekorian commented that although an apology letter was an attempt to rectify the situation, he asked how staff could ensure that the passengers on subsequent trains that may have endured a delay would be contacted and what wanted to know if there was a procedure in place. Sherita Coffelt, Director, Public Affairs responded that staff uses social media as an immediate way to communicate to the passengers. She also stated that staff would bring back the Quality Service Policy (QSP) for the Board to consider ways to enhance the policy. Director Gherardi expressed her concern and wanted to know if there were issues with the Tier 4 locomotive and their reliability and wanted to know if the problem could become a repeat issue3. Vice-Chair Humphrey stated that at the last Board meeting, staff provided a report on service delays due to infrastructure issues and felt that the Board wasn’t given the full picture. He requested that staff provide a report that incorporated both the infrastructure (State of Good Repair) and rolling stock delays. Director Franklin added that conducting an onboard survey to ask the passengers what staff could do for them should they encounter a delay would be helpful. ACTION: The Board received and filed this report. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is available upon request from the Board Secretary.

18. Chief Executive Officer’s Report – Arthur T. Leahy reported on the following: Organizational Changes – In March changes were implemented to enhance the

safety and security function and improve coordination across the Authority and included:

3 The Board received a follow-up email informing them that the issue was not related to a failure of the Tier 4 locomotive but rather a bad sensor that believed a door was open. The train would not be able to move forward while a door(s) are opened.

12


o System Safety and Security department would now report directly to Elissa K. Konove, Deputy Chief Executive Officer

o Compliance department would report director Kimberly Yu, Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Planning and Project Delivery)

o Chief Financial Officer would report directly to the Chief Executive Officer. The CFO oversees the Finance, Information Technology and Fare Collections departments.

Dodgers Motion – Staff will present to the Board a report in response to the

Dodgers motion at the May 11 Board meeting. It was requested from Director Solis’ office and the Dodgers organization to time to review the recommendation and gather additional data.

Olympic 2028 Kick-Off Meeting – occurred early March 2018 and Kimberly Yu and Rod Bailey attended this meeting.

Tier 4 Locomotive Update – Gary Eelman, Vice-President of Progress Rail was invited to attend the Board meeting, but due to schedule conflict was unable to attend. Staff will continue to invite him and provide updates monthly at the Board meetings.

Director Barger commented that her office received a call regarding an incident onboard a Metrolink train who had a valid ticket and appeared to have some mental illness issues. She noted that the conductors are not trained to handle these types of incidents and suggested teaming up with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) regarding psychiatric team training.

19. Board Members' Comments Director Gherardi thanked staff for traveling to Ventura to discuss the marketing program in March. She commented that the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) staff would make some edits to the materials and share them with the staff. Director Franklin commented that she had received a request from a local resident to hold a community meeting in Riverside and also a Board meeting. She brought this request to the Board for its consideration.

20. Chair’s Comments – Chair Kotyuk commented on the following topics: Board Workshop – a workshop would be held at the new Headquarters location

in the near future and asked the Board for topics to be considered/discussed. The following topics were provided:

o Contract bundling [requested by Chair Kotyuk]

13


o Federal and State – future potential funding sources for transportation needs [requested by Director Franklin]

Chair Kotyuk requested that if any member had additional items to be discussed at the workshop to please email him. American Public Transportation Association (APTA) Conference – attended the

Legislative Conference in March and asked that the full Board at APTA recommend that if agencies meet the Positive Train Control (PTC) 2018 mandate, that they be provided preference for grants at the federal level.

At this time, Chair Kotyuk presented Director Barger with her one year service certificate and pin.

21. Tour of Authority’s New Headquarters Following the Board meeting, members of the Board toured the new headquarters located at 900 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90017. They viewed the Authority’s office space located at Suite 1500 as well as Suite 1700 which would house the new Board meeting space4.

22. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business for consideration by the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:01 p.m.5

Respectfully Submitted,

Kari Holman Assistant to the CEO/Board Secretary

4 Please visit the Metrolink website to confirm meeting dates, times and locations at www.metrolinktrains.com/meetings. 5 The meeting was adjourned at 12:01 and the Tour (Item No. 21) began at 12:30p.m., and concluded at 2:00p.m.

14

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 6 TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Contract No. E741-15 – Project Management,

Construction Management and Staff Assistance Services – Exercise Two-Year Option – PreScience Corporation, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., AECOM Technical Services Inc., and RailPros, Inc.

Issue Continued on-call professional project management, construction management and engineering staff assistance services are needed to support a wide variety of small and large capital and third-party projects for the Authority. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to:

1) Exercise a single two-year option for Contract No. E741-15, Project Management, Construction Management and Staff Assistance Services, to a bench of firms as listed below:

E741A-15 – PreScience Corporation (PreScience) E741B-15 – Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc. (Parsons Brinckerhoff) E741C-15 – AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) E741D-15 – RailPros, Inc (RailPros)

2) Maintain the not-to-exceed contract funding authorization amount of $10 million for contracts E741A-15 (PreScience) and E741B-15 (Parsons Brinckerhoff) and increase the not to-exceed contract funding authorization amount to $15 million for contracts E741C-15 (AECOM) and E741D-15 (RailPros) for the three-year base term and two-year option.

Alternatives The Board may reject exercising the option and direct staff to solicit new proposals.

15

Contract No. E741-15 – On-Call Project Management, Construction Management and Staff Engineering Services – Exercise Two-Year Option Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment by continuing to provide necessary engineering support services to maintain the Authority’s railways, and to maintain and improve the Authority’s infrastructure. Background On-call project management, construction management and staff assistance services are needed on a wide variety of capital improvements and third-party projects and include:

contract management; project controls; construction inspection; resident engineering teams; scheduling; constructability reviews; and planning and general staff assistance support services.

Support services are utilized on an as-needed basis and frequently include tasks to also support member agency construction projects. The current on-call project management, construction management and staff assistance support services bench, Contract No. E741-15, was awarded on January 23, 2015, with a period of performance for PreScience and Parsons Brinckerhoff that began on July 15, 2015, and will expire on July 14, 2018, and for AECOM and RailPros that began on October 15, 2015, and will expire on October 14, 2018. The Engineering and Construction Department anticipates a wide variety of small and large projects during the next two years, including, but not limited to:

grade crossing safety improvements; grade separations; mainline track and siding extensions; station construction and expansions; Los Angeles Union Station reconstruction to accommodate high speed rail; Gold Line Phase 2B construction; Redlands Passenger Rail Project construction; and other third-party projects, which will be completed as required to meet various

project schedules. Both AECOM (E741C-15) and RailPros (E741D-15) currently have contract commitments in excess of $8 million, approaching the current contract limit of $10 million. Additional authorization is required to meet projected commitments for future rehabilitation, capital

16

Contract No. E741-15 – On-Call Project Management, Construction Management and Staff Engineering Services – Exercise Two-Year Option Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

and third party projects throughout the two year extension. Work under all four E741-15 contracts will be authorized through the Contract Task Order (CTO) process on an as-needed basis. Work assigned to all four of these contracts will continue to be Contact Task Order (CTO) based in order to direct and control services on a per-project basis. Staff is successfully using the CTO process to manage the current on-call professional engineering design services bench contracts. This process enables staff to define the project tasks, monitor and control the associated costs. Budget Impact There is no financial commitment with respect to approving the additional contract authority requested as subsequent work will be authorized only if funding is approved and available through the annual budget or an equivalent process. Prepared by: Andy Althorp, Principal Engineer, Project Management Aaron Azevedo, Principal Engineer, Rehab and Structures

Mia Beltran, Principal Contract and Compliance Administrator Justin Fornelli, Director, Engineering and Construction

Gary Lettengarver Chief Operating Officer

Elissa K. Konove Deputy Chief Executive Officer

17


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Contract No. SP466-16 – Law Enforcement Services –

Recommendation to Amend Period of Performance and Increase Contract Funding Authorization – County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

Issue Continued multi-jurisdictional on-train and patrol law enforcement services across five counties is necessary to ensure safe and secure environment for customers and employees. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to amend Contract No. SP466-16 for Law Enforcement Services with the County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department for a three-year base term with one two-year option, and increase contract funding authorization in an amount not-to-exceed $27,600,000. Alternatives

At present, there is no viable alternative for the current law enforcement services provided. The Board could authorize funding at a different level or recommend changes in the staffing. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment. The law enforcement services will provide safety and security to the Metrolink commuter rail system and its passengers. Background The Authority has obtained law enforcement services from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) since the beginning of operations. The current contract was

18

Contract No. SP466-16 – Law Enforcement Services – Recommendation to Amend Period of Performance and Increase Contract Funding Authorization Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

awarded by the Board in May 2017 to LASD to provide law enforcement services for a one-year term beginning July 1, 2017, and expiring June 30, 2018. FY2017-18 annual funding totaled $8,491,683, which included $2,451,261 for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and $195,272 for special activities. The primary mission of law enforcement services on Metrolink is to ensure public safety onboard the train, to coordinate enforcement with the cities along the right-of-way, and to assist with Metrolink’s fare enforcement and physical security program. In addition, the LASD provides patrolling services on the Metrolink right-of-way in Los Angeles County and has made removal and enforcement of homeless encampments a priority along the railway. Metro reimburses the Authority for these services under a separate agreement. Additionally, the Sheriffs provide weekend service on the Orange County, Antelope Valley and San Bernardino lines. During negotiations for the previous contract, staff contacted the Sheriff offices in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties soliciting their interest in proposing for the replacement of the Metrolink law enforcement services contract. All three agencies declined. A single response was received from LASD indicating their interest in continuing to provide law enforcement services for Metrolink trains. Terms of the Amended Contract Staff has negotiated an agreement with LASD, subject to the Board's approval. The amended agreement would begin July 1, 2018, for a three-year base term with one two-year option. The amended agreement includes performance-based requirements in the form of Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) as listed in Attachment 1. Failure to achieve the required performance measures shall result in LASD providing the additional services for the month at no expense to the Authority. The proposed staffing for FY2018-19 is set at 34 deputies and includes support for the Perris Valley Line. The previous staffing level had 35 positions in the contract, however, 2 positions were suspended. One of the suspended positions will be reinstated to address trespasser and right-of-way enforcement issues. Contract authority for this amendment totals $27,600,000 and reflects $8,744,000 for FY2018-19, with equals an approximate five percent (5%) escalation for the each of the base years and subsequent two-year option. Annual funding will be requested through the annual budget process based upon service assumptions approved by the Board. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)/Small Business Enterprise (SBE) Requirements This contract is not federally funded and is not subject to DBE Participation.

19


Budget Impact Contract funding authorization for this contract will be requested through the annual budget process for Fiscal Year 2018-19 and for future fiscal years. With the exception of recollectable work, requested dollars will be budgeted within various line items in the Authority’s operating budget. Recollectable work will be funded by existing third party agreements. Prepared by: Matthew C. Rodriguez, Security Manager Sonny Ibrahim, Senior Contract and Compliance Administrator


20


ATTACHMENT 1

Contract No. SP466-16

LASD Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s)

Outputs Performance Measures

Explanation Source Reporting*

Train Rides The number of trains ridden

compared to the total number of trains operated

each week

The purpose is to measure the

frequency of trains ridden within the

operational system

System-wide Crime and

Arrest Report

675 trains a month

ROW Enforcement

The number of hours dedicated

to ROW enforcement each

week

The purpose is to measure the number of hours and citations issued at the ROW’s


Arrest Report

275 hours a month

Street Car/VIPR Fare Enforcement

Operations

The number of Enforcement

Operations each week

The purpose is to conduct Street

Car/VIPR Enforcement Operations


Arrest Report

45 operations per month

Trespasser Encampment Operations

95 percent of all calls handled

within 48-hour time frame

The purpose is to respond and

investigate trespasser encampments

SilverTrac 48-hour response

Grade Crossing Operations

The number of grade crossing operations per

week

The purpose is to conduct grade

crossing operations each week


Arrest Report

85 operations per month

Timeline for Significant public

safety Delays

Timeline of mitigation efforts provided to staff within 3 business days of incident

The purpose is to provide mitigation

efforts taken in order to expedite the release

of trains

Mitigation Timeline Report

Timeline to be provided to security manger following an

incident

21


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: FY2017-18 Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations

Program Resolution for Fare Voucher Program Issue The Authority has submitted an application for funding from the State of California under the FY2017-18 Cap and Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) for the purpose of implementing a Fare Voucher Program. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) administers the LCTOP grant program and requires the Board to adopt a resolution delegating authority for execution of any actions necessary under this grant. An annual resolution is required to apply for the funds. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board adopt Resolution 18-95 (Attachment A) to authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute for and on behalf of the Authority, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by Caltrans. The Chief Executive Officer may delegate these actions to the Deputy Chief Executive Officer; the Deputy Operating Officer for Project Planning and Delivery; or the Director of Planning. Alternatives

The Board could elect to not delegate this signing authority, in which case the certification would be signed by the Chairman of the Board. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to retain and grow ridership. These grant funds will be applied to a fare voucher program which will result in an increase in ridership, thereby growing market share of Metrolink service.

22

FY2017-18 Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Resolution for Fare Voucher Program Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Background The FY2017-18 LCTOP funds will fund implementation of a Fare Voucher Program, in which a complementary roundtrip ticket will be mailed to high potential target markets, including: younger riders, generally defined as “Millennials” who are 18-35 years old; middle-aged riders, generally defined as “Generation X” who are 36-53 years old; and senior riders, generally defined as “Baby Boomers” who are currently 54-72 years old. The vouchers are intended to attract new riders onto the Metrolink system. The FY2017-18 LCTOP funds, totaling $2,029,192, will be the only source of funding for the voucher program and are forecasted to produce a total increase of at least 40,256 riders, a reduction of 1,239,603 vehicle miles travelled and the removal of 610 tons of greenhouse gas emissions. These estimates are expected to be realized after the LCTOP funds are fully expended over the four-year period shown below. The voucher program will be implemented system-wide and 50% of the funds ($1,014,596) will be invested in disadvantaged communities, per grant requirements. The funds are anticipated to be budgeted and expended in four equal increments over up to a four-year period, FY2019-FY22. For the FY19 marketing budget, requested at $3,900,000, the FY2017-18 LCTOP funds will cover the cost of the voucher program, budgeted at $507,297, leaving the Members’ contribution to cover the balance of the marketing program at $3,392,703. The remaining FY2017-19 LCTOP funds would be applied in the same manner for FY20, FY21 and FY22. Please see the table below: Total FY17-18 LCTOP Allocation per 2/7/18 State Controller’s Letter

Amount of FY17-18 LCTOP Allocation to be Applied to the Voucher Program in FY19 Budget




$2,029,192 $507,297 $507,297 $507,297 $507,301

The LCTOP program guidelines require the Member Agencies, who are considered project sponsors, to send letters of support for this project. Those letters are currently being generated by the Member Agencies for submission to Caltrans. Requisite to receiving the grant funds, LCTOP applicants are required to provide a resolution of the governing board delegating authority to a selected agent to execute for and on behalf of the applicant, any actions that are necessary for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance provided by Caltrans. The attached resolution, Attachment A, meets

23

FY2017-18 Trade Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Resolution for Fare Voucher Program Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

this requirement. Additionally, the delegated authority is required to sign the authorizing agent and certification and assurances forms. Those are provided in Attachment B. Next Steps Upon State approval of the application, the Authority will recognize these funds as subsidies into annual budgets, beginning with FY19 as shown in the table above. Budget Impact There is no budget impact from authorization of this resolution. No local match is required, and the resolution will allow the Authority to receive the funds. Prepared by: Anne Louise Rice, Assistant Director, Grants


24

Attachment A

RESOLUTION #18-95

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS

FOR THE LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM (LCTOP) Metrolink Fare Voucher Promotion Project for $2,029,192 WHEREAS, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) is an eligible project sponsor and may receive state funding from the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) for transit projects; and WHEREAS, the statutes related to state-funded transit projects require a local or regional implementing agency to abide by various regulations; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 862 (2014) named the Department of Transportation (Department) as the administrative agency for the LCTOP; and WHEREAS, the Department has developed guidelines for the purpose of administering and distributing LCTOP funds to eligible project sponsors (local agencies); and WHEREAS, the SCRRA wishes to delegate authorization to execute these documents and any amendments thereto to Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer. WHEREAS, the SCRRA wishes to implement the following LCTOP project(s) listed above, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the SCRRA that the fund recipient agrees to comply with all conditions and requirements set forth in the Certification and Assurances and the Authorized Agent documents and applicable statutes, regulations and guidelines for all LCTOP funded transit projects. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Arthur T. Leahy be authorized to execute all required documents of the LCTOP program and any Amendments thereto with the California Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the SCRRA that it hereby authorizes the submittal of the following project nomination(s) and allocation request(s) to the Department in FY 2017-18 LCTOP funds for the Metrolink Fare Voucher Promotion Project in the amount of $2,029,192 for the purpose of distributing complementary fare vouchers to high potential riders as a means of attracting new riders to the Metrolink service. Contributing sponsors are Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Orange County Transportation Authority, Riverside

25

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS FOR THE LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM (LCTOP) Page 2

Transportation Commission, San Bernardino County Transportation Authority and Ventura County Transportation Commission. AGENCY BOARD DESIGNEE: BY: ________________________________

Arthur T. Leahy Chief Executive Officer

26

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS FOR THE LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM (LCTOP)

SCRRA CERTIFICATION PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Governing Board of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, this 11th day of May 2018 by the following vote: Ayes: ________________ Noes: ________________ Abstentions: ________________ Absent: ________________ ANDREW F. KOTYUK Chairman of the Board Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Filed by: Approved as to Form Kari Holman Board Secretary of the Governing Board

Don O. Del Rio General Counsel

27

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE CERTIFICATIONS AND ASSURANCES AND AUTHORIZED AGENT FORMS FOR THE LOW CARBON TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROGRAM (LCTOP)

CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY

I, Kari Holman, Board Secretary of the Governing Board of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted at a regular meeting of said Governing Board and duly and regularly and legally held at the regular meeting place thereof of the 11th day of May 2018 of which meeting all of the members of said Governing Board had due notice and at which members thereof were represented; that at said meeting said Resolution was introduced by Chairman Kotyuk and was thereupon, upon motion by ________________________________________, seconded by _____________________________________, adopted by the following vote:

AYES: _________________ NOES: _________________ ABSENT: _________________ ABSTAINING: _________________

I do hereby further certify that I have carefully compared the same with the original minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my office and that said Resolution is full, true and correct copy of the original Resolution adopted at said meeting and entered in said minutes. That said Resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded since the date of its adoption and the same is now in full force and effect. I do hereby further certify that an agenda of said meeting was posted at least 72 hours before said meeting a location in Los Angeles, California, freely accessible to members of the public and a brief general description of said resolution appeared on said agenda. WITNESS my hand and seal of the Governing Board of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, this 11th day of May 2018.

Board Secretary of the Governing BoardSouthern California Regional Rail Authority

28

FY 2017-2018 LCTOP

Authorized Agent

AS THE Chief Executive Officer

(Chief Executive Officer/Director/President/Secretary)

OF THE Southern California Regional Rail Authority

(Name of County/City/Transit Organization)

I hereby authorize the following individual(s) to execute for and on behalf of the named

Regional Entity/Transit Operator, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining Low

Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds provided by the California Department of

Transportation, Division of Rail and Mass Transportation. I understand that if there is a change

in the authorized agent, the project sponsor must submit a new form. This form is required even

when the authorized agent is the executive authority himself. I understand the Board must

provide a resolution approving the Authorized Agent. The Board Resolution appointing the

Authorized Agent is attached.

Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer OR (Name and Title of Authorized Agent)

Elissa Konove, Deputy Executive Officer OR (Name and Title of Authorized Agent)

Kimberly Yu, Deputy Chief Operating Officer, Planning Project Delivery OR (Name and Title of Authorized Agent)

Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development OR (Name and Title of Authorized Agent)

Arthur T. Leahy Chief Executive Officer (Print Name) (Title)

(Signature)

Approved this 11 day of May , 2018

Attachment B

29

FY 2017-2018 LCTOP

Certifications and Assurances

Lead Agency: Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Project Title: Metrolink Fare Voucher Program

Prepared by: Anne Louise Rice, Assistant Director, Grants, SCRRA

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has adopted the following Certifications and

Assurances for the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP). As a condition of the receipt of

LCTOP funds, Lead Agency must comply with these terms and conditions.

A. General

1. The Lead Agency agrees to abide by the current LCTOP Guidelines and applicable legal requirements.

2. The Lead Agency must submit to Caltrans a signed Authorized Agent form designating the

representative who can submit documents on behalf of the project sponsor and a copy of the board

resolution appointing the Authorized Agent.

B. Project Administration

1. The Lead Agency certifies that required environmental documentation is complete before requesting an

allocation of LCTOP funds. The Lead Agency assures that projects approved for LCTOP funding

comply with Public Resources Code § 21100 and § 21150.

2. The Lead Agency certifies that a dedicated bank account for LCTOP funds only will be established

within 30 days of receipt of LCTOP funds.

3. The Lead Agency certifies that when LCTOP funds are used for a transit capital project, that the project

will be completed and remain in operation for its useful life.

4. The Lead Agency certifies that it has the legal, financial, and technical capacity to carry out the project,

including the safety and security aspects of that project.

5. The Lead Agency certifies that they will notify Caltrans of pending litigation, dispute, or negative audit

findings related to the project, before receiving an allocation of funds.

6. The Lead Agency must maintain satisfactory continuing control over the use of project equipment and

facilities and will adequately maintain project equipment and facilities for the useful life of the project.

7. Any interest the Lead Agency earns on LCTOP funds must be used only on approved LCTOP projects.

8. The Lead Agency must notify Caltrans of any changes to the approved project with a Corrective Action

Plan (CAP).

9. Under extraordinary circumstances, a Lead Agency may terminate a project prior to completion. In the

event the Lead Agency terminates a project prior to completion, the Lead Agency must (1) contact

Caltrans in writing and follow-up with a phone call verifying receipt of such notice; (2) pursuant to

verification, submit a final report indicating the reason for the termination and demonstrating the expended

funds were used on the intended purpose; (3) submit a request to reassign the funds to a new project within

180 days of termination.

Attachment B

30

FY 2017-2018 LCTOP

Certifications and Assurances C. Reporting

1. The Lead Agency must submit the following LCTOP reports:

a. Semi-Annual Progress Reports by May 15th and November 15th each year.

b. A Final Report within six months of project completion.

c. The annual audit required under the Transportation Development Act (TDA), to verify receipt

and appropriate expenditure of LCTOP funds. A copy of the audit report must be submitted to

Caltrans within six months of the close of the year (December 31) each year in which LCTOP

funds have been received or expended.

2. Other Reporting Requirements: ARB is developing funding guidelines that will include reporting

requirements for all State agencies that receive appropriations from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction

Fund. Caltrans and project sponsors will need to submit reporting information in accordance with

ARB’s funding guidelines, including reporting on greenhouse gas reductions and benefits to

disadvantaged communities.

D. Cost Principles

1. The Lead Agency agrees to comply with Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations 225 (2 CFR 225),

Cost Principles for State and Local Government, and 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative

Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.

2. The Lead Agency agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors will be obligated to

agree, that:

a. Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System,

Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the allow ability of individual project cost

items and

b. Those parties shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR,

Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State

and Local Governments. Every sub-recipient receiving LCTOP funds as a contractor or sub-

contractor shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part

200, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and

Local Governments.

3. Any project cost for which the Lead Agency has received funds that are determined by subsequent audit

to be unallowable under 2 CFR 225, 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 or 2 CFR, Part 200, are subject to

repayment by the Lead Agency to the State of California (State). All projects must reduce greenhouse

gas emissions, as required under Public Resources Code section 75230, and any project that fails to

reduce greenhouse gases shall also have its project costs submit to repayment by the Lead Agency to the

State. Should the Lead Agency fail to reimburse moneys due to the State within thirty (30) days of

demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the Parties hereto, the State is

authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due the Lead Agency from the State or any third-

party source, including but not limited to, the State Treasurer and the State Controller.

Attachment B

31

FY 2017-2018 LCTOP

Certifications and Assurances A. Record Retention

1. The Lead Agency agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors shall establish and

maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred project

costs and matching funds by line item for the project. The accounting system of the Lead Agency, its

contractors and all subcontractors shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP),

and enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion. All accounting records

and other supporting papers of the Lead Agency, its contractors and subcontractors connected with

LCTOP funding shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years after the “Project Closeout” report

or final Phase 2 report is submitted (per ARB Funding Guidelines, Vol. 3, page 3.A-16), and shall be

held open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of the State and the California State

Auditor. Copies thereof will be furnished by the Lead Agency, its contractors, and subcontractors upon

receipt of any request made by the State or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs claimed, the

State will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of the Lead Agency pursuant to the

provisions of federal and State law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work

performed by the Lead Agency’s external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by the State

when planning and conducting additional audits.

2. For the purpose of determining compliance with Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Section 2500

et seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with the performance of the Lead Agency’s

contracts with third parties pursuant to Government Code § 8546.7, the project sponsor, its contractors

and subcontractors and the State shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books,

documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such

contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various contracts. All of the

above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable

times during the entire project period and for three (3) years from the date of final payment. The State,

the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of the State, shall each have access to

any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a project for audits, examinations, excerpts, and

transactions, and the Lead Agency shall furnish copies thereof if requested.

3. The Lead Agency, its contractors and subcontractors will permit access to all records of employment,

employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other pertinent data and records by the

State Fair Employment Practices and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of

California designated by the State, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this

document.

F. Special Situations

Caltrans may perform an audit and/or request detailed project information of the project sponsor’s

LCTOP funded projects at Caltrans’ discretion at any time prior to the completion of the LCTOP.

I certify all of these conditions will be met.

Arthur T. Leahy

Chief Executive OFficer (Print Authorized Agent) (Title)

(Signature) (Date)

Attachment B

32

FY 2017-2018 LCTOP

Allocation Lead Agency: Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Project Title: Metrolink Fare Voucher Program

Regional Entity: Select Regional Entity

County: Los Angeles

Lead Agency: I certify the scope, cost, schedule, and benefits as identified in the attached Allocation

Request (Request) and attachments are true and accurate and demonstrate a fully funded operable project. I

understand the Request is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations or conditions that may be enacted by

the State Legislature, including the State's budgetary process and/or auction receipts. In the event the project

cannot be completed as originally scoped, scheduled and estimated, or the project is terminated prior to

completion, Lead Agency shall, at its own expense, ensure that the project is in a safe and operable condition

for the public. I understand this project will be monitored by the California Department of Transportation -

Division of Rail and Mass Transportation.

Authorized Agent: Arthur T. Leahy

Title: Chief Executive Officer

Lead Agency: Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Signature:

PUC Funds Type: 99313 $ Amount of 99313 Funds


Contributing Sponsor(s): The contributing sponsor is an entity that passes funds to the Lead Agency to

support a project. The contributing sponsor could be the regional entity (PUC 99313) passing their funds to a

recipient agency within their region or a recipient agency (PUC 99314) passing their funds through to either a

regional entity or a recipient agency within their region. The contributing sponsor(s) must also sign and state the

amount and type of LCTOP funds (PUC Sections 99313 and 99314) they are contributing the project. Sign

below or attach a separate officially signed letter providing that information. If there is more than one

contributing sponsor, please submit additional page, or a letter from the additional Contributing Sponsors.

Authorized Agent: See attached letters

Title: Authorized Agent’s Title

Lead Agency: Lead Agency.

Signature:



Attachment B

33


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Dodgers Express Service – Proposed Pilot Program Issue Staff is providing a report on the different options to provide special service for select Dodgers games. Recommendation The Board may provide direction for staff to provide service by also identifying funding to operate and market the pilot program. Alternative The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to increase regional mobility. By providing train service to major events in the region, cars are removed from the road reducing traffic congestion and emissions. Background At the February 9, 2018, Board Meeting, Director Solis, 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian, and Directors Barger and Krekorian introduced a motion for staff to evaluate the feasibility of introducing a Dodgers Express pilot service on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines for the 2018 baseball season and off-season special events. The Authority previously piloted a Dodgers Express train in 2011, but due to low ridership, the program was terminated mid-season. The San Bernardino Line averaged 28 passengers per train, and the Antelope Valley Line averaged 7 per train – but there was not a robust marketing effort to promote this pilot program. The highest ridership was on Friday nights on the San Bernardino Line, which averaged 42 passengers per train. Friday

34

Dodgers Express Service – Proposed Pilot Program Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

night ridership on the Antelope Valley Line averaged 11 per train. For some of the Antelope Valley Line trains, there was no ridership north of Santa Clarita. Between the two lines, the San Bernardino Line appears to have stronger potential for ridership and cost efficiency. Also, among days of the week, Friday night games represent the best opportunity to re-introduce a pilot program to offer Dodgers Express service.

2011 Pilot Average Passengers per Train (all days of week)

Dodgers Express on San Bernardino Line 28 (42 on Friday nights)

Dodgers Express on Antelope Valley Line 7 (11 on Friday nights)

Dodgers Express on Ventura County Line 6

Angels Express on Orange County Line 162

Since 2011, Dodger Stadium attendance has grown twenty-eight percent (28%), and Dodger Stadium Express bus ridership has more than doubled. Nightlife opportunities have also grown in downtown Los Angeles, and the inclusion of additional late-night trains may also provide an opportunity to test the response of a broader cross-section of riders. Candidate Pilots Staff have identified two potential opportunities for a 2018 pilot program, if outside funding can be identified (and pending validation of sufficient crew capacity): 1) Introduce an evening train home for Friday night games either:

for the San Bernardino Line only; or for the San Bernardino Line and the Antelope Valley Line

35


2) Focus on three rivalry homestands and add special service to and from those games on the San Bernardino Line and possibly the Antelope Valley Line. As with option 1 on Friday nights, special "to game" service cannot be added on Friday afternoons as they would need to run during rush hour, when Metrolink does not have spare capacity on the San Bernardino or Antelope Valley lines.

These two proposals are not mutually exclusive – both could be operated with sufficient funding.

36


Marketing Recommendations To increase ridership relative to the 2011 pilot, the Authority has included an additional marketing investment within the full quote. The 2011 program included little to no marketing communications and was limited to printing of a flyer and a press release. If the proposed Dodgers Express special train service is launched, the Dodgers organization has agreed to collaborate with the Authority and provide additional marketing and advertising support for the event utilizing their existing ticketholder database, marketing assets, and communication channels. The ability to market in conjunction with the Dodgers directly to dedicated Dodgers fan ticketholders is invaluable as these are the potential customers who are most likely to ride Metrolink to the game. The 2018 Dodgers Express Train Marketing Plan is designed to promote and increase ridership for the proposed special Metrolink Train Service and to provide a memorable experience for current and new riders by providing the value of easily attending one of Southern California’s largest attraction family-friendly events. Promotions and marketing efforts by both Metrolink and the Dodgers will include, but not be limited to: a. Paid media

Station marketing: posters and banners at Metrolink stations Train marketing: On board rack card style flyers and floor decals Dodger’s Express Bus Service: Seat drops communicating about Metrolink

access Pop Up Party: On selected train with swag, balloons, ex-player (potential) Union Station: East Portal Tower Ad (digital) and promotional event with Dodgers

at Los Angeles Union Station

b. Metrolink-owned channels Metrolink website homepage feature tile Metrolink dedicated splash page promoting special train service and ticket sales Dodgers to include Metrolink info on the Getting to Dodgers Stadium section of

their website. Social media outreach including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram Social media contest with Dodgers swag giveaway Metrolink Matters feature (bi-monthly onboard trains 25,000 copies) Metrolink e-blast (49,000 subscribers) Dodgers e-blast

c. Earned media

Press Release Metrolink Matters Blog

37


Conductor Announcements CEO Brief CIS Station Alerts

Estimated Costs A summary of costs associated with the various options is presented in below. Detailed backup for costs is presented in Attachment C. Costs are presented with and without the cost of a backup train in order to illustrate the potential need in the case of an unplanned service disruption. A summary of the two options (Friday games for the rest of the season / Rivalry homestands), accounting for total number of game days, is presented in Exhibit 3. Exhibit 1:

38


Exhibit 2: Summary of Characteristics for Pilot Options Option 1: Friday Night Option Option 2: Weekend Day Option San Bernardino

Line Antelope Valley Line San Bernardino Line Antelope Valley Line

“To Game” Service

Existing trains adequately serve passengers

Existing trains adequately serve passengers from Santa Clarita to South; service from Palmdale requires connection to North County Transporter bus. Additional “To Game” trains from Palmdale is not feasible due to conflicts with commute trains

Existing trains adequately serve passengers

Existing trains adequately serve passengers (certain games, passengers arrive more than 1 ½ early)

“From Game” Service

Extra train required

Extra train required. Due to constraints at Lancaster layover facility, service would end at Palmdale

Some game times are adequately served by existing trains. Extra train required for other game times

Extra train required

Estimated Potential Ridership* and Revenue

54 – 90 / game day

$540 - $900 /game day

15 – 24

$150 - $240 / game day

54 – 90 / game day

$540 - $900 /game day

15 – 24

$150 - $240 / game day

Cost $80 k for 8 games June-September

$80 k for 8 games June-September

$91 k for 9 games over three weekends

$91 k for 9 games over three weekends

Maintenance Facility storage

EMF – 1:30 AM Estimated return to maintenance facility

CMF – 2:30 AM Estimated return to maintenance facility (if trains go to Santa Clarita) 3:30AM storage time (if trains go to Palmdale)

EMF Lancaster CMF for trains to Santa Clarita

Other Factors

Friday night trains can capture currently unserved late night travel

Friday night trains can capture currently unserved late night travel

* Multiplying 2011 average ridership by 28% Dodger Stadium Attendance growth or 113% Union Station to Dodger Stadium ridership bus growth; Higher ridership is possible depending on impact of marketing commitments of the Dodgers organization

39


Exhibit 3: Season Summary of Potential Pilot Options Option 1:

Friday Nights Option 2: Weekend Homestands

Option 1 + Option 2: Friday Nights + Weekend Homestands

Game Days of Operation

8 9 14

Cost SB Line: $ 80k AV Line: $ 80k

SB Line: $ 91k AV Line: $ 91k

SB Line: $ 138k AV Line: $ 138k

Estimated Potential Revenue*

SB Line: $4,320 – 7,200 AV Line: $1,120 – 1,920

SB Line: $4,860 – 8,100 AV Line: $1,260 – 2,160

SB Line: $7,560 – 12,600 AV Line: $1,960 – 3,360

Operational Factors

Light risk of lack of crew resources if one line operated, moderate risk if both lines operated

Light risk of lack of crew resources if one line operated, moderate risk if both lines operated

Moderate risk of lack of crew resources if one line operated, high risk if both lines operated

*Potential to be upwardly adjusted due to marketing commitments of the Dodgers organization The cost for the Friday night supplemental train may be lower due to the potential opportunity to leverage existing equipment in use during the day. However, the price quoted above includes the cost to field an additional train set, as is the normal practice. Fare Recommendations To be consistent with other special train programs and to minimize ticket vending machine (TVM) programming costs, staff is recommending fares to be $10.00 per roundtrip to be consistent with the weekend day pass as well as the prior 2011 Dodger Special Train fare. Estimated Ridership and Revenue A low estimate, based on 2011 ridership and inflated by Dodger Stadium attendance growth since 2011, would yield 36 passengers per train on average on the San Bernardino Line (and 9 on the Antelope Valley Line if operated). Using the same $10 price as in 2011, this would yield $360 (and $90) per day. A higher estimate, a doubling of ridership based on growth with the Angels Express, might suggest an upper ridership range of 56 passengers on the San Bernardino Line (and 14 passengers on the Antelope Valley Line if operated). This would work out to $560 (and $140) per day. Friday nights on the San Bernardino Line performed noticeably better than other games in the 2011 pilot. Using similar methodology, Friday night games might see 55 passengers ($550) on the low end and 84 passengers ($840) on the higher end.

40


Community Impacts and Outreach Trains would be running through local communities later than usual after evening games. This would include horns being sounded at all crossings that are not in FRA-designated quiet zones. Trains on the San Bernardino Line could terminate at the Eastern Maintenance Facility (EMF). If service were to be extended to the Antelope Valley Line, trains would leave the Central Maintenance Facility (CMF) during the day and return to the CMF between 2:30 and 3:30 AM (estimated). In order to ensure that the communities that may be impacted by the proposed Dodgers trains are aware of possible impacts, Metrolink has been or will be in touch with all city managers along both the San Bernardino line and Antelope Valley line corridors, as well as selected community groups. This contact will allow local cities to ask questions and express concerns regarding the proposed service. Analysis Per the motion, staff studied various aspects of providing service to Dodgers games, including:

Service Scenarios / Stopping Patterns

Fares

Schedules/Equipment/Crew

Funding

Other Considerations

41


Service Consideration Major Alternatives Studied

Recommendations/Findings

Service Scenarios and Stopping Patterns

All-stop, limited-stop, and express stopping patterns. One or multiple special trains

All-stop stopping pattern. All-stop stopping patterns are expected to serve more riders. All-stop trains have more and more attractive (to passengers) scheduling options, but all-stop and expresses are options for select game times. It is also an easier marketing message. One train per game

Fares Regular fares, flat-rate fares, and % discount fares

$10 flat rate fare

Schedules/Equipment/Crew Various schedule times

Arrive at least 30 minutes before first pitch, and 1 hour after last out. There is a very limited ability to hold for late-running games

Funding Grants Grant funding is not feasible for a 2018 pilot

Other Considerations Cost and ridership Availability of Tier IV locomotives

Friday night service on the San Bernardino Line has the highest ridership and lowest cost per game Tier 4’s in service are already committed to other special services

Service Scenarios and Stopping Patterns Staff explored various stopping patterns such as all-stop and express services. The ability to offer these patterns is heavily dependent on schedule viability as both the Antelope Valley and San Bernardino lines are largely single tracked. This is explored in more detail in the schedules section, but there are more and better options for adding all-stop or most-stop services than there are for adding express services. Specifically, all-stop services would serve more stations and would likely attract more riders. However,

42


express services are viable options for adding service to certain combinations of game time, day of week, and train line. The ability to add services is a challenge for Metrolink given its current track, fleet, and crew capacity. For some combinations of game time, day of week, and train line, there may be track capacity to add two, one, or no additional train trips. There are also varying levels of fleet and crew availability – for instance there is more of the fleet available on weekends than on weekdays. Another area of challenge is using the “Extra Board” to provide service to the Dodger pilot program given that these reserve crews are mainly used to ensure continuity of service when normal crews are sick, in training, on vacation, or otherwise unable to run their train. Depleting the Extra Board with extra service would increase the risk that crews will be unavailable to cover for daily service which may be impacted by unplanned needs such as crew members calling sick or major service disruptions requiring relief crews. Staff are still investigating whether current staffing levels can support adding additional special trains without risking regular service, and if so, how many additional trains can be supported. Fares Metrolink’s current TVMs generally support two options for special event fares – utilizing regular fares or flat-rate special event fares. Flat rate fares for special events are also simpler and more compelling than percentage discounts. The current Angels Express fare of $7 is an example of such a flat rate event fare. Another comparable fare is the $10 weekend day pass. This fare could apply on the weekend homestand games. This fare could also be applied on a Friday (e.g., after a certain time such as 2PM). Schedules Staff first studied how well existing train service on the Antelope Valley and San Bernardino Lines can serve various combinations of game times and day of week. More detail on this can be found in Attachment A. In some cases – especially day games – existing service was adequate to bring passengers to and from the game. For evening games on Fridays and Saturdays there was not always late enough service to take passengers home, and new service would be needed to make Metrolink an option for attending a game. Staff then evaluated the ability of the current schedule to support additional trains. For Friday evening games, there is insufficient capacity to add a train to the game because they would run during peak commute hours when both the Antelope Valley and San Bernardino Lines are at capacity. However, there is a slot where a train could run home on the San Bernardino Line (full length of line) and Antelope Valley Line (only as far as

43


Palmdale). There are more options for train slots on the weekends. More detail on this can be found in Attachment B. Moreover, the current equipment cycle allows for a trainset to be available Friday nights on the San Bernardino Line and to add return-home service; this set lays over in San Bernardino overnight. There is also a set at the CMF that could possibly be used for service to Palmdale, but this would require that trainset to come in and out of the CMF late at night, returning after midnight. It could not serve Lancaster because the station track is used to store regular service trainsets overnight. There is equipment available on weekends to add trainsets into service on both lines, although extra costs would be incurred prepping those sets for service. Trains added for day and afternoon games would generally not be able to hold for late running games. Once a schedule window has passed, it might be an hour or more until the next available slot, and in some cases two crew shifts would need to be scheduled instead of one due to limits on hours of service. Metro runs the Dodgers Stadium Express bus service from Los Angeles Union Station to all Dodgers home games. The shuttle runs every 10 minutes and takes 20-30 minutes to reach the stadium. A similar pattern runs back to Union Station following the conclusion of the game. Dodgers’ game tickets serve as valid fare on the Dodgers Stadium Express bus service. Sufficient time must be allowed for passengers to take the shuttle between station and stadium. Funding Grant programs require several months of lead times to apply for and be granted, so these sources are not viable for the 2018 season. Discretionary funding, for instance local measure funds from member agencies, would likely be needed for any pilot this year. Other Considerations The potential cost to operate the special trains (excluding all other expenses) could range from under $3,000 to over $7,000 per game and line. The most cost effective could be to add a late-night return train home on the San Bernardino Line on Fridays, since this could potentially leverage a trainset already in use and return during the facility’s normal operating hours. However, prices are quoted without these potential savings to ensure that the range of potential costs are covered. Based on results from 2011, Friday nights on the San Bernardino Line are also likely to see the highest ridership and thus revenue recovery.

44


The use of Tier 4 locomotives cannot be ensured for a 2018 pilot since these locomotives are already reserved for existing special event commitments (e.g. Angels Express as a requirement of grant funding). Next Steps If the Board provides direction to introduce the pilot program and a recommendation to fund the service, staff will work member agencies, the Dodgers organization, or some other organization to confirm funding and in-kind resource commitments to initiate service. Budget Impact The item has no impact on the Authority’s Board-approved Operation or Capital Budget. The cost will be covered by a Third Party Recollectable agreement, if other grants are not available to provide the service this year. Prepared by: Margaret Meadows, Marketing Coordinator Rory Vaughn, Manager, Research and Planning Anne Louise Rice, Assistant Director, Grants Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development

Sabrina Davis, Manager, Sales and Marketing Sylvia Novoa, Manager, Community Relations

Sherita K. Coffelt Acting Chief of External Affairs


45

2018 Dodgers ExpressAttachment A – Operational Feasibility Analysis

Game Times• Most Dodgers home games

(82%) are either a 6:10 PM or 7:10 PM night game or a 1:10 PM Sunday game

• Day games and early afternoon games are fairly well served by existing service

• Weekday night games – half of all games – would require additional service to serve properly

2

Mon‐Thu Friday Weekend Holiday

9:00 AM 1 0 0 0

12:10 PM 1 0 0 0

1:10 PM 0 0 11 0

4:00 PM 1 0 0 0

4:15 PM 2 0 2 0

5:00 PM 0 0 1 0

5:10 PM 0 0 0 3

5:15 PM 0 0 1 0

5:30 PM 0 0 1 0

6:00 PM 1 0 0 0

6:10 PM 0 0 9 0

7:10 PM 35 13 1 0

2018 Dodgers Home Schedulecount of games at various times, by time of day

Attachment A

46

San Bernardino Line service to Dodger Games

Game Time Current Service Recommendation

7:10 PM Fridays(13 games)

Service available to game; but not home afterwards

ADD Dodgers Express departing at ~11:00 PM

7:10 PM Monday‐Thurs(35 games)


No change. Adding train will stress extra board

6:10 PM Saturdays(9 games)

Service available to and from game

No change needed

1:10 PM Sundays(11 games)


No change needed

Other Daytime Gamestimes vary substantially

Service generally available No change recommended

3

Antelope Valley Line service to Dodger GamesGame Time Current Service Recommendation

7:10 PM Fridays(13 games)

Service available to game from Santa Clarita; but not home afterwards

No change. See detailed slide for more information and options

7:10 PM Monday‐Thurs(35 games)

Service available to game from Santa Clarita; but not home afterwards


6:10 PM Saturdays(9 games)



1:10 PM Sundays(11 games)


No change needed

Other Daytime Gamestimes vary substantially

Service generally available No change recommended4

Attachment A

47

APPENDIX

5

San Bernardino Line andWeekday Night Games

• Passengers can take existing service to weekday night games.

• Special service would be needed to bring passengers home

6

from from from

San Bernardino San Bernardino San Bernardino

5:00 PM 5:53 PM 7:10 PM

↓ ↓ ↓

games start at 7:10 PM

↓

9:49 PM

to

San Bernardino

too early

Attachment A

48

San Bernardino Line andWeekday Night Games



• Recommendation:Add Dodgers Express train departing at 11:00PM on FRIDAYS

7

from from from

San Bernardino San Bernardino San Bernardino

5:00 PM 5:53 PM 7:10 PM

↓ ↓ ↓


Dodgers Express

↓ ↓

9:49 PM 11:00 PM

to To

San Bernardino San Bernardino

too early

Antelope Valley Line andWeekday Night Games

• Passengers from Santa Clarita can take existing service to the game

• Special service would be needed to bring in passengers from the Antelope Valley


8

too early

from from

Lancaster Santa Clarita

3:51 PM 6:14 PM

↓ ↓


↓

9:25 PM

To

Lancaster

too early

Attachment A

49

San Bernardino Line andSaturday Night Games


• Passengers can take existing service home

9

from from


3:40 PM 5:15 PM

↓ ↓


↓ ↓

9:00 PM 11:30 PM

to to


Antelope Valley Line andSaturday Night Games

• Passengers could take existing service to games


10

from

Lancaster

4:30 PM

↓


↓

8:55 PM

To

Lancaster

too early

Attachment A

50

San Bernardino Line andSunday Day Games

• Passengers can take existing service to Sunday day games.


11

from from


11:30 AM 1:15 PM

↓ ↓


↓ ↓

4:00 PM 5:35 PM

to to


Antelope Valley Line andSunday Day Games

• Passengers can take existing service to Sunday day games


12

from

Lancaster

11:00 AM

↓


↓ ↓

3:50 PM 5:25 PM

To To

Lancaster Lancaster

Attachment A

51

Alternative to Adding a Train:Hold the Last Train• Holding the last train is not feasible on the Antelope Valley Line.

The crew would exceed federally-mandated maximum work hours

• Holding the last train is somewhat feasible on the San Bernardino Line.

• However, the train could not hold past 11pm without exceeding crew hours. Train would thus not be able to wait for longer games

• Such a long hold would be a dissatisfier for current train ridership, possibly causing Metrolink to lose regular riders

• Current ridership on this train is ~70 passengers a day in the summer months

13

Attachment A

52

Dodgers Express -- Potential Schedule Slots for Special Service to Select Weekend Homestands

Preface

The attached schedules roughly describe potential slots in the existing schedule to insert special event trains for weekend Dodger Games

While multiple options may be shown to and from some games, generally those slots are mutually exclusive -- in that only one of them can be used at a

time (e.g. cannot schedule both a 1:00 and 1:05 departure on the same line).

These schedules are intended as an input to crew and equipment analyses to determine if these services could be delivered using existing resources and, if so,

at what cost.

Generally speaking, the Antelope Valley Line schedules are less stable due to extreme single-track distances on the line.

These schedules are not "FINAL" and have not experienced the full scrutiny that a normal production schedule change would.

Attachment B

53


Service to/from 6:10 PM Saturday Home Games

(1 date under consideration: August 4 vs Astros)

San Bernardino Line

1:38 367 - Regular Service → 2:02 PM → 3:40 PM 9:00 PM → 10:45 PM → 376 - Regular Service 1:45

1:45 369 - Regular Service → 3:30 PM → 5:15 PM 30 minute 6:10 PM Saturday 30 minute → 11:30 PM → if express 1:30

bus ride Home Games bus ride → 11:45 PM → if all-stop 1:45

1:50 SPECIAL if all-stop → 3:40 PM → 5:30 PM (Aug 4 - vs Astros) OR

OR → 12:00 AM → if express 1:35

1:35 if express → → 5:40 PM → 12:15 AM → if all-stop 1:50

1:40 if all-stop → → 5:45 PM

11:30 PM → 1:10 AM → 378 - Regular Service 1:40

1:50 373 - Regular Service → 4:50 PM → 6:40 PM

Antelope Valley Line


2:00 SPECIAL if express → 3:25 PM → 5:25 PM 30 minute 6:10 PM Saturday 30 minute → 11:55 PM → if express 1:55

OR bus ride Home Games bus ride → 12:05 AM → if all-stop 2:05

2:10 SPECIAL if all-stop → 3:20 PM → 5:30 PM (Aug 4 - vs Astros) OR LATER (flexible, no reverse trains to meet)

Please note that these times describe available "schedule slots" to insert a train into the existing service. Outstanding questions about crew and equipment viability remain

to be answered.

10:00 PM

10:25 PM

4:05 PM

10:00 PM

SPECIAL

SPECIALSPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIALSPECIAL

Attachment B

54



(1 date under consideration: June 16 vs Giants)

San Bernardino Line

1:38 367 - Regular Service → 2:02 PM → 3:40 PM 8:40 PM → 10:10 PM → if express 1:30

OR Options Below

1:50 if all-stop → 2:25 PM → 30 minute 5:15 PM Saturday 30 minute 9:00 PM → 10:45 PM → 376 - Regular Service 1:45

1:20 if express → 2:45 PM → bus ride Home Games bus ride

OR (June 17 - vs Giants) 9:10 PM → 10:55 PM → if all-stop 1:45

1:30 if all-stop → 2:35 PM → OR

1:35 if express → 2:55 PM → → 11:05 PM → if express 1:35

→ 11:15 PM → if all-stop 1:45




2:07 if express → → 4:40 PM 30 minute 5:15 PM Saturday 30 minute → 11:15 PM → if express 1:55

2:22 if all-stop → → 4:55 PM bus ride Home Games bus ride → 11:25 PM → if all-stop 2:05

(June 17 - vs Giants) OR LATER (flexible, no reverse trains to meet)


to be answered.

2:33 PM 9:20 PM

9:30 PM

4:15 PM

4:30 PM

SPECIAL

SPECIALSPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

Attachment B

55



(1 date under consideration: July 14 vs Angels)

San Bernardino Line


1:50 SPECIAL if all-stop → 1:20 PM → 3:10 PM 30 minute 4:15 PM Saturday 30 minute 8:00 PM → 9:45 PM → if all-stop 1:45

OR bus ride Home Games bus ride OR

1:45 SPECIAL if all-stop → 1:45 PM → 3:30 PM (July 14 - vs Angels) 8:20 PM → 10:05 PM → if all-stop 1:45

OR

1:38 367 - Regular Service → 2:02 PM → 3:40 PM 8:30 PM → 10:15 PM → if all-stop 1:45

OR

8:40 PM → 10:10 PM → if all-stop 1:30

9:00 PM → 10:45 PM → 376 - Regular Service 1:45



2:10 SPECIAL if all-stop → 1:00 PM → 3:10 PM 30 minute 4:15 PM Saturday 30 minute → 9:55 PM → if express 1:55

bus ride Home Games bus ride → 10:05 PM → if all-stop 2:05

(July 14 - vs Angels) OR LATER (flexible, no reverse trains to meet)




to be answered.

8:00 PM SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

Attachment B

56


Service to/from 1:10 PM Sunday Home Games

(3 dates under consideration: June 18 vs Giants, July 15 vs Angels, and August 5 vs Astros)

San Bernardino Line

1:45 357 - Regular Service → 9:45 AM → 11:30 AM 4:00 PM → 5:50 PM → 366 - Regular Service 1:50

1:50 if all-stop → 10:35 AM → 30 minute 1:10 PM Sunday 30 minute → 6:55 PM → if express 1:40

1:30 if express → 10:55 AM → bus ride Home Games bus ride → 7:10 PM → if all-stop 1:55

^ both include 10+ minute dwells east of Rancho for meets

1:50 359 - Regular Service → 11:25 AM → 1:15 PM 5:35 PM → 7:27 PM → 368 - Regular Service 1:52

→ 7:40 PM → if express 1:40

→ 7:50 PM → if all-stop 1:50

^ express includes 7+ minute dwell at Montclair for meets


2:08 262 - Regular Service → 8:57 AM → 11:05 AM 3:51 PM → 5:58 PM → 267 - Regular Service 2:07

2:00 if express → → 12:05 PM 30 minute 1:10 PM Sunday 30 minute 4:50 PM → → if all-stop 2:10

2:10 if all-stop → → 12:15 PM bus ride Home Games bus ride 5:00 PM → → if express 2:00

^ Cannot hold for late games, unless it runs after M269 (1 hr later)


2:08 264 - Regular Service → 11:15 AM → 1:23 PM


to be answered.

10:05 AM 7:00 PM

12:25 PM 5:15 PM

6:00 PM

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIALSPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

SPECIAL

Attachment B

57

Operating Date: Eight (8) Friday Night Games, June 8 - Sep 21, 2018

Service: Dodgers Express -- Friday Only, San Bernardino Line Onlypost-game return trip only (leave LAUS 11pm or later)

Cost

Cost ElementPer Night

FY18Per Night

FY19 Total CommentTrain Crew Labor 1,220$ 1,202$ 9,669$ 1 crew @ 8 hrs straight time

Back Up Crew 1,220$ 1,202$ 9,669$ 1 crew @ 8 hrs straight time

Mechanical 888$ 919$ 7,262$ Prepare set and cleaning

Back Up Mechanical 803$ 831$ 6,564$ Prepare set

CER's -$ N/A

Security 176$ 190$ 1,478$ +3 hrs of security at LAUS (10p-1a)

Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 653$ 647$ 5,194$ 1 SBD-LAUS roundtrip

Freight RR Track Chrgs. -$ N/A

Marketing 20,000$

TVM programming 13,000$ (prelim estimate from Dolly)

Contingency Fee with Back Up 7,284$ 10%

Contingency Fee without Back Up 5,660$ 10%

Total Cost with Back Up: 80,120$ Total Cost without Back Up: 62,264$

METROLINK COST ESTIMATE

Attachment C

58


Service: Dodgers Express -- Friday Only, San Bernardino and Antelope Valley LinesService to and from Game

Cost


FY18Per Night

FY19 Total Comment

Train Crew Labor 2,620$ 2,569$ 20,704$ 2 crews @ 8 hrs straight time & 8 hrs overtime

Back Up Crew 2,620$ 2,569$ 20,704$ 2 crews @ 8 hrs straight time & 8 hrs overtime

Mechanical 1,507$ 1,559$ 12,319$ (AVL set returns to CMF overnight)

Back Up Mechanical 1,422$ 1,471$ 11,621$

CER's -$ -$ -$ N/A


Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 1,438$ 1,424$ 11,435$ 1 RT SBD-LAUS; 1 RT LAUS-Palmdale

Freight RR Track Chrgs. -$ -$ -$ N/A

Marketing 20,000$

TVM programming 13,000$





Attachment C

59


Service: Dodgers Express -- Friday Only, Antelope Valley Line Only [IMPUTED]Service to and from Game

Cost


FY18Per Night

FY19 Total Comment

Train Crew Labor 1,400$ 1,367$ 11,035$ 2 crews @ 8 hrs straight time & 8 hrs overtime

Back Up Crew 1,400$ 1,367$ 11,035$ 2 crews @ 8 hrs straight time & 8 hrs overtime

Mechanical 619$ 640$ 5,057$ (AVL set returns to CMF overnight)

Back Up Mechanical 619$ 640$ 5,057$

CER's -$ -$ -$ N/A


Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 785$ 777$ 6,240$ 1 RT SBD-LAUS; 1 RT LAUS-Palmdale


Marketing 20,000$






Attachment C

60

Operating Date: Nine Games (Three Weekends x 3 Games per Weekend):June 15-17, July 13-15, Aug 3-5

Service: Dodgers Express -- Three Weekend Series, San Bernardino Line Only Fridays: post-game return trip only (leave LAUS 11pm or later) Saturdays and Sundays: Service to and from Game

CostCost Element 3 Fridays 3 Sat +3 Sun Total CommentTrain Crew Labor 3,624$ 11,784$ 15,408$ 8 hrs ST and 11 hrs OT

Back Up Crew 3,624$ 7,229$ 10,853$ 1 crew @ 8 hrs OT

Mechanical 2,665$ 5,516$ 8,181$ Prepare set and cleaning

Back Up Mechanical 2,409$ 4,986$ 7,395$ Prepare set

CER's -$ -$ N/A

Security 556$ 1,139$ 1,695$ +3 hrs of security at LAUS (10p-1a)

Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 1,947$ 3,894$ 5,841$ 1 SBD-LAUS roundtrip per game


Marketing 20,000$

TVM programming 13,000$ (prelim estimate from Dolly)





Attachment C

61


Service: Dodgers Express -- Three Weekend Series, San Bernardino & Antelope Valley Lines Fridays: post-game return trip only (leave LAUS 11pm or later) Saturdays and Sundays: Service to and from Game



Mechanical 4,522$ 8,826$ 13,348$


CER's -$ -$ N/A


Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 4,286$ 8,573$ 12,859$ 1 RT SBD-LAUS; 1 RT LAUS-PMD per game


Marketing 20,000$






Attachment C

62


Service: Dodgers Express -- Three Weekend Series, Antelope Valley Line only (IMPUTED) Fridays: post-game return trip only (leave LAUS 11pm or later) Saturdays and Sundays: Service to and from Game



Mechanical 1,857$ 3,310$ 5,167$


CER's -$ -$ N/A


Fuel (2.7 gal/mi @ $2.10/gal) 2,339$ 4,678$ 7,018$ 1 RT SBD-LAUS; 1 RT LAUS-PMD per game


Marketing 20,000$






Attachment C

63


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot Issue As a result of a motion led by Director Solis, with support from Directors Barger, Krekorian and 2nd Vice-Chair Najarian, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) Boards have approved funding for a promotional 25% fare reduction on the San Bernardino Line. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board receive the recommendations of the Metro and SBCTA Boards and direct staff to implement a 25% fare reduction pilot for an initial period of six months effective July 1, 2018, with an extension for an additional six months following the completion of a Title VI fare equity analysis in October 2018. Promotional San Bernardino Line fares will not be valid for travel on Riverside Line trains. (Riverside Line fares continue to be valid on both the Riverside and San Bernardino Lines.) Alternatives The Board may consider any or all of the following, which may require additional approval by the Metro and SBCTA Boards and/or delay in implementation:

1) Defer action on the recommendation listed above; or

2) Revise the recommendation listed above. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to retain and grow ridership. Reductions in fares have shown to be effective in increasing ridership.

64

San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Background Over the past several years the San Bernardino Line has lost more ridership than any other Metrolink line, dropping from the highest to second highest ridership line in the Metrolink system. Ridership losses have reached 16% in five years due to a variety of reasons, including service reliability problems, a 10% service cut, low gas prices, and the opening of the Metro Gold Line extension to Azusa. At its January 25, 2018 meeting, the Metro Board directed staff to work with the Authority and SBCTA to develop a strategic plan to implement a fare discount pilot program to better understand the potential impact to ridership and demand for additional service on the San Bernardino Line (Attachment A). Promotional San Bernardino Line Fare Reductions Results from recent surveys of San Bernardino Line riders and cost sensitivity analyses prepared by Metrolink’s fare policy consulting team from CH2M indicate that riders on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Line are more responsive to changes in fares than riders on other lines. This suggests fare reductions as an effective strategy to increase ridership. Staff joined a working group of Metro and SBCTA staff to analyze options for fare reductions based on latest research findings, including the results of the successful Antelope Valley Line fare reduction program which was implemented in July 2015. An evaluation of the Antelope Valley Line fare reduction program was presented to the Board on March 23, 2018. Using the Antelope Valley Line fare reduction program as a benchmark, a strategic implementation plan for a promotional 25% fare reduction was developed for the San Bernardino Line. Key considerations were the expected ridership growth and subsidy requirements. San Bernardino Line Fare Reduction Key Findings: Discount: 25% fare reduction on all passes and tickets (excluding Weekend Day Passes) Eligibility: All trips with both origin and destination station on the San Bernardino Line. Trips that require a transfer to another line are not eligible to receive the discount. Fare Reciprocity: Promotional San Bernardino Line fares are excluded from reciprocal use on the Riverside Line to minimize negative impacts on the Riverside Line. Period: July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019 pending the results of a Title VI fare equity analysis.

65


Marketing Support: The fare promotion will be supported through a $250,000 marketing plan utilizing public awareness and marketing strategies (Attachment B). Expected Line Ridership Growth: 15% in first year, 4% in years 2 to 5 (annualized). Anticipated service increases over the next five years are expected to help avoid ridership growth resulting in capacity constraints. Expected revenue impacts: San Bernardino Line fare revenue is projected to decline by 13% decline in first year, with revenue reaching pre-program levels in year 5 (annualized). A comparison between current and proposed promotional fares is provided in Table 1 below. Table 1. Proposed Promotional Fares MONTHLY PASS 7 DAY PASS ROUND TRIP ONE WAY

Origin Station to LAUS

Base 25%

Discount Base

25% Discount

Base25%

Discount Base

25% Discount

Cal State L.A.

$77.00 $57.75 $19.25 $14.50 $5.50 $4.25 $2.75 $2.00

El Monte $161.00 $120.75 $40.25 $30.25 $11.50 $8.75 $5.75 $4.25 Baldwin Park

$196.00 $147.00 $49.00 $36.75 $14.00 $10.50 $7.00 $5.25

Covina $217.00 $162.75 $54.25 $40.75 $15.50 $11.75 $7.75 $5.75 Pomona - North

$252.00 $189.00 $63.00 $47.25 $18.00 $13.50 $9.00 $6.75

Claremont $259.00 $194.25 $64.75 $48.50 $18.50 $14.00 $9.25 $7.00

Montclair $273.00 $204.75 $68.25 $51.25 $19.50 $14.75 $9.75 $7.25

Upland $280.00 $210.00 $70.00 $52.50 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $7.50 Rancho Cucamonga

$301.00 $225.75 $75.25 $56.50 $21.50 $16.25 $10.75 $8.00

Fontana $336.00 $252.00 $84.00 $63.00 $24.00 $18.00 $12.00 $9.00

Rialto $350.00 $262.50 $87.50 $65.75 $25.00 $18.75 $12.50 $9.50 San Bernardino

$371.00 $278.25 $92.75 $69.50 $26.50 $20.00 $13.25 $10.00

San Bernardino - Downtown

$371.00 $278.25 $92.75 $69.50 $26.50 $20.00 $13.25 $10.00

66


Subsidy Requirements While the promotional fare reduction was modeled after the Antelope Valley Line fare reduction program, projections for the San Bernardino Line had to take into consideration differences in rider demographics and line corridors. For instance, the Antelope Valley Line is the only transportation option for many residents in the Antelope Valley. The San Bernardino Line corridor, on the other hand, is characterized by a multitude of travel choices, including heavy and light rail, express bus, and freeway express lanes. To account for this difference, the San Bernardino Line fare reduction was modeled assuming a lower ridership response (less demand elasticity). In the first year the 25% fare reduction is projected to result in a 15% increase in ridership on the San Bernardino Line. This will not be sufficient to offset the reduction in fare revenue which is expected to decline by 13%, or $2,731,794. However, continued ridership growth is expected to close the fare revenue gap within five years (longer than what has been observed on the Antelope Valley Line). Both Metro and SBCTA, who jointly fund San Bernardino Line operations, have committed funding for the cost of conducting the fare reduction pilot. Fare revenue shortfall funding was approved by the SBCTA Board on April 4, 2018 (Attachment C), and by the Metro Board on April 26, 2018 (Attachments D, E). The approved funding also includes $431,000 for program expenses incurred during the first year. These program expenditures consist of $250,000 for marketing support (Attachment B), as well as $31,000 for ticket vending machine (TVM) and website programming. Additional expenditures include $150,000 for Title VI compliance and contingencies for a possible extension of the promotion (Table 2). Table 2. Program Expenses

Program Expenses Estimated Amount

Marketing $250,000

Website Programming $15,000

TVM Programming $16,000

Title VI Cost $50,000

Contingency $100,000

Total Expenses $431,000

67


The fare reduction promotion is anticipated to launch on July 1, 2018 for an initial period of six months, with a possible extension contingent upon Board approval. Projected fare revenue and subsidy requirements over a five-year period following the launch of the program are provided for context in Table 3. Table 3. Projected Subsidy Requirement

Note: Figures do not account for riders shifting from the Riverside Line to the San Bernardino Line in response to the lower fares. In year 1 (FY19), the 25% fare discount is expected to reduce fare revenue by $2,731,794 to $17,658,592 from $20,390,386. The subsidy requirement inclusive of the $431,000 program expenditures totals $3,162,794 for the first year (Metro share: $1,891,983; SBCTA share: $1,270,811). Assuming ridership growth at an annual rate of 4% the subsidy requirement will be reduced to $2.03 million in year 2, $1.29 million in year 3, and $0.53 million in year 4, with the requirement for fare subsidies ending in year 5. Impacts on other Metrolink lines Staff analyzed the promotional fare reduction for likely impacts on other lines. Current Metrolink fare policy allows for San Bernardino Line and Riverside Line fares to be used interchangeably on either line (fare reciprocity). For instance, Riverside Line passes and tickets may be used for travel on the San Bernardino Line between corresponding stations, and vice versa. This poses a risk for potential revenue losses as Riverside Line riders could be incentivized to buy subsidized San Bernardino Line fares for use on the Riverside Line, which could be done with little effort using mobile tickets. To avoid revenue loss of between $1.2 to $1.7 million annually due to reciprocity for the Riverside Line, the promotional San Bernardino Line fares are excluded from use on the Riverside Line. Since riders would exchange their full price Riverside Line tickets for reduced San Bernardino Line tickets, only 75% of lost Riverside Line fare revenue would be recouped by increased San Bernardino Line sales. Riders wishing to have the flexibility of traveling on both lines will be advised to purchase Riverside Line fares which provide

68


full reciprocity with the San Bernardino, 91, and IEOC Lines. Currently, less than 2% of San Bernardino Line riders take advantage of reciprocity. Rider notification and fare enforcement will be essential. Even if the promotional San Bernardino Line fares are not valid for use on the Riverside Line, the fare differential is likely to result in some Riverside Line riders switching to the San Bernardino Line. Analysis of ticket usage data indicates that riders at Downtown Pomona, East Ontario and Riverside Downtown are most likely to travel on San Bernardino Line trains. Conservative estimates suggest that about 7-8% of Riverside Line riders would switch to a San Bernardino Line station, reducing Riverside Line revenue by about $605,000 annually. Next Steps Staff will be monitoring ridership response to the promotional fares. Special attention will be given to note any impacts on Riverside Line revenue and ridership. Staff will return to the Board with a preliminary evaluation in September 2018. Should the Board desire to extend the promotional fare reduction beyond six months staff will initiate the necessary public outreach and Title VI analysis. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. There are ongoing discussions with affected Member Agencies to ensure a neutral impact to future budgets. Prepared by: Henning Eichler, Planning Manager II Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development


69

Metro

Board Report

Los Angeles CountyMetropolitan Transportation

AuthorityOne Gateway Plaza

3rd Floor Board RoomLos Angeles, CA

PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING COMMITTEEJANUARY 17, 2018

Motion by:

Solis, Najarian, Barger, Krekorian, and Fasana

Item 44: Metrolink San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Pilot Program

Over the past several years, Metrolink has made tremendous strides to attract more riders to itssystem and become a more viable option for Southern California residents. Since introducing the25% Fare Discount Program on the Antelope Valley Line (AVL) in July of 2015, ridership has grown27% in FY 2016-17 compared to FY 2014-15. The increased ridership and associated fare revenueshas resulted in recovering more than 80% of funds originally allocated to the program. Assuming theupward ridership trend continues, the AVL Fare Discount Program is projected to “break even” by thesummer of 2018.

In December of 2016, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) funded andreplicated the discount program to stimulate ridership growth at four new stations along the 24-milePerris Valley Line (PVL) extension. Due to initial success, RCTC is seeking to offer the discountedfare for an extended period of time.

While the AVL and PVL are realizing a ridership uptick resulting from the program, Metrolink’s mostheavily used line, the San Bernardino Line (SBL) is steadily declining. Over the past five years, theSBL has experienced an 11% drop in ridership with an excess of seating capacity throughout the line,including all peak hour trains. Moreover, the population density and intense congestion on the I-10and I-210 freeways that parallel the SBL corridor are strong indicators that Metrolink has the potentialto maximize ridership on the San Bernardino Line. Given the available seats to fill and the need toretain and grow ridership on the SBLSUBJECT: Motion by Solis, Najarian, Barger, Krekorian, and Fasana

METROLINK SAN BERNARDINO LINE FARE DISCOUNTPILOT PROGRAMWE THEREFORE MOVE that the Board direct the CEO to work with the Southern California

Regional Railroad Authority (SCRRA) and the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority

(SBCTA) to develop a strategic plan to implement a Fare Discount Pilot Program to better understand

the potential impact to ridership and demand for additional service on the San Bernardino Line.

WE FURTHER MOVE that the CEO report back in 90 days.

File #: 2017-0901, Version: 1

Metro Printed on 1/21/2018Page 1 of 1

powered by Legistar™

Attachment A

70

http://www.legistar.com/

San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot Marketing Plan In support of building ridership on the San Bernardino Line, Metro and SBCTA have provided funding for a marketing campaign to promote the new 25% Fare Discount. Supported by advertising along the corridor, the goal is to halt the long-term ridership decline and drive strong growth in ridership as was seen during the Antelope Valley Line fare discount program. The marketing plan will deliver an integrated marketing and media mix campaign to acquire new potential riders and re-introduce former riders to our new value-enhanced San Bernardino Line service. The marketing strategy will also address our business outreach tactics and an improved customer experience/retention program. Campaign Objectives

Increase daily commuter ridership and revenue along the San Bernardino Line. Increase off-peak and weekend ridership and revenue along the San Bernardino

Line Build awareness about the San Bernardino Line fare discount with potential new

riders. Increase corporate partners accounts surrounding the stations throughout the San

Bernardino Line corridor (I.e. Inland Empire Industry Centers). Engage community members and station cities communicating about the new San

Bernardino Line fare discount. Key Messages

Riding on Metrolink is already the relaxing alternative to driving. Now your commute by train is even more affordable!

Starting July 1st through December 31st, San Bernardino Line customers can benefit from the new 25% fare reduction discount on one-way, round trip, 7-day and monthly passes.

Less stress and less worry for less money. Take the train on the San Bernardino Line and get 25% off. Act now, this promotion ends December 31st, 2018.

Target Audience

San Bernardino cities including Covina, Rancho Cucamonga, and San Bernardino. Employment centers in Inland Empire especially along bus routes providing

service to the San Bernardino Line. Universities and Colleges along the San Bernardino Line to target student

ridership.

Attachment B

71

San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot – Attachment B Page 2

Tactics Promotions and marketing efforts will include, but not be limited to: 1. Paid Media

Out of Home: Billboard positions along 10 Freeway, east & westbound facing boards

Paid Search: increased visibility on search engines to build awareness of the fare discount and to drive traffic to the website. Will include free ride offer to incent trial.

Transit Advertising: Targeting daily commuters on regional bus lines servicing access to key San Bernardino Line stations.

Pandora: Internet radio display advertising geo-targeted to the San Bernardino Line corridor. Will include free ride offer to incent trial.

Display Banner Ads: Paid graphic advertisements appearing on select websites geo-targeted to promote the fare discount. Will include free ride offer to incent trial.

Facebook Ads: Targeted advertising to a 3-mile radius of the stations along the San Bernardino Line corridor as well as key bus transit hubs providing access to the San Bernardino Line stations.

Waze: User-based GPS application geo-targeting highly relevant to the riders’ current location with direct incentives through a trial ride offer.

2. Metrolink Owned Channels:

Metrolink Stations: posters and banners at Metrolink stations Metrolink Train: On board rack card style flyers and seat drops Metrolink website homepage feature tile Metrolink website price finder display promoting San Bernardino Line Fare

Discount Metrolink website dedicated splash page promoting fare discount Metrolink Social media outreach including Facebook and Twitter Metrolink Matters Blog Metrolink Matters feature (bi-monthly onboard trains 25,000 copies) Metrolink e-blast (49,000 subscribers) Metrolink Conductor Announcements Metrolink CEO Brief Community outreach to station cities

3. Partnership Opportunities Reach out to station cities to promote the Metrolink connections to the San

Bernardino Line on their websites. Partnership with Foothill Transit and Omnitrans to promote the San Bernardino

Line fare discount to their riders

72

San Bernardino Line Promotional Fare Reduction Pilot – Attachment B Page 3

Partnership with IE Commuter to promote specific connectivity messages between the entities.

Promotion of the discount through our Member Agency (Metro, SBCTA) communication channels

4. Traditional Media Press Release Media Event

5. Corporate Partnership Programs:

Identify surrounding station city employers to increase ridership in the Inland Empire region

Communicate with station cities to identify potential CPP account opportunities Network with current CPPs in the area for potential new clients

73

Entity: San Bernardino County Transportation Authority

Minute Action

AGENDA ITEM: 16

Date: April 4, 2018 Subject: San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Program & Allocation

Recommendation: That the Board, acting as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority: A. Allocate $2 million of available Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Committee Clean Transportation CTC Partnership Program grant funds and $814,999 of Metrolink-generated State Transit Assistance Operator Share funds to a Metrolink San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Pilot Program. B. Authorize staff to develop a work plan and implement the 25% fare discount in partnership with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority which operates Metrolink. C. Authorize the Executive Director to execute an agreement between San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and Southern California Regional Rail Authority for the implementation of the 25% fare discount program, upon concurrence from General Counsel. Background: Historically, the San Bernardino Line (SBL) has been one of the most heavily used lines throughout the regional Metrolink system. However, over the past five (5) years, the line has experienced an average 11% drop in ridership, as well as an excess seating capacity of 68.6% during non-peak periods on weekdays and, 74.6% on weekends between July and December 2017. In addition to other factors such as increases in car ownership and low fuel costs, the timing of the drop in ridership correlates with a 2013 fare increase. While Metrolink retains a farebox recovery rate of approximately 41% to 44.4%, the resulting drop in revenue has had an impact to San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) subsidies. In an attempt to re-build ridership and to support Metrolink service, the LA Metro Board directed their staff to work with Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and SBCTA to develop a strategic plan to implement a SBL Fare Discount Pilot Program, and better understand the price elasticity of demand, as well as the potential for increasing ridership on the SBL moving forward. SBCTA provides an annual operating subsidy to SCRRA, with Local Transportation Funds (LTF) being the primary fund-source. The proposed Fiscal Year 2018/2019 operating subsidy requested by SCRRA consists of a 2.2% cost increase which is reasonable; however, when coupled with a drop in expected fare revenue, the cost increase results in a 5.5% net increase over the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 operating subsidy which is unsustainable. In addition, the Fund Administration Department recently completed an independent analysis of LTF projections by an outside consultant which indicated a need for more conservative revenue projections. As LTF is the primary fund-source for both SCRRA and Omnitrans operations, this impacts SBCTA’s ability to sustainably fund San Bernardino County’s share of Metrolink’s cost on a long-term basis. While SBCTA staff continues to review funding alternatives, the decline in LTF sales tax revenue, combined with the reduction in fare revenue due to ridership decline, requires SBCTA to strategically review opportunities to grow ridership and thus reduce the long-term subsidy need. The availability of the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) and State Transit Assistance Operator Share funding, in conjunction with LA Metro’s desire to move forward with a SBL Fare Discount Program, provides the opportunity to mitigate

16

Packet Pg. 197

Attachment C

74

Board of Directors Agenda Item April 4, 2018 Page 2

San Bernardino County Transportation Authority

the dropping fare revenue through implementation of a fare discount pilot program that ultimately grows ridership. The Metrolink regional rail system has implemented two (2) different discount programs along two (2) lines in recent years, both of which achieved an increase in ridership. In July 2015, LA Metro introduced a 25% discount along the Antelope Valley Line (AVL), and by Fiscal Year 2016/2017, ridership grew by 21% as compared to Fiscal Year 2014/2015. To date, the increase in ridership and associated fare revenues have resulted in a recovery of approximately 90% of funds allocated to the program. LA Metro projects the break-even point to be assumed in summer 2018. In December 2016, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) funded a similar discount structure on the new Perris Valley Line (PVL) with the goal of stimulating ridership across the four (4) new stations along the 24-mile line extension. Although the PVL scenario differs from AVL in that it is a new extension that lacks a history of ridership numbers to serve as a base line, to date, RCTC has not had to increase operating subsides. Due to the success of the two fare discount pilot programs implemented in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties and in partnership with LA Metro, SBCTA is supportive of a similar program along the SBL. However, due to operating subsidy constraints, funding is needed to move forward with the program. SBCTA has identified $2 million in grant funding from the MSRC Clean Transportation CTC Partnership Program that is available on a one-time basis with San Bernardino County being guaranteed a fair-share amount based on geographic equity. By using these funds, in addition to State Transit Assistance Operator Share monies for this purpose, SBCTA can provide San Bernardino County residents with a fare discount that is consistent with that of Los Angeles County, with the goal of increasing ridership and associated revenues in the future. A cost and implementation analysis of the proposed SBL Fare Discount Pilot Program, which includes discount scenarios of 25%, 20%, 15%, and 10%, is provided in the attachment, and serves as a basis for continued discussions with LA Metro and SCRRA. In accordance with the cost analysis, an allocation of $2 million in MSRC Clean Transportation grant funds, with the remaining balance of $814,999 funded by Metrolink-generated State Transit Assistance Operator Share, would sufficiently fund SBCTA’s projected share of the “across the board” 25% discount scenario. Additionally, Metrolink Fare Policy indicates the existence of reciprocity between the Metrolink San Bernardino and Riverside lines due to the higher frequency of service along the San Bernardino Line. Reciprocity will be addressed during the development of a strategic work plan.

SBCTA staff would like to develop a work plan in partnership with LA Metro, who is to report back to their Board in April. The allocation of the $2 million of MSRC Clean Transportation grant funds to the San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Program allows staff to move forward quickly with adequate funds for the program and in alignment with LA Metro. Additionally, the timely allocation of funds provides staff with sufficient amount of time to meet the MSRC programming deadline of June 2018.

Financial Impact: This item is consistent with SBCTA Fiscal Year 2017/2018 Budget.

Reviewed By: This item was reviewed and unanimously recommended for approval by the Transit Committee on March 14, 2018.

Responsible Staff: Carrie Schindler, Director of Transit and Rail Programs

16

Packet Pg. 19875

SB LINE FARE REDUCTION PROPOSAL

PRESENTED BY METROLINK

1

16.a

Packet Pg. 200

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

76

SB LINE FARE REDUCTION IMPACT

Discount valid for all SB Line station pairs SB Line fare discounts not subject to fare reciprocity with Riverside Line Changes in revenue and ridership from Riverside Line riders switching to the SB Line not accounted for Elasticity calculations based on CH2M analysis

2

16.a

Packet Pg. 201

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

77

SB LINE FARE REDUCTION SUBSIDY

(First year subsidy requirements include program expenses)

3

A) $431K of program expenses will be absorbed in FY19 B) Assumed growth rate from 1.3% to 4.0% (based on discounted rate) C) Subsidy neutrality amount is $20,390,386 D) Includes all ticket types except weekend day passes

ASSUMPTIONS

16.a

Packet Pg. 202

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

78

SB LINE FARE PROGRAM EXPENSES

Program Expenses Estimated Amount Marketing $250,000 Website Programming $15,000 TVM Programming $16,000 Title VI Cost $30,000 Miscellaneous $120,000 Total Expenses $431,000

4

16.a

Packet Pg. 203

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

79

SB LINE FARE REDUCTION 25%

5

16.a

Packet Pg. 204

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

80


6

16.a

Packet Pg. 205

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

81


7

16.a

Packet Pg. 206

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

82


8

16.a

Packet Pg. 207

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

83

TRAIN CAPACITY

The projected ridership growth is not expected to cause significant capacity constraints for San Bernardino Line trains. The 20% and 25% discounts are expected to result in one train (#313) to reach capacity in FY2021. At that time, newly refurbished cars will be available to add capacity by lengthening that train from five to six cars. (Projections do not reflect estimates of migration of existing riders from the Riverside Line to the San Bernardino Line.)

9

16.a

Packet Pg. 208

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

84

FARE TABLE

CURRENT VS. 25% DISCOUNT

MONTHLY_PASS 7 DAY PASS ROUND_TRIP ONE_WAY

Origin Station to LAUS Base 25% Discnt Base 25% Discnt Base 25% Discnt Base 25% Discnt

Cal State L.A. $77.00 $57.75 $19.25 $14.50 $5.50 $4.25 $2.75 $2.00

El Monte $161.00 $120.75 $40.25 $30.25 $11.50 $8.75 $5.75 $4.25

Baldwin Park $196.00 $147.00 $49.00 $36.75 $14.00 $10.50 $7.00 $5.25

Covina $217.00 $162.75 $54.25 $40.75 $15.50 $11.75 $7.75 $5.75

Pomona - North $252.00 $189.00 $63.00 $47.25 $18.00 $13.50 $9.00 $6.75

Claremont $259.00 $194.25 $64.75 $48.50 $18.50 $14.00 $9.25 $7.00

Montclair $273.00 $204.75 $68.25 $51.25 $19.50 $14.75 $9.75 $7.25

Upland $280.00 $210.00 $70.00 $52.50 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $7.50

Rancho Cucamonga $301.00 $225.75 $75.25 $56.50 $21.50 $16.25 $10.75 $8.00

Fontana $336.00 $252.00 $84.00 $63.00 $24.00 $18.00 $12.00 $9.00

Rialto $350.00 $262.50 $87.50 $65.75 $25.00 $18.75 $12.50 $9.50

San Bernardino $371.00 $278.25 $92.75 $69.50 $26.50 $20.00 $13.25 $10.00

San Bernardino - Dtwn $371.00 $278.25 $92.75 $69.50 $26.50 $20.00 $13.25 $10.00

10

16.a

Packet Pg. 209

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

85

TRAFFIC AND AIR QUALITY

BENEFITS

Traffic Relieve Fare Discount SB Line

Express Train Dodgers Train

Annual New Ridership 412,716 102,996 520

Car trips avoided 240,606 60,045 111

GHG avoided (metric tons) 3,483 869 2

11

Note: This analysis addresses neither costs nor revenues associated with SB Line Express Train or Dodgers Train.

16.a

Packet Pg. 210

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

86

12

16.a

Packet Pg. 211

Att

ach

men

t: A

ttac

hm

ent

A -

SB

L F

are

Dis

cou

nt

Pro

gra

m C

ost

An

alys

is (

4573

: S

an

87

Metro

Board Report




File #: 2018-0099, File Type: Program Agenda Number: 20.

PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING COMMITTEEAPRIL 11, 2018

SUBJECT: METROLINK SAN BERNARDINO LINE (SBL)25 PERCENT FARE DISCOUNT SIX-MONTH PILOTPROGRAM

ACTION: APPROVE RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDATION

CONSIDER:

A. APPROVING the Metrolink San Bernardino Line 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program;

B. PROGRAMMING up to $2 Million in prior year Proposition C 10% surplus funds for FY 2018-19 funding only for the Metrolink SBL 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program; and

C. AUTHORIZING the CEO to enter into all agreements necessary to implement the MetrolinkSBL 25% Fare Discount Pilot Program.

ISSUE

In January 2018, Directors Solis, Najarian, Barger, Krekorian and Fasana directed the ChiefExecutive Officer to work with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and SanBernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to develop a strategic plan to implement a FareDiscount Pilot Program to better understand the potential impact to ridership and demand foradditional service on SBL and report back in 90 days (refer to Attachment A-Metro Board Motion#44). In partnership with SBCTA and collaboration with SCRRA, staff is returning to the Board withrecommendations to implement a six-month 25% “across-the-board” Fare Discount Pilot Program onthe Metrolink San Bernardino Line (SBL), to start as early as July 2018.

DISCUSSION

The Metrolink SBL had the highest ridership in the Metrolink regional commuter rail systemhistorically until 2016. Since then, over the past five years, the SBL has continued to experience asteady decline with an average drop of 16% in ridership. Currently, there is an excess seatingcapacity of up to 69% during non-peak weekday period and up to 75% on weekends. Factorscontributing to ridership loss on the Metrolink SBL include low fuel prices, increased car ownership,service reliability and on-time performance issues, in addition to a 27% ridership loss at the Metrolink



Attachment D

88



Covina Station since the Gold Line was extended to Azusa in March 2016.

Metrolink SBL 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot ProgramIn response to the continued ridership loss on the SBL, SCRRA staff has been considering a multi-pronged customized ridership strategy for the SBL, to consist of: 1) fare reductions; 2) serviceenhancements; and, 3) improving the customer experience.

In partnership with SBCTA, staff worked with SCRRA to prepare a fare reduction feasibility proposalfor the Metrolink SBL that consists of 25%, 20%, 15% and 10% discounts with an increase ofridership projections for each level of discount. Due to the highest potential increase of ridership andgiven the success a similar discount program on the Metrolink Antelope Valley Line, staff isrecommending a 25% fare discount program with a projected ridership increase of approximately413,000 new riders in the first year.

To date, SCRRA has implemented two 25% fare discount pilot programs, the Metrolink AntelopeValley Line (AVL) in Los Angeles County and the Metrolink Perris Valley Line in Riverside County.


powered by Legistar™89



Based on the success of these two fare discount programs, the SBCTA Transit Committee approvedthe SBL 25% Fare Discount Pilot Program with a recommendation for approval to their Board ofDirectors on April 4, 2018.

With the recommended approval, staff will work with SBCTA and SCRRA to develop a work plan andimplement a temporary promotional 25% fare discount for six months to begin as early as July 2018.Staff will also work with SCRRA and SBCTA to evaluate a federal Title VI study that requires all farechanges to be evaluated for equity impacts should the promotional 25% fare discount extend beyondthe six-month pilot period. Depending upon preliminary ridership and revenue impacts, staff willreport to the Board by February 2019 with a recommendation to terminate, modify or extend theMetrolink SBL 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program.

Motion #44 acknowledged the success of the AVL 25% Fare Discount Pilot Program, as anopportunity to implement a similar program to increase ridership and revenues on the SBL.

Metrolink AVL 25% Fare Discount Pilot ProgramIn April 2015, the Board approved a motion to reduce fares 25% on the Metrolink AVL. Since thatprogram’s launch in July 2015, the AVL Fare Discount Pilot Program has been successful in growingridership on the AVL, with a projection of up to 33% higher ridership than pre-program levels by June2018.

Several key findings have emerged regarding the growth in AVL ridership:

· The strongest response has been from infrequent riders, with an increase in one-way andround trip sales of 23%

· Many of the new riders have become regular riders. Monthly pass sales are up at a higherrate than the overall growth rate on the AVL.

· Student and youth ridership continues to be very strong, up 35% in FY 16 and an additional18% in FY 17.

· Short distance ridership (less than 20 miles) increased 12% in FY 17.

Due to the strong ridership growth on the AVL, fare revenue is almost at pre-program levels, and isprojected to break even by Summer 2018.





Although Metro has programmed $5.462 million for the AVL Fare Discount Program, Metro has spentless than $2 million and is not anticipating any further subsidy in FY 19.

Attachment B provides a Metrolink evaluation of the AVL Fare Discount Pilot Program, 30 monthssince the program’s implementation.

DETERMINATION OF SAFETY IMPACT

This is a programming and fare reduction action which has no impact on safety.

FINANCIAL IMPACT





The recommended approval authorizes a six month pilot program, July 2018 through December 2018with a cost not to exceed $2 million for FY 19. Based upon the success of the AVL 25% FareDiscount Pilot Program and fare elasticity analysis conducted by SCRRA, staff anticipates thatridership will grow the first year at 15% and continue to grow thereafter. Due to the revenue growthassociated with strong ridership, the revenue loss will be less per year, FY 19 thru FY 22, untilbreaking even, and then starting to generate positive revenue in FY 23. Should the SBL 25% FareDiscount Six-month Pilot Program be approved by the SCRRA board to go forward as an ongoingprogram, the four-year cost to Metro is anticipated to be $4,190,969 before the program breaks even,and no additional Metro subsidy would be required thereafter.

SBCTA Cost-SharingThe operating costs and revenues for the SBL are shared between Metro and SBCTA. Metroprovides 59.82% of the costs to operate the SBL, and SBCTA provides 40.18% of the costs tooperate the SBL. Per the Board motion, Metro and SBCTA staff worked closely to collaborate andpartner on the cost sharing for the SBL Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program. The SBCTA Board issupportive of the 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program, and has recently allocated funds forthe SBL Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program (Attachment C).

Impact to BudgetStaff is proposing to fund the SBL 25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program from prior yeardeferred revenues and operating surpluses that are currently on hand with Metrolink. CurrentlyMetrolink has $14.9 million of Metro surplus funds. After applying the $2 million in funds for the SBL25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program, approximately $12.9M would remain in deferredrevenues that can be used to fund extension of the program, Metrolink Operations,rehabilitation/state of good repair, or other items the Metro board may deem to be of high priority.

Metro is currently carrying a negative fund balance of Proposition C 10% and Measure M 1% fundsavailable to support Metrolink Operations. This negative fund balance is projected to continue until it





grows positive in FY 25. Funding for Metrolink Operations is constrained, and the deferred revenuefunds could be used to offset the negative funding balance for Metrolink Operations.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

One alternative is to not implement a SBL Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program. This is notrecommended due to the success of the AVL Fare Discount Pilot Program, the anticipated ridershipgrowth, and the funding support of SBCTA.

A second option is to offer a reduced discount program of 20%, 15% or 10%. This is notrecommended since SBCTA has approved their 25% discount commitment and ridership growth willbe significantly less than 25% discount.

NEXT STEPS

Metro will work with Metrolink staff to initiate a marketing campaign to promote the SBL 25% FareDiscount Six-month Pilot Program. The pilot program is targeted to start on July 1, 2018. Ridership,revenues and other impacts will be monitored monthly by SCRRA staff.

Staff will continue to provide updates to ridership and revenues via the Regional Rail QuarterlyReport this Fall. Depending upon preliminary ridership and revenue impacts, staff will report back tothe Board by February 2019 with a recommendation to terminate, modify or extend the Metrolink SBL25% Fare Discount Six-month Pilot Program.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A - Metro Board Motion #44Attachment B - Metrolink Staff Report/Evaluation of AVL Fare Discount ProgramAttachment C - SBTCA Staff Report

Prepared by:Jay Fuhrman, Manager, Transportation Planning, (213) 418-3179Jeanet Owens, Senior Executive Officer, Project Management, (213) 418-3189

Reviewed by:Nalini Ahuja, Chief Financial Officer (213) 922-3088Richard Clarke, Chief Program Management Officer (213) 922-7557




94

Fuhrmanj

Text Box

Attachment A

96

Fuhrmanj

Text Box

Attachment B

Entity: San Bernardino County Transportation Authority

Minute Action

AGENDA ITEM:

Date: April 4, 2018

Subject:

San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Program & Allocation

Recommendation: That the Board, acting as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority:

A. Allocate $2 million of available Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Program grant funds and $814,999 of Metrolink generated State Transit Assistance – Operator Share funds to a Metrolink San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Pilot Program.

B. Authorize staff to develop a work plan and implement the 25% fare discount in partnership with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority which operates Metrolink.

C. Authorize the Executive Director to execute an agreement between SBCTA, LA Metro, and SCRRA for the implementation of the 25% fare discount program, upon concurrence from General Counsel.

Background: Historically, the San Bernardino Line (SBL) has been one of the most heavily used lines throughout the regional Metrolink system. However, over the past five (5) years, the line has experienced an average 11% drop in ridership, as well as an excess seating capacity of 68.6% during non-peak periods on weekdays and, 74.6% on weekends between July and December 2017. In addition to other factors such as increases in car ownership and low fuel costs, the timing of the drop in ridership correlates with a 2013 fare increase. While Metrolink retains a farebox recovery rate of approximately 41% to 44.4%, the resulting drop in revenue has had an impact to San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) subsidies. In an attempt to re-build ridership and to support Metrolink service, the LA Metro Board directed their staff to work with Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and SBCTA to develop a strategic plan to implement a SBL Fare Discount Pilot Program, and better understand the price elasticity of demand, as well as the potential for increasing ridership on the SBL moving forward. SBCTA provides an annual operating subsidy to SCRRA, with Local Transportation Funds (LTF) being the primary fund-source. The proposed Fiscal Year 2018/2019 operating subsidy requested by SCRRA consists of a 2.2% cost increase which is reasonable; however, when coupled with a drop in expected fare revenue, the cost increase results in a 5.5% net increase over the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 operating subsidy which is unsustainable. In addition, the Fund Administration Department recently completed an independent analysis of LTF projections by an outside consultant which indicated a need for more conservative revenue projections. As LTF is the primary fund-source for both SCRRA and Omnitrans operations, this impacts SBCTA’s ability to sustainably fund San Bernardino County’s share of Metrolink’s cost on a long-term basis. While SBCTA staff continues to review funding alternatives, the decline in LTF sales tax revenue, combined with the reduction in fare revenue due to ridership decline, requires SBCTA to strategically review opportunities to grow ridership and thus reduce the long-term subsidy need. The availability of the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Program (MSRCP) and State Transit Assistance Operator Share funding, in conjunction with LA Metro’s desire to move forward with a SBL Fare Discount Program, provides the opportunity to mitigate the dropping fare revenue through implementation of a fare discount pilot program that ultimately grows ridership.

102

Fuhrmanj

Text Box

Attachment C

Board of Directors Agenda Item

April 4, 2018

Page 2

San Bernardino County Transportation Authority

The Metrolink regional rail system has implemented two (2) different discount programs along two (2) lines in recent years, both of which achieved an increase in ridership. In July 2015, LA Metro introduced a 25% discount along the Antelope Valley Line (AVL), and by Fiscal Year 2016/2017, ridership grew by 21% as compared to Fiscal Year 2014/2015. To date, the increase in ridership and associated fare revenues have resulted in a recovery of approximately 90% of funds allocated to the program. LA Metro projects the break-even point to be assumed in summer 2018. In December 2016, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) funded a similar discount structure on the new Perris Valley Line (PVL) with the goal of stimulating ridership across the four (4) new stations along the 24-mile line extension. Although the PVL scenario differs from AVL in that it is a new extension that lacks a history of ridership numbers to serve as a base line, to date, RCTC has not had to increase operating subsides.

Due to the success of the two fare discount pilot programs implemented in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties and in partnership with LA Metro, SBCTA is supportive of a similar program along the SBL. However, due to operating subsidy constraints, funding is needed to move forward with the program. SBCTA has identified $2 million in grant funding from the MSRC Clean Transportation Funding that is available on a one-time basis with San Bernardino County being guaranteed a fair-share amount based on geographic equity. By using these funds, in addition to State Transit Assistance Operator Share monies for this purpose, SBCTA can provide San Bernardino County residents with a fare discount that is consistent with that of Los Angeles County, with the goal of increasing ridership and associated revenues in the future.

A cost and implementation analysis of the proposed SBL Fare Discount Pilot Program, which includes discount scenarios of 25%, 20%, 15%, and 10%, is provided in Attachment A, and serves as a basis for continued discussions with LA Metro and SCRRA. In accordance with the cost analysis, an allocation of $2 million in MSRCP funds, with the remaining balance of $814,999 funded by State Transit Assistance Operator Share, would sufficiently fund SBCTA’s projected share of the “across the board” 25% discount scenario. Additionally, Metrolink Fare Policy indicates the existence of reciprocity between the Metrolink San Bernardino and Riverside lines due to the higher frequency of service along the San Bernardino Line. Reciprocity will be addressed during the development of a strategic work plan.

SBCTA staff would like to develop a work plan in partnership with LA Metro, who is to report back to their Board in April. The allocation of the $2 million of MSRCP funds to the San Bernardino Line Fare Discount Program allows staff to move forward quickly with adequate funds for the program and in alignment with LA Metro. Additionally, the timely allocation of funds provides staff with sufficient amount of time to meet the MSRCP programming deadline of June 2018.

Financial Impact:

This item is consistent with SBCTA Fiscal Year 2017/2018 Budget.

Reviewed By:

This item was reviewed and unanimously recommended for approval by the Transit Committee

on March 14, 2018.

Responsible Staff:

Carrie Schindler, Director of Transit and Rail Programs

103

Metro

Board Report




File #: 2018-0233, File Type: Motion / Motion Response Agenda Number: 20.2

REGULAR BOARD MEETINGAPRIL 26, 2018

Motion by:

SOLIS, GARCETTI, FASANA, KREKORIAN, AND BARGER

Authorize the Metrolink San Bernardino Line

Fare Discount Pilot Program for One Full Year

Based on direction from the Board, Metro staff has recommended a 25% fare discount pilot program

on the Metrolink San Bernardino Line (SBL) for a period of six months, from July through December

of 2018.

As recommended, a program during the summer months and holidays will not capture the fluctuating,

seasonal ridership patterns resulting from school-based schedules along the SBL such as Cal State

LA, the Claremont Colleges and Chaffey College. Absent this critical data, the six-month program will

limit year-over-year comparative analysis and hinder our ability to thoroughly understand price

elasticity and ridership demand throughout the year. Moreover, Metro’s Planning and Programming

Committee and SBCTA have approved the necessary resources to operate the program for a full

year (FY 18/19) and notwithstanding the pilot length, Metro will also work jointly with SCRRA and

SBCTA on a federal Title VI analysis to evaluate equity impacts resulting from the program.

Based on efforts to conduct a Title VI study; funding for a full year on behalf of Metro and SBCTA;

and the need to capture critical data throughout the year…

SUBJECT: MOTION BY SOLIS, GARCETTI, FASANA,KREKORIAN, AND BARGER

AUTHORIZE THE METROLINK SAN BERNARDINO LINE FAREDISCOUNT PILOT PROGRAM FOR ONE FULL YEAR

APPROVE Motion by Solis, Garcetti, Fasana, Krekorian, and Barger that the Board authorize the

recommended 25% Fare Discount Pilot Program on the Metrolink San Bernardino Line for one full

year and report back to the board on a quarterly basis.



Attachment E

104



FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County

Metropolitan Transportation Authority for Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project; Valley Subdivision Mile Post 7.99, Design Review and Project Support

Issue Approval is needed to execute a Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project (Project) at mile post 7.99 on the Valley Subdivision. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute this Funding Agreement between Metro and the Authority in the amount of $390,300, defining the roles, responsibilities and funding commitments for the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project. Alternatives

The Board may request additional information Strategic Goal Alignment This project aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment. In the interim the project will enhance safety at the existing Doran Street at grade crossing before the full construction provides a road/rail grade separation, herein after referred to as the Salem/Sperry Overpass, to replace both Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil Street at grade railroad crossings. Upon completion of the road/rail separation both the Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil Street at grade crossings will be retired and removed.

105

Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project; Valley Subdivision Mile Post 7.99, Design Review and Project Support Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Background

Metro, in cooperation with the City of Glendale, the City of Los Angeles, and the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), has obtained funding through Measure R and other sources for a railroad/highway grade separation to replace the existing at-grade crossings at Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil Street in the cities of Glendale and Los Angeles. Metro is currently proceeding with the environmental clearance and the development of Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the full railroad/highway grade separation and for interim at-grade crossing improvements at Doran Street. The existing Doran Street at-grade crossing is located at mile post (MP) 7.99 on the Valley Subdivision. The right-of-way is owned by Metro and the tracks and associated systems are maintained and operated by the Authority. Approximately 90 Metrolink, Union Pacific, and Amtrak trains operate over this segment of the Valley Subdivision daily. In addition, this railroad corridor is proposed for future, shared use by the California High Speed Rail system.

Metro, as lead agency, is developing the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project (see enclosed map of project and location). The Project includes design and construction of interim improvements for the existing Doran Street at grade crossing, and a future highway grade separation through a proposed overpass structure to connect Salem and Sperry Streets on either side of the railroad corridor, then allowing closure of the existing Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil at-grade crossings. New pedestrian bridges over the Verdugo wash are also proposed. The Salem/Sperry Overpass is located near the existing Broadway/Brazil at-grade crossing, which was substantially upgraded to current crossing safety standards in 2012 and 2013. The existing Doran Street at-grade crossing will be substantially modified to incorporate changes to the signal system, a new pedestrian crossing and adjustments to the roadway for two-way traffic (one lane westbound and one lane eastbound) as part of the Project. Metro has submitted a Petition for Modification (PFM) to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to gain approval to revise the current Commission Decision from a one-way street to a two-way street for the interim period. Highway-Rail Crossing. Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil existing at-grade railroad crossings will be retired and removed from service at Project completion.

This Funding Agreement will provide $390,300 at Metro’s sole cost, for Authority staff to provide support to the project, including review of design plans, meeting attendance, general railroad coordination, development of agreements, execution of consultant contract task orders, provision of scope and cost estimates for Authority support services during construction and for flagging and other railroad protective services for the design

106

Funding Agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project; Valley Subdivision Mile Post 7.99, Design Review and Project Support Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

of the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation Project. The term of this funding agreement is until March 31, 2020 unless extended by written amendment. The Funding Agreement has been included as information – Attachment A. Next Steps Upon Board Authorization, the Funding Agreement will be executed by both parties. Budget Impact This item has no impact upon the Authority’s Board-approved Operations or Capital Budgets. The amount incurred or expended will be borne by Metro. Prepared by: Andy Althorp, Principal Engineer, Project Management Justin Fornelli, Director, Engineering & Construction

Darrell Maxey Deputy Chief Operating Officer (PTC and Engineering)


107

FA with SCRRA re Doran GS St Project -- Design Review and Project Support

FUNDING AGREEMENT FA#940000000DORANSCRRA

FOR DORAN STREET CROSSING GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT

DESIGN REVIEW AND PROJECT SUPPORT

This Funding Agreement (“Agreement”) is made as of ______, 2018, by and between

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (“SCRRA”), and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“LACMTA”).

RECITALS:

A. LACMTA, a regional transportation planning agency, owns and operates transit and

transportation services in Los Angeles County and is involved in the planning, funding, construction and/or operation of heavy and light rail transit, buses and /or commuter train services in Los Angeles County. The Project is located within railroad right-of-way owned by LACMTA and maintained and operated by SCRRA.

B. LACMTA, as lead agency, is developing the Doran Street Crossing Grade Separation project (the “Project”) in the County of Los Angeles, CA. The Project includes design and construction of grade separations via the Salem/Sperry Overpass and a northerly point of access to Fairmont Avenue for the closure of Doran Street and Broadway/Brazil at-grade railroad crossings at project completion. Doran Street and Broadway/ Brazil are located on the south side of the State Route134 (SR-134) and east of the Los Angeles River. This Project also includes interim at-grade crossing improvements for Doran Street to remain open until the proposed grade separation through the Salem/Sperry Overpass and a northerly point of access to Fairmont Avenue are constructed.

C. SCRRA, commonly known as “Metrolink”, is a joint powers authority responsible for

operating commuter rail service covering the five southern California counties. LACMTA is a member of the five county Metrolink joint powers authority.

D. SCRRA will need to participate in the Project environmental, preliminary engineering and design review processes, to ensure that proposed improvements meet Metrolink’s design and operating requirements. Such participation will include, without limitation, SCRRA staff attendance at meetings and reviewing and commenting on technical reports and environmental studies, conceptual and preliminary design drawings to ensure compliance with SCRRA standards and specification, providing data and inputs for rail modeling including SCRRA’s operational and maintenance requirements, providing flagging services for access to the right-of-way, and providing support for community outreach activities, all as more specifically described in the scope of work noted as Exhibit A of this Agreement (collectively, the “WORK”). SCRRA shall provide the WORK in accordance with the schedule, if any, and scope set forth in the WORK.

Attachment A

108


E. SCRRA is funded primarily by five member agencies, and the WORK indicated above does not fall within SCRRA budget allocations. Accordingly, it is necessary to secure funding for the WORK separately, as a third party recollectable project.

F. LACMTA adopted Ordinance #08-01, the Traffic Relief and Rail Expansion Ordinance,

on July 24, 2008 (the “Ordinance”), which Ordinance was approved by the voters of Los Angeles County on November 4, 2008 as “Measure R” and became effective on January 2, 2009. This Project is eligible for funding under Line 45 of the Measure R Expenditure Plan.

G. LACMTA proposes to provide funding for the WORK in an amount not to exceed Three Hundred Ninety Thousand Three Hundred Dollars, $390,300 as provided for in Agreement Article 1, Payment of Funds, and as more described in Exhibit B, the Project budget.

H. LACMTA desires to reimburse SCRRA to perform the WORK and SCRRA desires to perform the WORK on the terms and conditions as set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO DO HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

AGREEMENT 1. PAYMENT OF FUNDS

1.1 LACMTA will reimburse SCRRA an amount not to exceed $390,300 as provided for in Agreement Article 1, Payment of Funds, for eligible expenses incurred by SCRRA in implementing the WORK. LACMTA will not be responsible for any costs and expenses in excess of $390,300 as provided for in Agreement Article 1, Payment of Funds, incurred by the SCRRA in performing the WORK. If the WORK changes, either by schedule or addition of more tasks, LACMTA and SCRRA will work together to amend this Agreement scope of work and authorized funding amount, as needed.

1.2 Payments to SCRRA will be processed by LACMTA within a reasonable time,

but in no event, more than thirty (30) calendar days, after receipt of a Request for Reimbursement submitted in accordance with Section 4 below.

2. SCOPE OF WORK

2.1 SCRRA shall perform and implement the WORK in compliance with all the terms

and conditions set forth herein and all applicable laws, regulations and policies. 2.2 No material changes, as determined by LACMTA in its reasonable discretion, to

the WORK shall be funded or allowed without an amendment to this Agreement approved and signed by LACMTA Chief Executive Officer or his designee.

109


SCRRA shall notify LACMTA immediately of all proposed changes to the WORK, schedule or budget and no changes shall be initiated by SCRRA prior to LACMTA approval.

2.3 LACMTA and SCRRA concur on the tasks, schedule and budget, which is

included in the WORK. 3. TERM

3.1 The term of this Agreement shall begin as of the date this Agreement is fully

executed by all parties, and terminate on March 31, 2020, unless extended by written amendment.

4. REIMBURSEMENT, EXPENDITURE AND DISPOSITION OF FUNDS 4.1 SCRRA shall prepare and submit to LACMTA a Request for Reimbursement for

actual tasks completed and paid for by SCRRA consistent with the WORK on a quarterly basis with the appropriate detailed supporting documentation. All costs charged shall be supported by properly executed payroll data showing labor (wage) rates per hour; invoices and vouchers evidencing in proper detail the nature of the charges and other documentation requested by LACMTA.

4.2 The Request for Reimbursement shall consist of a detailed invoice itemizing incurred expenses for services as related to the WORK during the billing period. A copy of all deliverables identified in the WORK for the billing period shall accompany the Request for Reimbursement.

4.3 SCRRAshallsendallRequestforReimbursementwithsupportingdocumentationto:

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Accounts Payable P. O. Box 512296 Los Angeles, CA 90051-0296 Re:DoranStreetGradeSeparationProject MetroProjectNo.460091 4.4 Funds will be released on a reimbursement basis. LACMTA will make all

disbursements electronically unless an exception is requested in writing. Reimbursements via Automated clearing House (ACH) will be made at no cost to SCRRA. SCRRA must complete the ACH form and submit such form to LACMTA before grant payments can be made.

4.5 Request for Reimbursement must be submitted on SCRRA letterhead with supporting

documentation, as described in Section 4.2. 4.6 LACMTA shall not reimburse any expenditure not in compliance with the WORK

110


and/or other terms and conditions of this Agreement. 4.7 If any amounts paid to SCRRA are disallowed for any reason, SCRRA shall remit

to LACMTA the disallowed or non-reimbursed amount(s) within 30 days from receipt of LACMTA’s notice. All payments made by the LACMTA hereunder are subject to the audit provisions contained herein and within this Agreement.

4.8 SCRRA shall submit the final invoice for WORK no later than June 30, 2019, unless

otherwise agreed to by both parties in writing. 4.9 If the not to exceed amount is found to be insufficient to allow SCRRA to meet its

obligations to the Project, SCRRA will notify LACMTA as soon as possible specifying which elements of the PROJECT will be impacted until the not to exceed amount is adjusted.

4.10 If LACMTA and SCRRA cannot reach AGREEMENT on any necessary adjustment

to the not to exceed amount, LACMTA may at its discretion elect not to revise the not to exceed amount and to prioritize the work in a manner that will meet the available funding. Any revised not to exceed amount will be incorporated into this AGREEMENT by written amendment executed by the CEO or similar officer of each of the parties to the AGREEMENT. In no event will SCRRA be required to proceed with work for which there is insufficient funding.

5. REPORTING AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS 5.1 SCRRA shall be subject to and shall comply with all applicable requirements of

LACMTA regarding reporting and audit requirements. 5.2 SCRRA shall submit in its Request for Reimbursement, written progress reports with

each set of invoices to LACMTA as specified to determine if SCRRA is performing to expectations, is on schedule, is within funding cost limitations, to provide communication of interim findings and to afford occasions for airing difficulties respecting special problems encountered so that remedies can be developed. Should SCRRA fail to submit a complete Request for Reimbursement or project deliverables in accordance with the WORK schedule, LACMTA may elect not to pay SCRRA until submittal is fully complete.

5.3 Exhibit C is the Project Reporting & Expenditure Guidelines. SCRRA shall

complete the “Quarterly Measure R Expenditure Report”. The Quarterly Expenditure Reports is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit C-1 in accordance with Exhibit C – Project Reporting and Expenditure Guidelines.

5.4 SCRRA shall submit the Quarterly Measure R Expenditure Report (Exhibit C-1)

within sixty (60) days after the close of each quarter on the last day of the months November, February, May and August. Should SCRRA fail to submit such reports

111


within 10 days of the due date and/or submit incomplete reports, LACMTA will not reimburse SCRRA until the completed required reports are received, reviewed, and approved. The Quarterly Measure R Expenditure Report shall include all appropriate documentation, and any changes to interim milestone dates that do not impact the final milestone date. All supporting documents must include a clear justification and explanation of their relevance to the Project. If no activity has occurred during a quarter, SCRRA will still be required to submit the Quarterly Measure R Expenditure Reports indicating no dollars were expended that quarter. If a request for reimbursement exceeds $500,000 in a single month, then SCRRA can submit such an invoice once per month with supporting documentation.

5.5 LACMTA shall have the right to conduct audits of this Agreement, as needed, such

as financial and compliance audits and performance audits. SCRRA shall make available and shall ensure its contractors make available, any records, information, material data and documentation needed by the auditors. SCRRA shall establish and maintain proper accounting procedures and cash management records and documents in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). SCRRA shall reimburse LACMTA for any expenditure not in compliance with the WORK or other terms and conditions of this Agreement, other applicable requirements of LACMTA. The allowability of costs for SCRRA’s own expenditures submitted to LACMTA shall be in compliance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87. The allowability of costs for SCRRA’s contractors, consultants and suppliers’ expenditures submitted to LACMTA through SCRRA’s invoices shall be in compliance with OMB Circular A-87 or Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 31, whichever is applicable. LACMTA shall have the right to conduct a final LACMTA audit. The findings of the LACMTA audit will be final. This section shall survive termination of this Agreement.

5.6 SCRRA shall certify each Request for Reimbursement by reviewing all costs and

maintaining internal control to ensure that all expenditures are allocable, allowable and reasonable and in accordance with OMB A-87, and the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

5.7 SCRRA shall also certify final costs of the WORK to ensure that all costs are in

compliance with OMB Circular A-87, and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 5.8 SCRRA shall retain all original records and documents related to the WORK

(“Records”) for a period of three years after final payment. The Records shall be open to inspection and subject to audit and reproduction by LACMTA auditors or authorized representatives to the extent deemed necessary by LACMTA to adequately permit evaluation of expended costs. The Records subject to audit shall also include, without limitation, those records deemed necessary by LACMTA to evaluate and verify, direct and indirect costs (including overhead allocations) as they may apply to costs associated with the Project.

112


5.9 SCRRA shall cause all contractors to comply with the requirements of Sections 5.4 and 5.7 above. SCRRA shall ensure all contractors to cooperate fully in furnishing or in making available to LACMTA all records deemed necessary by LACMTA auditors or authorized representatives related to the Work.

5.10 Exhibit D, the "FTIP PROJECT SHEET (PDF)", is attached as Exhibit D and is

required to ensure that the Project is programmed correctly in the most up-to-date FTIP document. The FTIP PROJECT SHEET (PDF) can be found in Metro FTIP database under the reports section at http://program.metro.net. All projects that receive funding through Measure R must be programmed into the FTIP, which includes locally funded regionally significant projects for information and air quality modeling purposes. SCRRA shall review the Project in ProgramMetro each year and update or correct the Project information as necessary during a scheduled FTIP amendment or adoption. SCRRA will be notified of amendments and adoptions to the FTIP via e-mail. Changes to the FTIP through ProgramMetro should be made as soon as possible after SCRRA is aware of any changes to the Project, but no later than October 1 of the year the change or update is effective. Should SCRRA fail to meet this date, it may affect SCRRA ability to access funding, delay the Project and may ultimately result in the Funds being lapsed.

5.11 SCRRA shall be responsible for ensuring its contractors/ subcontractors for the

Project comply with the terms of the Ordinance. SCRRA shall cooperate with LACMTA Audit Department such that LACMTA can meet its obligations under the Ordinance.

6. Project Management

6.1 All WORK under this Agreement shall be coordinated with SCRRA and LACMTA through the Project Managers named below.

6.1.1 For purposes of this Agreement, SCRRA designates the following Project

Manager:

Andrew Althorp Principal Engineer – Project Management (909) 593-6973 [email protected]

SCRRA reserves the right to change this designation upon written notice to LACMTA.

6.1.2 For purposes of this Agreement, LACMTA designates the following individual as

its Project Manager:

Brian Balderrama Senior Director, Regional Rail

113


(213) 418-3177 [email protected] LACMTA reserves the right to change this designation upon written notice to SCRRA.

7. DEFAULT

7.1 A Default by SCRRA under this Agreement is defined as any one or more of the

following: (i) SCRRA fails to comply with the terms and conditions contained in

this Agreement; or (ii) SCRRA fails to perform satisfactorily or to make sufficient progress

toward completion, or makes a material change to the WORK or budget without LACMTA's prior written consent or approval.

7.2 A Default by LACMTA under this Agreement is defined as any one or more of the following:

(i) LACMTA fails to comply with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement, including, without limitation, failure to timely reimburse SCRRA for costs incurred pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

8. REMEDIES

8.1 In the event of a Default by SCRRA, LACMTA shall provide written notice of such

Default to SCRRA with a 30-day period to cure the Default. In the event that SCRRA fails to cure the Default, or commit to cure the Default and commence the same within such 30 day period and to the satisfaction of the LACMTA, LACMTA shall have the following remedies: (i) LACMTA may terminate this Agreement; (ii) LACMTA may make a determination to make no further disbursements of funds to SCRRA; (iii) LACMTA may recover from SCRRA any funds paid to SCRRA after the Default.

8.2 Effective upon receipt of written notice of termination from LACMTA, SCRRA shall

not undertake any new work or obligation with respect to this Agreement unless so approved by LACMTA in writing, in which case the disbursement of funds shall continue in accordance with this Agreement.

8.3 Subject to LACMTA’s agreement to provide prior written notice with a 30-day period

to cure the default, the remedies described herein are non-exclusive. LACMTA shall have the right to enforce any and all rights and remedies herein or which may be now or hereafter available at law or in equity.

114


8.4 In the event of a Default by LACMTA, SCRRA shall provide written notice of such Default to LACMTA with a 30-day period to cure the Default. In the event that LACMTA fails to cure the Default, or commit to cure the Default and commence the same within such 30 day period and to the satisfaction of the SCRRA, SCRRA may terminate this Agreement.

8.5 Subject to SCRRA’s agreement to provide prior written notice with a 30-day

period to cure the default, the remedies described herein are non-exclusive. SCRRA shall have the right to enforce any and all rights and remedies herein or which may be now or hereafter available at law or in equity.

9. TERMINATION

9.1 This Agreement may be terminated by any party to the Agreement at any time and for

any reason. Termination will occur 30 days after written notice is issued by any party of intent to terminate Agreement. Such written notice shall be immediately provided to all parties of this Agreement.

9.2 In the event of termination of this Agreement, SCRRA will immediately stop

rendering services under this Agreement and will deliver to LACMTA all data, reports, worksheets, and all such other information and materials as SCRRA may have accumulated in performing this Agreement.

10. INDEMNITY

10.1 SCRRA shall include LACMTA as an indemnitee in any indemnity provided by its contractor for flagging services to LACMTA, which indemnity shall survive expiration or termination of such contractor’s contract.

10.2 Approval by SCRRA shall mean only that the plans and related documents meet the standards of SCRRA, and such approval by SCRRA shall not be deemed to mean that the plans and related documents or construction is structurally sound and appropriate or that the plans and related documents meet applicable regulations, laws, statutes, local ordinances, building codes, or any combination thereof. SCRRA shall not be deemed a designer of the Project for any purpose.

11. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/NONDISCRIMINATION

11.1 In the performance of the WORK, SCRRA shall affirmatively require that its

employees and contractors shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), medical condition (cancer), age, marital status, denial of family and medical care leave, and denial of pregnancy disability

115


11.2 SCRRA shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of its employees and

applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. SCRRA shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code, Section 12900 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated there under (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing the Government Code sections referenced above, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full.

11.3 In the event of noncompliance by SCRRA with the nondiscrimination provisions

of this Agreement, LACMTA may cancel, terminate or suspend this Agreement in whole or in part.

12. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS

12.1 SCRRA shall not represent to cities, communities, or other organizations or interests that WORK is being conducted by or on behalf of LACMTA.

12.2 SCRRA in the performance of the Work is not a contractor nor an agent or employee

of LACMTA and attests to no organizational or personal conflicts of interest and agrees to notify LACMTA immediately in the event that a conflict, or the appearance thereof, arises. SCRRA shall not represent itself as an agent or employee of LACMTA and shall have no powers to bind the LACMTA in contract or otherwise.

12.3 This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties, with respect

to the subject matter herein. The Agreement shall not be amended, nor any provisions or breach hereof waived, except in writing signed by the parties who agreed to the original Agreement or the same level of authority.

12.4 In the event that there is any legal court (e.g. Superior Court of the State of California,

County of Los Angeles, or the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California) proceeding between the parties to enforce or interpret this Agreement or the applicable requirements of LACMTA to protect or establish any rights or remedies hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees.

12.5 Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations

hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by unforeseen causes including acts of God, floods, earthquake, fires, acts of a public enemy, and government acts beyond the control and without fault or negligence of the affected party. Each party hereto shall give notice promptly to the other of the nature and extent of any such circumstances claimed to delay, hinder, or prevent performance of any obligations under this Agreement.

116


12.6 SCRRA shall comply with and ensure that work performed under this Agreement is done in compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, and procedural requirements and the applicable requirements and regulations of LACMTA.

12.7 Neither party shall assign this Agreement, or any part thereof, without the prior written

consent and prior approval of the other party, and any assignment without said consent shall be void and unenforceable.

12.8 This Agreement shall be governed by California law and any applicable federal law.

If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

12.9 The terms of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon,

each of the parties and their respective successors and assigns. 12.10 LACMTA anticipates it may need to avail itself of lower cost bonds or other debt, the

interest on which is tax exempt for federal tax purposes and/or Build America Bonds as defined in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 or similar types of bonds (collectively, the 'Bonds") to provide at least a portion of its funding commitments under this Agreement to SCRRA. SCRRA shall ensure that the expenditure of the Funds disbursed to SCRRA does not jeopardize the tax-exemption of the interest, the Federal subsidy payment or the tax credit, as applicable, by complying with the Bond Requirements attached as Exhibit E to this Agreement. SCRRA agrees to provide LACMTA with progress reports, expenditure documentation, and any other documentation as reasonably requested by LACMTA and necessary for LACMTA to fulfill its responsibilities as the grantee or administrator or bond issuer of the Funds. With regard to LACMTA debt financing to provide any portion of the Funds, SCRRA shall take all reasonable actions as may be requested of it by LACMTA's Project Manager for the Project, to assist LACMTA in demonstrating and maintaining over time, compliance with the relevant sections of the Federal Tax Code to maintain such bonds tax status.

12.11 Notice will be given to the parties at the address specified below unless otherwise

notified in writing of change of address.

LACMTA's Address: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Attn: Brian Balderrama One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop 99-17-1 Los Ángeles, CA 90012 [email protected] 213-418-3177

117


SCRRA's Address: Southern California Regional Rail Authority Attn: Andrew Althorp 2558 Supply Street, Pomona, CA 91767 [email protected] 909-593-6973

12.12 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect

to the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings.

118


IN WITNESS WHERE/OF, the parties have caused this Funding Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates indicated below: LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY By:______________________________________ Date:_________________

Phillip A. Washington Chief Executive Officer

APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARYC.WICKHAMCountyCounsel By:______________________________________ Date:_________________

Deputy SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY By:______________________________________ Date:_________________


APPROVED AS TO FORM By: ________________________ Don O. Del Rio

119


EXHIBIT A

SCRRA Scope of Work Doran Street Grade Separation Project

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Metro Authority (LACMTA or Metro) in cooperation with the City of Glendale, the city of Los Angeles, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), and the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) has obtained funding through Measure R and other sources for a grade separation at Doran Street in the cities of Glendale and Los Angeles. At this time, Metro is proceeding with the environmental clearance and the development of Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) for the grade separation of Doran Street on the Metro owned right-of-way in Los Angeles County, California. The Doran Street at-grade crossing is located on the Valley Subdivision, Antelope Valley Line, in the SCRRA (Metrolink) system. The right-of-way is owned by Metro. The tracks are maintained and operated by SCRRA. Currently approximately 90 Metrolink, Union Pacific, and Amtrak trains operate over this segment of the Valley Subdivision each day. In addition, this railroad corridor will be utilized by the California High Speed Rail system. The Doran Street crossing is located adjacent to the south side of the State Route 134 overcrossing of the Metro owned right-of-way. Adjacent to the crossing is a propane sales facility and numerous other businesses. In addition, the site location is near the Los Angeles River. Each of these items, in addition to others, will have an impact on the overall configuration of the project. Due to the proximity of the SR-134 overcrossing and the location of the Verdugo Wash, just north of the SR-134, it is expected that a grade separation of the right-of-way will maintain the railroad tracks at the existing grade with the roadway as an undercrossing or overcrossing. The proposed Salem/Sperry overpass is located near the Broadway/Brazil at-grade crossing, which was substantially upgraded through 2012 and 2013. The Doran Street at-grade crossing will be substantially modified to incorporate changes to the signal system, a new pedestrian crossing and adjustments to the roadway for two way traffic (one lane westbound and one lane eastbound).. These Doran Street modifications are subject to approval of a Petition to Modify California Public Utilities Commission 12-12-021 Settlement Agreement for the Doran Street Highway-Rail Crossing. The Metro Board at their January 2017 meeting approved alternative 2 to start preliminary engineering and environmental work. This approved alternative includes the Salem/ Sperry Overpass and a Northerly Point of Access (P or J Hook Options). LACMTA, as the lead Agency, has secured funding for project preliminary engineering through final design approval. SCRRA will provide technical and operational review and support throughout that duration.

120


1.0.1 Features of the Project The general description of this project is the Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing improvements, Salem/Sperry Overpass grade separation of the existing street crossing over the railroad right-of-way and a northerly point of access to Fairmont Avenue via northerly extension of W. Fernando Road with a bridge over the Verdugo Wash. The Metro Consultant shall be responsible for preparing, but not limited to, the following:

Geometric design Geotechnical investigation Contaminated soil assessment Sound walls and retaining walls Drainage modifications, Traffic engineering and traffic studies Signage and signalization Roadway and ramp modifications Survey and mapping Landscaping and irrigation Sidewalks and median modifications Utility removal and relocation Lighting Obtaining Caltrans approval Public Outreach Stakeholder coordination Railroad coordination Rail signal design Right-of-way engineering Quality Assurance/Quality Control CPUC GO-88B Application for Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing CPUC Grade Separation Application for Salem/Sperry Overpass SCRRA Special Design Considerations as applicable

1.0.2 Statement of Intent Metro has awarded a professional services contract to provide engineering services including:

Phase II; Development of the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Clearance for the Project Phase III; Preparation of Plans, Specifications and Estimates (“PS&E”), and right of way engineering for the Project

The project will be developed in the following phases:

Phase I: Alternative Analysis (closed) Phase II: Preliminary Engineering, Environmental clearance

121


Phase III: Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Metro has intent for SCRRA to provide railroad related project coordination and review, technical and operational support, CPUC application support, flagging services and public outreach support for the preliminary engineering through final design phase for the;

Doran Street Interim at-Grade Crossing and Salem/Sperry Overpass grade separation.

1.1 SCRRA PROJECT MANAGEMENT SCRRA and/or their Consultant shall support the performance of the work including:

Reporting coordination progress to the Metro Project Manager Attending, coordinating, and providing comments to minutes of Project

Development Team (PDT) meetings as needed. A. Project Meetings: Attend monthly project team meetings as needed. Hold interdepartmental meetings to discuss the Project developments with respect to operations, signals, structures, communications, PTC, etc.; as well as to coordinate with other ongoing projects and maintenance. B. Project Administration Internally administer SCRRA supporting services, including management and administration. C. Project Reporting Provide progress reports as part of the invoice. The progress reports shall address activities and progress within the recent billing cycle and provide upcoming reviews, deliverables and actions. 1.2 DOCUMENT REVIEW/ DESIGN SUPPORT 1.2.1 Phase I: Alternative Analysis This task has been closed with the Metro Board approval in January 2017. 1.2.2 Phase II: Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Clearance SCRRA shall review the preliminary engineering documents to support the environmental clearance for the proposed Salem/Sperry Overpass grade separation and the Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing .

122


The Product from Phase II shall be the environmental clearance of the project and interim condition designs that can be approved and constructed as soon as possible. Utilizing information from Phase I and additional information developed in Phase II, SCRRA shall review and provide comments in part as related to the railroad on studies prepared by others that are required to obtain the environmental clearance for the Project. The Project may be categorically exempt (CE) under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and NEPA standards. 1.2.3 Phase III: Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) The PS&E shall be prepared in English units and in conformance with the latest editions of applicable standards. As part of the work involved in the preparation of the PS&E, SCRRA shall review plans and Special Provisions pertaining to items of work related to the railroad that are not addressed in the latest editions of applicable standards. The Product from Phase III shall be PS&E documents for the procurement of the construction of the project. SCRRA shall review, the procedures and work product of each of the following design levels, provide written comments and participate in comment resolution meeting if requested. Specifically, SCRRA will review the appropriate milestones and consultant deliverables at each of those milestones. SCRRA review comments are expected with 20-30 working days of receipt of LACMTA consultant’s submission, consistent with the project schedule.

35% Design Documents 65% Design Documents 90% Design Documents 100% Design Documents Issue for Construction Package CPUC GO-88B Application for Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing CPUC Application for Salem/Sperry Overpass grade separation SCRRA Special Design Considerations as appropriate

When project plans are 65% complete SCRRA will prepare the Construction and Maintenance Agreements for

Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing Salem/Sperry Overpass

Coordinate any internal legal and interdepartmental reviews and approvals of CPUC applications prepared by others for the Salem/Sperry Overpass grade separation and the Doran Street Interim at-grade Crossing. 1.3 FLAGGING SERVICES

SCRRA will provide railroad flagging, cable locating, and safety training services as as provided for in Exhibit B during the engineering site reviews, geotechnical investigations, right-of-way and topographic surveying. A minimum of two weeks’ notice will be given to ensure SCRRA’s ability to schedule a flagger once a right of entry is approved. SCRRA will provide no more than 10 days of flagging to support design efforts.

123


1.4 Third Party Work in the Railroad Right of way

Companies retained by Metro to facilitate and obtain design information for the Project within the Railroad Right of Way, such as pothole and cable locating, geotechnical investigations and , right-of-way and topographic surveying shall obtain a Temporary Right of Entry from SCRRA and pay application fees and provide the required Railroad insurance. Temporary Right of Entry Form 5 and Form 6 can be accessed through the Metrolink Web site www.metrolinktrains.com

1.5 PUBLIC OUTREACH At least one SCRRA Public Outreach representative will be available as needed to attend Project Design Team (PDT) meetings, total five (5) PDT meeting, and Public Outreach meetings for the Project as scheduled by Metro or their consultant. Metro anticipates four (4) community meetings and one (1) public hearing meeting that will be attended by SCRRA’s Public Outreach representative. The SCRRA Public Outreach representative will coordinate with Metro’s Community Relations Manager and Metro’s Public Outreach consultant during the Preliminary Engineering through Final Design phase for the Project and will distribute Metro-provided public notices as needed on trains and at train stations as well as through digital media, such as SCRRA’s metrolinktrains.com website and social media.

124


Project Budget Doran Street Interim and Grade Separation Improvements

As of December 27, 2017

Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost Subtotal

1.1 Project Management and Administration $ 120,800

Attend PDT Meetings as needed 1 LS $ 32,000 $ 32,000

Oversight, Invoicing and Accounting

Consultant Project Management 400 Hours $ 222 $ 88,800

1.2.1 Phase I: Alternative Analysis (Closed) $ ‐

1.2.2 Phase II: Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Clearance $ 25,000

Review and Comment 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000

1.2.3 Phase III: Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E) $ 166,970

Civil Consultant Review 110 Hours $ 222 $ 24,420

Signal Consultant Review 325 Hours $ 222 $ 72,150

Interdepartmental Review 150 Hours $ 241 $ 36,150

One Review Workshop Each Phase 50 Hours $ 241 $ 12,050

C&M Agreements & Review CPUC Applications 100 Hours $ 222 $ 22,200

1.3 Flagging Services $ 16,500

Signal Locating 2 LS $ 500 $ 1,000

Safety Training (up to 20 trainees ; 1 class) 1 LS $ 500 $ 500

Flagging (for design efforts only) 10 Days $ 1,500 $ 15,000

1.4 Public Outreach $ 25,500

Public Notices and Media Outreach 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000

Attend PDT Meetings, total 5 1 LS $ 7,500 $ 7,500

Community Meetings & Public Hearing, total 5 1 LS $ 7,500 $ 7,500

Contingency (10%) $ 35,477

GRAND TOTAL $ 390,247

USE $390,300

125


EXHIBIT C

PROJECTREPORTING&EXPENDITUREGUIDELINES

REPORTINGPROCEDURES

QuarterlyProgress/ExpenditureReport ExhibitC1 isrequiredforallprojects.SCRRAshallbesubjecttoandcomplywithallapplicablerequirementsofthefundingagencyregardingproject‐reportingrequirements.Inaddition,SCRRAwillsubmitaquarterlyreporttotheLACMTAatP.O.Box512296,LosAngeles,CA90051‐0296.Pleasenotethatlettersorotherformsofdocumentationmaynotbesubstitutedforthisform.

TheQuarterlyProgress/ExpenditureReportcoversallactivitiesrelatedtotheprojectandlistsallcostsincurred.ItisessentialthatSCRRAprovidecompleteandadequateresponsetoallthequestions.Theexpenseslistedmustbesupportedbyappropriatedocumentationwithaclearexplanationofthepurposeandrelevanceofeachexpensetotheproject.

Incaseswheretherearenoactivitiestoreport,orproblemscausingdelays,clearexplanation,includingactionstoremedythesituation,mustbeprovided.

SCRRAisrequiredtotrackandreportontheprojectschedule.LACMTAwillmonitorthetimelyuseoffundsanddeliveryofprojects.Projectdelay,ifany,mustbereportedeachquarter.

TheQuarterlyProgress/ExpenditureReportisduetotheLACMTAassoonaspossibleafterthecloseofeachquarter,butnolaterthanthefollowingdatesforeachfiscalyear:

UponcompletionoftheProjectafinalreportthatincludesproject’sfinalevaluationmustbesubmitted.EXPENDITUREGUIDELINES

AnyactivityorexpensechargedaboveandbeyondtheapprovedScopeofWork FAExhibitA isconsideredineligibleandwillnotbereimbursedbytheLACMTAunless

Quarter ReportDueDate

July–September November30October‐December February28January‐March May31April‐June August 31

126


priorwrittenauthorizationhasbeengrantedbytheLACMTAChiefExecutiveOfficerorhis/herdesignee.

Anyexpensechargedtothegrantmustbeclearlyanddirectlyrelatedtotheproject.

AdministrativecostistheongoingexpenseincurredbytheSCRRAforthedurationoftheprojectandforthedirectbenefitoftheprojectasspecifiedintheScopeofWorkExhibitA .Examplesofadministrativecostsarepersonnel,officesupplies,andequipment.Asaconditionforeligibility,allcostsmustbenecessaryformaintaining,monitoring,coordinating,reportingandbudgetingoftheproject.Additionally,expensesmustbereasonableandappropriatetotheactivitiesrelatedtotheproject.

LACMTAisnotresponsiblefor,andwillnotreimburseanycostsincurredbytheSCRRApriortotheEffectiveDateoftheFA,unlesswrittenauthorizationhasbeengrantedbytheLACMTAChiefExecutiveOfficerorhis/herdesignee.

DEFINITIONS

AllowableCost:Tobeallowable,costsmustbereasonable,recognizedasordinaryandnecessary,consistentwithestablishedpracticesoftheorganization,andconsistentwithindustrystandardofpayforworkclassification.

ExcessiveCost:Anyexpensedeemed“excessive”byLACMTAstaffwouldbeadjustedtoreflecta“reasonableandcustomary”level.Fordetaildefinitionof“reasonablecost”,pleaserefertotheFederalRegisterOMBCircularsA‐87CostPrincipalsforStateandLocalGovernments;andA‐122CostPrincipalsforNonprofitOrganizations.

IneligibleExpenditures:AnyactivityorexpensechargedaboveandbeyondtheapprovedScopeofWorkisconsideredineligible.

127


EXHIBIT C-1

Quarterly Measure R Expenditure Report

128


EXHIBIT D

FTIP Sheet

129


EXHIBITE

BondRequirements

TheprovisionsofthisExhibitEapplyonlyifandtotheextentsomeoralloftheFundsarederivedfromLACMTAissuedBondsorotherdebt,theinterestonwhichistaxexemptforfederaltaxpurposesand/orBuildAmericaBondsasdefinedintheAmericanReinvestmentandRecoveryActof2009orsimilartypesofbonds collectively,the"Bonds" .

SCRRAacknowledgesthatsomeoralloftheFundsmaybederivedfromBonds,theinterestonwhichistax‐exemptforfederaltaxpurposesorwithrespecttowhichLACMTAreceivesaFederalsubsidyforaportionoftheinterestcostortheinvestorreceivesataxcredit.SCRRAfurtheracknowledgesitsunderstandingthattheproceedsoftheBondsaresubjecttocertainongoinglimitationsrelatingtotheuseoftheassetsfinancedorprovidedwithsuchproceeds "ProjectCosts"or"ProjectComponents" inthetradeorbusinessofanypersonorentityotherthanagovernmentalorganization anysuchusebyapersonorentityotherthanagovernmentalorganizationisreferredtoas"PrivateUse" .PrivateUsewillincludeanysale,leaseorotherarrangementpursuanttowhichanongovernmentalpersonorentityreceivesalegalentitlementofaProjectComponentandalsoincludescertainagreementspursuanttowhichanongovernmentalpersonwilloperateormanageaProjectComponent.EachquarterlyinvoicesubmittedbyGRANTEEtoreimbursepriorexpenditures ortobereceivedasanadvance shallprovideinformationregardingthespecificProjectCostsorProjectComponentstowhichtheFundswhichpaythatinvoicewillbeallocatedandwhetherthereisormightbeanyPrivateUseassociatedwithsuchProjectCostsorProjectComponents.SCRRAwill,fortheentiretimeoverwhichLACMTA'sBondsorotherdebtremainsoutstanding, 1 notifyandreceiveLACMTA'sapprovalpriortoenteringintoanyarrangementwhichwillormightresultinPrivateUseand 2 maintainrecords,includingobtainingrecordsfromcontractorsandsubcontractorsasnecessary,ofallallocationsofFundstoProjectCostsorProjectComponentsandanyPrivateUseofsuchProjectCostsorProjectComponentsinsufficientdetailtocomplyandestablishcompliancewithSection141oftheInternalRevenueCodeof1986,asamendedthe"Code" ,orsimilarcodeprovisionthenineffectandapplicable,asdeterminedbytheLACMTAinconsultationwithitsbondcounsel.

GRANTEEwilldesignateoneormorepersonsthatwillberesponsibleforcompliancewiththeobligationsdescribedinthisExhibitEandnotifyLACMTAofsuchdesignations.

130


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Master Cooperative Agreement with the Metro Gold Line

Foothill Extension Construction Authority for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project

Issue Staff is seeking Board approval to finalize and execute a Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) with the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority (Construction Authority) for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project (Project), specifying the procedures that the Construction Authority and the Authority will follow in implementing their respective roles and responsibilities in the design and construction of the Project. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board authorize the Chief Executive Officer to finalize and execute this MCA between the Construction Authority and the Authority, in an amount not-to-exceed $4,929,370, at the Construction Authority’s sole cost, defining roles and responsibilities of the Construction Authority and the Authority for the design and construction of the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project. Alternative

The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment. The Project requires the relocation of Authority tracks and facilities and includes several joint at-grade crossings, as well as grade crossing flyovers with existing Authority and proposed new light-rail transit tracks. This MCA allows for coordination with Construction Authority to ensure Authority safety standards and design criteria are followed.

131

Master Cooperative Agreement with Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018

Background The Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project is a 12.3-mile extension of the Metro Gold Line light-rail transit (LRT) alignment to the east, with service anticipated from the Azusa-Citrus Station to the Montclair Transcenter. It is a dual track system with overhead catenary lines for power and includes six stations: Glendora, San Dimas, La Verne, Pomona, Claremont, and Montclair. The LRT track will be mostly at-grade and located generally within the existing Pasadena and San Gabriel Subdivisions owned by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). The Project will require the relocation of existing freight tracks, which are maintained by the Authority, to accommodate new LRT tracks from the City of Azusa to the City of Pomona. East of the City of Pomona, the LRT tracks will be placed adjacent to Metrolink’s San Bernardino Line tracks, requiring the relocation of the Metrolink tracks to the south and the relocation of the existing Metrolink Claremont Station approximately 1,000 feet to the east. There are 28 existing at-grade crossings throughout the Project corridor. The Project will also construct several LRT grade separations (LRT flyovers) and new bridges, which will mitigate the impacts to some of the more complex crossings. Complex crossings are considered to be those that have four or more tracks, are adjacent to stations, have adjacent traffic intersections, or a combination of these features. Complex crossings are located in La Verne, Pomona and Claremont. The final configuration of all of the joint grade crossings and flyovers has not been finalized and these crossings are subject to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) review and approval process. The Project will be implemented using a design-build contractor, which the Construction Authority is currently in the process of procuring. The MCA allocates a not-to-exceed amount of $4,929,370 to the Authority to provide design reviews, attend coordination meetings, implement required Positive Train Control (PTC) modifications, implement critical network cutovers, coordinate absolute work windows, and provide oversight of the Construction Authority’s track safety, track maintenance, and right of entry programs over the seven-year design and construction duration of the Project. In addition, the MCA specifies that the Construction Authority’s design-build contractor will be responsible for the maintenance of track and signal, as well as right-of-way along the Pasadena and San Gabriel Subdivisions within the Project footprint, during the initial stage of the Project that requires the relocation of the freight and Metrolink tracks. During the period of time that the Construction Authority is responsible for this maintenance, the Authority will provide to the Construction Authority a proportional amount of the Pasadena Subdivision Shared Use Agreement (SUA) for BNSF track, signal maintenance and Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) revenue amounting to approximately: $856,965 annually if the eastern limits terminate in Claremont, and, $886,379 annually if the eastern limits extend to Montclair.

132

Master Cooperative Agreement with Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority for the Metro Gold Line – Phase 2B Project Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018

The associated MOW scope assumed and amount paid to the Construction Authority will be reduced from the Authority’s MOW contractors by mutual agreement and the allocations to the Construction Authority will be made from the Authority’s Operating Budget in subsequent years. The cost allocation should result in no net cost to Authority. The Authority’s support of the design and construction of the Project is essential for the following reasons: to ensure compliance with Authority standards and requirements; to facilitate the improvements of the freight and Metrolink track, signal, communication and PTC infrastructure and systems; and to ensure operational safety, efficiency and regulatory compliance. All Authority costs in support of this Project will be borne by the Construction Authority. Prior to the MCA, the Construction Authority allocated $1,150,000 to the Authority for coordination and design review efforts during the preliminary design phase of the Project, spanning from July 2015 through April 2018. A draft copy of the MCA is posted on the Authority’s website and available upon request. Next Steps Upon Board authorization, the MCA will be finalized and executed. Staff will continue to work with Metro and the Construction Authority on the following issues: Final grade crossing and Authority infrastructure designs. Construction sequencing, scheduling, and MOW implementation.

Staff will continue to provide updates to the Board as necessary. Budget Impact The $4,929,370 for the Authority’s coordination and reviews during the design and construction of the Project will be borne by the Construction Authority, hence there is no impact on the Authority’s Board-approved Operation or Capital Budget. Prepared by: Justin Fornelli, Director, Engineering & Construction Darrell Maxey, Deputy Chief Operating Officer, PTC & Engineering


133


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Fuel Hedging Program Update – Quarter Ended March 31,

2018 Issue Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s Fuel Hedging program. This report is for the quarter ended March 31, 2018. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. Background Finance Policy FIN-11.1, Fuel Management and Hedging, was approved by the Board on January 23, 2015 and provides guidance for the Fuel Management and Hedging Program. This Program was implemented to assist staff with better forecasting fuel expenses for budget purposes and to minimize the impact of fuel market price volatility on the annual fuel expense budget. The Board has requested that staff provide a quarterly update on our Fuel Management and Hedging Program. On July 1, 2017, a more formalized Fuel Management and Hedging Program was initiated with approved Fuel Hedging Advisor, Linwood Capital, LLC, utilizing the purchase of “futures contracts”. A deposit of $1,500,000 was made to an account established in the name of Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Authority), for use in purchasing forward contracts for fuel. On March 30, 2018, the Authority’s hedging account had a value of $3,036,954. This is an increase of $1,536,954 to our original deposit of $1,500,000. As of March 30, 2018, thirty-nine (39) contracts were being held with unrealized gains of $460,219.20. Realized

134

Fuel Hedging Program Update – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

gains of $1,544,025 on liquidated contracts are recorded as offset to the fuel expenditures from operations. The Futures Account Report for quarter ended March 30, 2018, provided by Linwood Capital, LLC is included as Attachment A. Although the market price of diesel fuel has increased over the past nine months by over 45 cents per gallon, the Authority’s expense has been significantly mitigated by its hedging activities. The details of the monthly market price and the hedged price are as shown on the reports below. The FY18 budget was calculated at a rate of $2.10 per gallon. As shown on the attached report, the average market price for diesel fuel has been $2.08 per gallon, a favorable 2 cents per gallon on the 6,953,425 gallons that have been purchased this year Therefore, the effect of the lower market price has provided a $139,070 positive variance from budget. Fuel hedging has provided an additional 22.21 cents per gallon on the 4,956,000 hedged or a positive variance of $1,544,025 (realized gains). Combining the hedging benefit and the benefit from the lower market price, the Authority has a $1.7 million positive variance from budget. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Christine Wilson, Senior Manager, Budgets and Financial Analysis

Ronnie Campbell Chief Financial Officer

135


Fuel Hedging Account as of March 30, 2018

Cumulative since July 1, 2017 inception for Fiscal Year 2018

-$1,536,953.64

$1,500,000.00

-$460,219.20

$3,497,172.84

$3,036,953.64

Account Value = cash asset after fuelexpense reduction including contingentfuel expense reduction

Cumulative reduction of Fuel Expense(net of brokerage fees)Cumulative net cash from Metrolink tofutures accountContingent future reduction of fuelexpense

Cash asset removing future fuel expensereduction

136


Attachment A

HISTORICAL ANALYSIS: FY 2018

ML REALIZED REALIZED TOTAL SUPPLIER

CALENDAR ACT/BUD DAYS IN SUPPLIER COST GAINS PERCENT GAINS COST COST HEDGED

PERIOD GALLONS PERIOD PRICE CENTS/G CENTS/G HEDGED DOLLARS DOLLARS DOLLARS GALLONS

July‐17 764,384 31 173.47 173.40 0.06 49.45% $478.80 $1,325,460.62 $1,325,939.42 378,000

August‐17 764,384 31 186.44 175.35 11.09 82.42% $84,806.40 $1,340,325.35 $1,425,131.75 630,000 September‐

17 739,726 30 207.20 183.54 23.66 73.81% $175,018.20 $1,357,708.92 $1,532,727.12 546,000 October‐17 764,384 31 208.33 188.44 19.89 65.94% $152,061.00 $1,440,367.19 $1,592,428.19 504,000 November‐

17 739,726 30 217.47 185.45 32.01 85.17% $236,804.40 $1,371,843.27 $1,608,647.67 630,000 December‐

17 764,384 31 208.53 183.68 24.85 65.94% $189,936.60 $1,404,040.09 $1,593,976.69 504,000 January‐18 764,384 31 225.51 191.35 34.16 65.94% $261,135.00 $1,462,631.55 $1,723,766.55 504,000 February‐18 690,411 28 222.04 191.63 30.41 73.00% $209,987.40 $1,323,000.60 $1,532,988.00 504,000 March‐18 764,384 31 218.95 195.02 23.94 82.42% $182,968.80 $1,490,683.78 $1,673,652.58 630,000 April‐18 197,260 8 230.57 204.80 25.77 63.87% $50,828.40 $403,994.12 $454,822.52 126,000

FISCAL 2018 6,953,425 282 208.01 185.81 22.21 71.27% $1,544,025.00 $12,920,055.50 $14,464,080.50 4,956,000

PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS: FY 2018

PROJECTED UNREALIZED UNREALIZED TOTAL SUPPLIER

CALENDAR BUDGET DAYS IN SUPPLIER COST GAINS PERCENT GAINS COST COST

PERIOD GALLONS PERIOD PRICE CENTS/G CENTS/G HEDGED DOLLARS DOLLARS DOLLARS

April‐18 542,466 22 227.04 197.77 29.27 73.00 $158,796.00 $1,072,816.34 $1,231,612.34 396,000

May‐18 764,384 31 226.88 195.76 31.12 73.00 $237,858.00 $1,496,362.88 $1,734,220.88 558,000

June‐18 739,726 30 226.77 217.63 9.14 73.00 $67,638.00 $1,609,860.77 $1,677,498.77 540,000

FISCAL 2018 2,046,575 83 226.88 204.20 22.69 73.00 $464,292.00 $4,179,039.99 $4,643,331.99 1,494,000

137


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Comparative Operating Statement Actual vs Budget

through the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2018 and vs Third Quarter Actual of Fiscal Year 2017 and Year-End Forecast for Fiscal Year 2018 with Comparisons to Budget and Prior Year Actual

Issue The Chief Executive Officer has directed staff to produce quarterly operating statements for the Board’s review. The statements included in this report present the actual results through the third quarter of FY18, which is the nine months ended March 31, 2018, compared to budget, and compared to the prior year actual results for the same period. This report also includes a forecast of the full fiscal year 2018 with comparisons to budget and prior year actuals. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. Background The Board adopted the FY2017-18 (FY18) Budget on June 23, 2017. The total FY18 Operating Budget of $243.0 million (M) consists of $183.7M for Train Operations, $41.6M for Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) and $17.7M for Insurance. Staff produces a formal analysis of actual revenue and expenditures in comparison to the Adopted Budget on a quarterly basis. Adherence to budget is monitored on a monthly basis. The attached Schedule A provides detail of actual operating results year-to-date through the third quarter of FY18, with comparisons to year-to-date budget for FY18, and comparisons to actual expenses for the same period of FY2016-17 (FY17). All information

138

Comparative Operating Statement Actual vs Budget through the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2018 and vs Third Quarter Actual of Fiscal Year 2017 and forecast of full fiscal year 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

presented is preliminary and unaudited and includes estimates where actual amounts were unavailable. Summary of Results through the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2018 (July 1, 2017 – March 31, 2018) Revenues are $73.0M and under budget by $2.4M or 3.2%. Expenses are $159.9M and under budget by $21.3M or 11.8%. Budgeted subsidy is $105.8M, providing a surplus of $18.9M through three quarters of

FY18. As shown on Schedule A the total Expenses before BNSF Railway (BNSF) Lease as compared to last year, are up $652K or 0.4%. Budget variances are explained in more detail below. All explanations below refer to the detailed information on Schedule A. Explanations are included only where variances are significant. Note that all comparisons are made to the “Adopted” Budget, not the budget as adjusted by transfers between categories. In response to a Board request, Schedule B and C are attached which present the Operating Statement actuals through the third quarter of FY18 by Line and by Member Agency respectively. Operating Revenues Total Operating Revenues through the third quarter are under budget by $2.4M, or 3.2%. This variance is primarily related to a shortfall in Farebox Revenue as described below. Compared to last year, total Operating Revenues through the third quarter are down $999K or 1.4%. Farebox Revenues for FY18 were originally projected to remain flat at the FY17 level. In the second half of FY17, Farebox Revenues experienced declines due to lower revenues on the San Bernardino (SB) and Inland Empire/Orange County (IE/OC) Lines, thus contributing to the budget shortfall of $1.9M, or 3.0% in FY18. Farebox Revenue through the third quarter of FY18 is down by $752K, or 1.2% from the prior year. Due to strong ridership on the Antelope Valley (AV) Line, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) fare reduction subsidy is less than budgeted. The intention of the Metro subsidy was to provide funds to the extent revenues were reduced as a result of the AV Line fare reduction. Since the program has produced increased ridership and revenue, the amount of subsidy required to make up the shortfall was less than budgeted. The comparison is at the proforma line because the subsidy was intended to make up any shortfall.

139


Farebox variances as compared to the third quarter of last year reflect increased revenue on the following lines: AV Line up 4.1% across all ticket types except weekend, 91/Perris Valley Line (PVL) up 1.3% increases in one-way tickets by students, and Orange County (OC) up 0.5% with a strong increase in one way and student travel. Revenue on all other lines has decreased as compared to the third quarter of last year as follows: Riverside down by 0.7% due to slightly lower week-end ticket sales San Bernardino down by 2.3% due to decreased round-trip and weekend tickets, Ventura down by 2.8% due to fewer one-way tickets, and IEOC down by 5.3% due to declines in 7-day, monthly pass and round trip ticket type. Dispatch Revenue is under budget by $34K, or 2.1%, through the third quarter of FY18. Dispatch Revenue is lower than last year by $76K, or 4.6% and has been adversely affected by dispatch of fewer trains due to wild fires earlier in the year. Other Revenues, in the amount of $181K, are over budget by $172K, primarily as a result of the unbudgeted final payments from Amtrak for maintenance of their ticket vending machines (TVMs). Through the third quarter, MOW Revenue is under budget by $613K, or 6.1%. MOW Revenue is based on different criteria depending on the particular shared use agreement on the line. The shortfall in this case is due to a drop of roughly 2% on time train performance, which constitutes a reduction of less revenue per train mile. In addition, there were several days of non-operating train billings due to MOW after Laguna Niguel and several days of track closures due to weather issues. Operations and Services Train Operations is comprised of Amtrak expenditures, and the Authority’s Dispatch Cost Center including nine Communications Coordinators. Through the third quarter, expenditures for Amtrak total $27.9M. Amtrak expenditures are under budget by $2.1M or 7.6%. Our Business Administrator for this contract is working with Amtrak officials to monitor these expenditure trends and forecasted expenditures for the remainder of FY18. We believe that at year end, Amtrak expenditures will be a minimum of $1.1M under budget. The Dispatch Cost Center, with the reassignment of Communications Coordinators from Operations Salaries & Benefits under Administration and Services, is over budget by $293K. In total, the Train Operation category totals $31.5M, is $1.8M or 5.4% under budget, and $186K more than last year. Equipment Maintenance through the third quarter of FY18, at $26.8M, is under budget by $755K or 2.7%. This category is comprised of services provided by Bombardier to maintain and repair rolling stock, material issued from inventory to service and repair rolling stock, in addition to charges for maintenance performed at Stuart Mesa, and Mechanical Services. The amount under budget is primarily due to fewer materials issued

140


to repair rolling stock and lower mechanical services. As compared to last year, Equipment Maintenance is up $2.4M, or 10.0% resulting from the combination of increases arising from the new Bombardier agreement of $2.8M, and a small reduction of $330K in materials to repair rolling stock. Fuel cost at $12.5M through the third quarter of FY18 is under budget by $2.2M, or 15.0%. Contributing to this decrease were $1.5M in fuel purchases made through the Fuel Hedging Program implemented July 1, 2017 and $672K savings yielded from purchases using spot pricing at a lower price per gallon than assumed for budgeting purposes. Non-Scheduled Rolling Stock repairs are $43K through three quarters of FY18; under budget by $32K, or 43%, over last year by $43K. This item is unpredictable by nature. Operating Facilities Maintenance is under budget by $156K, or 12.6%. The amount under budget is primarily due to fewer unexpected facilities issues. Other Operating Train Services is over budget by $37K, or 11.2%. Emergency transportation costs were greater than budgeted as a result of bus bridges needed for closures due to rehabilitation of track. Rolling Stock Lease was budgeted for $101K through the third quarter. The lease is being paid by our Tier 4 supplier through a third-party agreement. Security in total includes Sheriffs, Guards and Supplemental Security. These items total $5.8M and are under budget through the third quarter of FY18 by $1.3M or 17.8%. Some guards which are assigned to a Third Party Recollectable agreement were inadvertently included in the Operating Budget. This issue was addressed and the Third Party MOU was amended. Public Safety is under budget through the third quarter of FY18 by $72K or35.2%. This category is primarily under budget due to safety programs starting in the latter part of the fiscal year. The amount is over last year by $22K, or 20.1%, primarily as a result of the installation of the Silvertrak Security Incident Management System installed this year, and an Industrysafe annual subscription. Passenger Relations actuals through the third quarter for FY18 are $1.3M and are under budget by $79K or 5.8%. This category is comprised primarily of charges from the Alta call center, callbox maintenance, and red cap shuttle services. The amounts are equivalent to last year. Ticket Vending Machine (TVM) Maintenance/Revenue Collection is $5.8M, and is over budget by $192K, or 3.4%. This over budget expense is caused by unbudgeted TVM reprograming requests. The implementation of the optical readers has caused a

141


significant increase in Mobile Application adoption, which should translate to decreased costs for ticket stock in the future. Compared to last year, expense is up $302K, or 5.5%. Marketing is under budget through the third quarter by $447K, or 41.2%. Most of this variance is caused by marketing plans which are committed and will be completed later in the fiscal year. Expense in this category has increased by $339K, or 113.1% over last year, primarily as a result of event marketing activities, and of the Marketing Department assuming responsibility for management of our website including $129K of software. Media and External Communication consists primarily of Public Affairs activities. This category is under budget by $134K, or 36.2%. Most of this variance is caused by the postponement of printing of timetables and other printing jobs to the fourth quarter of FY18. Utilities and Leases are $1.9M, and under budget through the first nine months of FY18 by $519K, or 21.0%. Telephone, electricity and water expenses were over budgeted in FY18. Transfer to Other Operators total $2.8M and is under budget by $2.0M, or 42.2%, through the third quarter of FY18. The amount is also below last year by $ 1.9M, or 40.4%. The variance is a result of two circumstances: a $1.2M refund of an overpayment of five previous quarters, due to the review of a year 2010 transfer rate survey; and an overall decrease in transfers from Metrolink to connecting transit. The transit transfer decrease is consistent with the current trend of significant decreases in bus ridership. Amtrak transfers are under budget through the third quarter of FY18 by $403K, or 24.7%. Amtrak transfers were budgeted at the cap, while actual rail to rail usage is at a lower level. Transfer costs exceed last year by $ 265K, or 27.5% despite the reduced passenger usage, as a result of the increased per passenger rate charged by Amtrak. The change was increased from $4.50 per rider to $7.50. Station Maintenance is under budget through the third quarter by $91K or 7.2%. This amount is greater than last year by $296K or 33.9%. This was a result of a credit received, due to the annual reconciliation, on CAM charges for the prior year (FY16) recorded in the first quarter of FY17. Rail Agreements in the amount of $4.0M through the third quarter of FY18 are under budget by $68K or 1.7%. These costs are $57K less than last year. Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) The MOW Line Segment costs include work performed maintaining Track, Signals, Structures and PTC. The actual expenditure through the third quarter of FY18 is $28.7M and is under budget by $1.3M, or 4.4%. Variances from the budget are primarily in the

142


following areas: Track maintenance is under budget by $690K, Signal maintenance & materials are over budget by $537K, Vegetation control is under budget by $462K, while PTC expenditures are under by $566K. The balance of $119K variance is spread over many tasks. Much of the variance is the result of an intense focus on Rehabilitation projects in the first half of the year. In the second quarter, a diversion of labor was also required (on a recollectable basis) to assist Member Agencies in vegetation fire line clearances. Extraordinary MOW includes the cost of unexpected events due to weather, gate knock downs, vandalism, etc. Variances are expected given the unpredictable nature of this category. In the first nine months of FY18, Extraordinary MOW was $429K, which is under budget by $309K, or 41.9%. The amount is less than prior year by $47K, or 9.8%. Administration & Services Operations Salaries and Fringe Benefits expenditure are $9.2M through the third quarter of FY18, and under budget by $715K or 7.2%. This category is $370K or 3.9% less than last year. Operations Non-Labor expenditures of $3.8M are under budget by $1.7M, or 31.2% through the third quarter of FY18. The primary driver is the PTC category, which is under budget by $1.1M because computer hardware/software purchases specific to PTC will be deferred until later in the year. Information Technology (IT) is also under budget by $260K because general agency software and hardware purchases have been deferred. Vehicle gasoline and repairs is under budget by $217K and other miscellaneous expenses is under budget by $123K Operations Non-Labor expenses are $950K or 33% more than last year. Indirect Administrative Expenses total $10.3M through the third quarter of FY18 are under budget by $1.6M or 13.8%. This item is overhead comprised of a number of different categories (i.e. overhead salaries, fringe and consulting), a portion of which has been allocated to Capital projects. Overhead salary vacancies affect this amount. The under budget amount is primarily in Authority Consultants which are under budget by $1.2M. Variances are due to consultant services, such as auditing, TAM, and DBE and labor compliance, expected to be provided in the fourth quarter of FY18. The Indirect Administrative Expenses are over last year by $277K or 2.8%. Operations Professional Services are under budget by $1.4M or 58.3% through the third quarter of FY18. This variance is primarily the result of the deferral of Mechanical Oversight Consultant of $480K, Consultant for retail ticket network of $400K, and unspent amount for Qualified Maintenance Position for PTC of $400K, and $120K in miscellaneous consultants. This category is virtually the same as last year.

143


Insurance Premiums for Liability/Property/Auto/Miscellaneous total $7.3M through the third quarter and are under budget by $2.1M or 22.0%. A more favorable insurance market has provided annual premiums less than budgeted in FY18 and less than experienced in FY17. Claims/Self-Insurance (SI) total $4.4M and are over budget through the third quarter of FY18 by $1.4M or 46.8%. Continuing costs related to the 2015 Oxnard incident (including the deductible accrual) are $3.0M through the third quarter, other incidents include the Union Pacific Railroad (UPPR) Valley sub incident for $414K, and the Valley sub flood for $269K. The decrease from prior year is a function of lower Rotem redesign costs. Claims administration is under budget by $490K, or 55.1%, but greater than last year by $262K. Legal fees and the incidents which generate them are difficult to predict or quantify. Staff has received unbudgeted claims recoveries of $2.9M which will more than offset the amount where claims are over budget. Net Results / Member Subsidies Member Subsidies are the net of actual Operating Revenue and actual Operating Expense including Insurance costs. As shown on Schedule A, the loss through three quarters of FY18 is $86.9M, as compared to a budgeted loss of $105.8M, providing a favorable variance of $18.9M, due to the above stated justifications in the different revenue and expense categories. Compared to last year, including BNSF, the Member Subsidy is lower through the third quarter of FY18 by $3.2M or 3.6%. Note with Respect to Federal Funding of Operating Costs Federal Funding of Preventative Maintenance and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for New Service are currently being monitored and compiled. Expenses are only eligible if they are charged by Federalized vendors, occur on revenue service segments and have been paid. Through the third quarter of FY18, the Authority has incurred the following eligible expenses:

- CMAQ Eligible Expenses total $489K - Preventative Maintenance Eligible Expenses total $18.5M

144


Forecast of Fiscal Year 2018 (July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018) The attached Schedule D provides a forecast of the operating results for the full year of FY18. This forecast is in categorical detail with comparisons to budget and to the prior year. The forecast was constructed based on an analysis of current trends and with input from various cost center managers. All information presented is preliminary and includes estimates. The forecast shows that the Actual Expenses is 8.0% less than the Adopted Budget for FY18 and 0.6% greater than last year. Operating Subsidies are forecasted to be 11.16% lower, providing a surplus of 15.9M. All explanations below refer to the detailed information on Schedule D. Explanations are included only where variances are significant. (Note that all comparisons are made to the “Adopted” Budget, not the budget as adjusted by transfers between categories.) Operating Revenues Operating Revenues for FY18 are forecasted to be $97.2M or 3.4% under budget. Specific elements are discussed below: The Farebox Revenue forecast of $ 82.4M is based on current trends which show a

decrease in ticket sales. This decrease in revenue creates a shortfall of $ 2.8M, or 3.2%. The forecast is inclusive of the subsidy provided by Metro to support the Antelope Valley (AV) Line Fare Reduction Pilot Program. In comparison to last year, this is a Farebox Revenue decrease of $973K or 1.2%.

Dispatch Revenue is $59K under budget due to the reduced Amtrak Intercity payments

resulting from newly instituted restrictive auditing, as well the drop on current trend of on train performance.

Other Revenue is $284K over budget mainly from passenger citations $42K; Sales of

Amtrak tickets through Metrolink TVM’s, $103K; Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) Revenue $28K and other miscellaneous revenue $111K.

MOW revenue is forecasted to be under budget by 6.9% or $ 918K. MOW revenue is

based on different criteria depending on the particular shared use agreement on the line. The shortfall in this case is specifically a result of less freight on the Coast and Saugus segments which are calculated on a “car count” basis.

145


Operating Expenditures Total Operating Expense and Insurance Expense, are forecasted to be $223.7M for fiscal 2018, below budget by $19.3M or 8.0%. This forecast puts the Agency's total loss at $ $126.5M, which is $15.9M, or 11.2% favorable from Budget. The expense increase before BNSF as compared to last year is$1.3M, or 0.6%. The primary areas of expense which are forecasted to be under budget are, Equipment Maintenance, Fuel, Transfer Payments, MOW and Insurance. These are explained in more detail below: Equipment Maintenance is forecasted to total $34.7M, for FY18, which is under budget

by $2.0M or 5.4%. Less material used for the repair of Rolling Stock accounts for $ 1.6M of this amount, and $221K for mechanical services not spent and $179K for miscellaneous expenditures. Compared to last year, Equipment Maintenance is down $703K, or 2.0%.

Fuel costs are forecasted to be lower than budget by $2.6M or 13.0%. Fuel costs have

been reduced as a result of the fuel hedging program and savings yielded from purchases using spot pricing at a lower price per gallon than assumed for budgeting purposes. Compared to last year, fuel is $1.1M less or 6.1%.

Rolling Stock Lease was budgeted for $151K in FY18. However, subsequent to the

budget adoption, our Tier 4 supplier agreed to pay for this lease, leaving PTC removal portion of the budget unspent.

Security Guards are expected to be under budget by $800K or 27.9%. A number of security guards that had been assigned to a third party agreement, were included in the FY18 Adopted Budget. However, after the MOU was finalized, the actual expenses related to the third party project, were appropriately reclassified from the operating expenses to the third party project, but the budget was not amended.

TVM Maintenance is expected to be over budget by $436K, or 5.8%. This variance is primarily due to incentives in the monthly maintenance contract and ticket stock expenses.

Utilities are expected to be under budget by $542K or 16.5%. This is due to planned

upgrades to enhance PTC communications which were postponed. Transfers to Other Operators are forecasted to be under budget in FY18 by $2.6M, or

38.8%. This category is expected to be under budget due to a credit received from Metro in the amount of $1.2M, due to a review of the transfer rate used for reimbursement purposes; and $1.4M due to an overall decrease in transfers from Metrolink to connecting transit.

146


Amtrak Transfers for FY18 is expected to be under budget by $523K or 24.0%. This is due to the transfers budgeted at the Cap as negotiated with Amtrak, however, actual rail to rail ridership is at a lower level than anticipated.

Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) MOW is forecasted to be under budget by $918K or 2.2%. This amount is a combination of credits received from VTMI as a result of equipment rentals in the amount of $400K, unspent vegetation control and cleanup expenses in the amount of $320K, and $198K in other miscellaneous maintenance expenses. Administration & Services Operations Salaries and Fringe Benefits expenditure are forecasted at $12.6M, which is to be under budget by $1.4M or 10.0%. Vacancies in various departments created the variance. This category is $1.2M, or 9.0% less than last year. Ops Non-Labor Expenses is expected to be under budget by $719K or 9.7% for FY18. This category is comprised of budgets for multiple cost centers which contribute to the operations of the agency. This category is expected to be lower as a result of Operation projects not completed in the IT area by $156K, PTC related expenses by $255K, Gasoline and Auto repairs expenses by $146K, and a combination of unspent funds for various administrative support expenses in the amount of $162K. Insurance Liability/Property/Auto/Miscellaneous is the category for insurance premiums. A very favorable insurance market provided lower than budgeted premiums creating an underrun in the FY18 Budget by $3.2M or 25.9%. Claims/SI are projected to be over budget in FY18 by $1.2M or 30.0%. These are costs for a number of incidents, which we will attempt to make successful claims for restitution. Claims administration is expected to be under budget by $668K, or 56.2%. Due to the variable and unpredictability of expenses related to litigation, claims and other legal matters, it is difficult to accurately forecast expenses for the incidents that generate them. In summary, the Authority is forecasting: Revenue at $97.2M which is $3.5M or 3.4% under budget Expenses at $223.7M, which is $19.3M, or 8.0% less than budget; and Net Loss at $126.5M, which is 11.2% better than budget

147


This is estimated to produce a Surplus of $15.9M on Member Subsidies. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Christine Wilson, Senior Manager, Finance


148


SCHEDULE A Page 1 of 2

(Unaudited)

Amount % Amount % Operating Revenues

Farebox Revenue 61,741,907 62,850,423 62,238,366 (1,108,516) (1.8%) (496,459) (0.8%)Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy 94,550 930,073 349,796 (835,523) (89.8%) (255,246) (73.0%)

Subtotal-Pro Forma FareBox 61,836,457 63,780,496 62,588,162 (1,944,039) (3.0%) (751,705) (1.2%)

Dispatching 1,559,699 1,593,756 1,635,522 (34,057) (2.1%) (75,823) (4.6%)

Other Revenues 180,816 9,000 294,775 171,816 1909.1% (113,959) (38.7%)

MOW Revenues 9,400,094 10,012,626 9,458,005 (612,532) (6.1%) (57,911) (0.6%)

Subtotal Operating Revenues 72,977,066 75,395,878 73,976,464 (2,418,812) (3.2%) (999,398) (1.4%) Operating Expenses

Operations & Services

1 Train Operations 31,488,915 33,301,750 31,302,912 (1,812,835) (5.4%) 186,003 0.6%2 Equipment Maintenance 26,763,665 27,518,319 24,323,728 (754,654) (2.7%) 2,439,937 10.0%3 Fuel 12,533,203 14,741,997 13,391,629 (2,208,794) (15.0%) (858,426) (6.4%)13 Non-Sched Rolling Stock Repairs 42,766 74,997 - (32,231) (43.0%) 42,766 n/a13 Operating Facilities Maintenance 1,082,894 1,238,634 1,179,630 (155,740) (12.6%) (96,736) (8.2%)1 Other Operating Train Services 367,612 330,673 350,453 36,939 11.2% 17,159 4.9%

13 Rolling Stock Lease - 100,668 172,620 (100,668) (100.0%) (172,620) (100.0%)4 Security - Sheriff 4,255,027 4,383,873 4,262,648 (128,846) (2.9%) (7,621) (0.2%)4 Security - Guards 1,436,293 2,128,032 1,078,897 (691,739) (32.5%) 357,396 33.1%4 Supplemental Additional Security 87,273 517,500 10,040 (430,227) (83.1%) 77,233 769.3%13 Public Safety Program 131,954 203,616 109,902 (71,662) (35.2%) 22,052 20.1%5 Passenger Relations 1,285,158 1,364,579 1,283,348 (79,421) (5.8%) 1,810 0.1%6 TVM Maint/Revenue Collection 5,824,611 5,632,506 5,522,192 192,105 3.4% 302,419 5.5%13 Marketing 637,907 1,085,272 299,277 (447,365) (41.2%) 338,630 113.1%13 Media & External Communications 236,292 370,540 246,595 (134,248) (36.2%) (10,303) (4.2%)7 Utilities / Leases 1,948,346 2,466,954 1,882,995 (518,608) (21.0%) 65,351 3.5%8 Transfers to Other Operators 2,783,172 4,811,903 4,673,596 (2,028,731) (42.2%) (1,890,424) (40.4%)8 Amtrak Transfers 1,229,620 1,632,753 964,625 (403,133) (24.7%) 264,995 27.5%13 Station Maintenance 1,168,460 1,259,064 872,902 (90,604) (7.2%) 295,558 33.9%9 Rail Agreements 3,956,436 4,024,791 4,013,572 (68,355) (1.7%) (57,136) (1.4%) Subtotal Operations & Services 97,259,604 107,188,421 95,941,561 (9,928,817) (9.3%) 1,318,043 1.4%

Maintenance-of-Way

10 MoW - Line Segments 28,699,745 30,012,270 26,690,281 (1,312,525) (4.4%) 2,009,464 7.5%

10 MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance 428,825 738,077 475,624 (309,252) (41.9%) (46,799) (9.8%)

Subtotal Maintenance-of-Way 29,128,570 30,750,347 27,165,905 (1,621,777) (5.3%) 1,962,665 7.2%

Administration & Services

1 Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits 9,222,679 9,938,094 9,592,634 (715,415) (7.2%) (369,955) (3.9%)1 Ops Non-Labor Expenses 3,823,262 5,553,754 2,873,567 (1,730,492) (31.2%) 949,695 33.0%12 Indirect Administrative Expenses 10,265,867 11,902,833 9,989,152 (1,636,966) (13.8%) 276,715 2.8%1 Ops Professional Services 1,025,737 2,460,303 1,025,054 (1,434,566) (58.3%) 683 0.1%

Subtotal Admin & Services 24,337,545 29,854,984 23,480,407 (5,517,439) (18.5%) 857,138 3.7%

13 Contingency (Non-Train Ops) 15,000 189,000 2,031 (174,000) (92.1%) 12,969 638.6%

Total Operating Expenses 150,740,719 167,982,752 146,589,904 (17,242,033) (10.3%) 4,150,815 2.8%

VARIANCE from Prior Year Over/(Under) 2018 ACTUAL

2018 ADOPTED BUDGET

2017 ACTUAL VARIANCE from Budget

Over/(Under)

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITYOPERATING STATEMENT

FOR THE 9 MOS. ENDING MAR 31, 2018

THIRD QUARTER YEAR TO DATE OF FY18

149


SCHEDULE A Page 2 of 2

(Unaudited)

Amount % Amount %

Insurance Expense/(Revenue)

Liability/Property/Auto/Misc 7,298,711 9,356,544 8,306,095 (2,057,833) (22.0%) (1,007,384) (12.1%)

Claims / SI 4,403,060 2,999,997 4,225,537 1,403,063 46.8% 177,523 4.2%

Claims Administration 400,189 890,541 138,077 (490,352) (55.1%) 262,112 189.8%

PLPD Revenue (2,931,998) - (450) (2,931,998) n/a (2,931,548) 651455.1%

Net Insurance Expense 9,169,962 13,247,082 12,669,259 (4,077,120) (30.8%) (3,499,297) (27.6%)

Total Expense Before BNSF 159,910,681 181,229,834 159,259,163 (21,319,153) (11.8%) 651,518 0.4%

Total Loss Before BNSF (86,933,615) (105,833,956) (85,282,699) 18,900,341 (17.9%) (1,650,916) 1.9%

Member Subsidies*

Operations 92,586,874 92,586,874 89,563,602 - 0.0% 3,023,272 3.4%

Insurance 13,247,084 13,247,082 12,590,010 2 0.0% 657,074 5.2%

Total Member Subsidies 105,833,958 105,833,956 102,153,612 2 0.0% 3,680,346 3.6%

Surplus / (Deficit) Before BNSF 18,900,343 - 16,870,913 18,900,343 n/a 2,029,430 12.0%

BNSF LEASED LOCOMOTIVE COSTS

Total BNSF Lease Loco Expenses - - 4,877,751 - n/a (4,877,751) (100.0%)

Member BNSF Lease Subsidies* - 6,054,632 - n/a (6,054,632) (100.0%)

Surplus / (Deficit)-BNSF Lease - - 1,176,881 - n/a (1,176,881) (100.0%)

Total Expense 159,910,681 181,229,834 164,136,914 (21,319,153) (11.8%) (4,226,233) (2.6%)

Net Loss (86,933,615) (105,833,956) (90,160,450) 18,900,341 -17.9% 3,226,835 (3.6%)

All Member Subsidies 105,833,958 105,833,956 108,208,244 2

Surplus / (Deficit) 18,900,343 - 18,047,794 18,900,343 n/a

ELEGIBLE FEDERAL FUNDING 2018 ACTUAL ANNUAL

DRAWDOWN 2017 ACTUAL BALANCE %

VARIANCE from Prior Yr

%

Preventive Maintenance 21,872,594 24,584,474 - 2,711,880 11.0% 21,872,594 n/a

CMAQ 1,853,109 3,100,000 1,786,141 1,246,891 40.2% 66,968 3.7%

** Numbers may not foot due to rounding.

VARIANCE from Prior Year Over/(Under) 2018 ACTUAL

2018 ADOPTED BUDGET


Over/(Under)

* Although member subsidies are billed quarterly and include the annual prepaid insurance premiums in the first quarter billing (and are so recorded in Oracle), amounts reflected here display only that amount ratably

li d t th i d h

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITYOPERATING STATEMENT

FOR THE 9 MOS. ENDING MAR 31, 2018


150


SCHEDULE B

($000s) San

Bernardino

Ventura

County

Antelope

Valley

Riverside Orange

County

OC MSEP IEOC 91 Total

OperatingRevenueFareboxRevenue 15,495 4,535 8,516 6,506 16,225 296 5,871 4,298 61,742

MetroFareReductionSubsidy ‐ ‐ 95 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 95

Subtotal‐ProFormaFareBox 15,495 4,535 8,610 6,506 16,225 296 5,871 4,298 61,836

Dispatching 118 388 270 4 733 11 13 22 1,560

OtherRevenues 37 25 29 18 26 5 25 16 181

MOWRevenues 2,521 1,183 2,856 187 1,102 188 836 528 9,400

SubtotalOperatingRevenue 18,172 6,131 11,765 6,715 18,086 500 6,744 4,864 72,977

OperatingExpensesOperations&ServicesTrainOperations 7,091 3,305 7,144 2,007 4,730 660 3,570 2,982 31,489

EquipmentMaintenance 6,082 2,839 5,409 1,941 3,840 1,048 3,223 2,381 26,764

Fuel 2,743 1,337 2,720 936 2,110 183 1,566 938 12,533

Non‐ScheduledRollingStockRepairs 10 4 9 3 7 1 5 3 43

OperatingFacilitiesMaintenance 261 99 239 76 173 37 133 64 1,083

OtherOperatingTrainServices 53 61 67 55 29 10 41 52 368

RollingStockLease ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Security‐Sheriff 939 261 1,164 202 581 97 477 533 4,255

Security‐Guards 207 240 261 216 112 39 160 202 1,436

SupplementalAdditionalSecurity 22 6 12 9 23 0 8 6 87

PublicSafetyProgram 19 22 24 20 10 4 15 19 132

PassengerRelations 322 110 196 102 302 0 175 79 1,285

TVMMaintenance/RevenueCollection 1,050 860 860 465 655 268 868 797 5,825

Marketing 160 60 90 56 149 ‐ 79 43 638

Media&ExternalCommunications 34 39 43 36 18 6 26 33 236

Utilities/Leases 280 325 354 293 151 54 216 274 1,948

TransferstoOtherOperators 564 220 620 255 303 ‐ 137 684 2,783

AmtrakTransfers(IncldBurbankAirportShare) ‐ 190 ‐ ‐ 1,040 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,230

StationMaintenance 353 153 255 103 188 5 13 100 1,168

RailAgreements ‐ 432 ‐ 1,341 629 8 774 771 3,956

SubtotalOperations&Services 20,190 10,566 19,467 8,117 15,051 2,421 11,488 9,959 97,260

Maintenance‐of‐WayMoW‐LineSegments 8,364 4,484 6,527 705 3,576 591 2,790 1,663 28,700

MoW‐ExtraordinaryMaintenance 110 81 138 3 35 ‐ 22 40 429

SubtotalMaintenance‐of‐Way 8,474 4,565 6,665 708 3,611 591 2,812 1,703 29,129

Administration&ServicesOpsSalaries&FringeBenefits 1,333 1,534 1,679 1,383 724 253 1,025 1,293 9,223

OpsNon‐LaborExpenses 824 439 779 323 528 121 453 358 3,823

IndirectAdministrativeExpenses 1,477 1,714 1,864 1,545 798 282 1,141 1,444 10,266

OpsProfessionalServices 148 171 186 154 80 28 114 144 1,026

SubtotalAdmin&Services 3,781 3,859 4,508 3,405 2,129 684 2,732 3,239 24,338

Contingency(Non‐TrainOps) 2 3 3 2 1 0 2 2 15

TotalOperatingExpenses 32,448 18,993 30,643 12,233 20,792 3,697 17,033 14,903 150,741

InsuranceExpense/(Revenue)Liability/Property/Auto 1,760 668 1,613 515 1,166 248 899 429 7,299

Claims/SI 1,062 403 973 311 703 150 542 259 4,403

ClaimsAdministration 97 37 88 28 64 14 49 24 400

PLPDRevenue (707) (268) (648) (207) (468) (100) (361) (172) (2,932)

NetInsuranceExpense 2,212 839 2,027 647 1,464 312 1,130 539 9,170

TotalExpense 34,660 19,832 32,670 12,880 22,257 4,008 18,163 15,442 159,911

Loss (16,488) (13,701) (20,905) (6,165) (4,170) (3,508) (11,419) (10,578) (86,934)

MemberSubsidies

TotalMemberSubsidies 16,488 13,701 20,905 6,165 4,170 3,508 11,419 10,578 86,934

Train Miles 491,469 212,025 439,220 140,630 322,695 68,516 252,182 169,958 2,096,695

Passengers per Train Mile 4.1 3.8 3.1 5.4 6.3 1.2 3.9 3.9 4.2

Subsidy per Passenger $8.17 $16.82 $15.59 $8.16 $2.04 $41.55 $11.53 $15.97 $9.98


OPERATING STATEMENT THROUGH THE THIRD QUARTER OF FY18

BY LINE

151


SCHEDULE C

($000s) Metro OCTA RCTC SBCTA VCTC Total

OperatingRevenueFareboxRevenue 30,455 16,437 5,725 7,701 1,425 61,742

MetroFareReductionSubsidy 95 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 95

Subtotal‐ProFormaFareBox 30,549 16,437 5,725 7,701 1,425 61,836

Dispatching 808 511 6 47 188 1,560

OtherRevenues 82 41 25 23 11 181

MOWRevenues 5,483 1,898 488 1,143 388 9,400

SubtotalOperatingRevenue 36,922 18,887 6,243 8,914 2,012 72,977

OperatingExpensesOperations&ServicesTrainOperations 16,672 6,985 3,381 3,313 1,139 31,489

EquipmentMaintenance 13,385 6,303 2,782 3,125 1,169 26,764

Fuel 6,624 2,913 1,193 1,360 443 12,533

Non‐ScheduledRollingStockRepairs 23 10 3 5 1 43

OperatingFacilitiesMaintenance 577 263 82 124 36 1,083

OtherOperatingTrainServices 173 63 55 38 39 368

RollingStockLease ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Security‐Sheriff 2,236 875 612 437 95 4,255

Security‐Guards 677 247 215 147 151 1,436

SupplementalAdditionalSecurity 43 23 8 11 2 87

PublicSafetyProgram 62 23 20 13 14 132

PassengerRelations 624 374 106 146 35 1,285

TVMMaintenance/RevenueCollection 2,368 1,373 1,042 663 379 5,825

Marketing 310 178 54 78 19 638

Media&ExternalCommunications 111 41 35 24 25 236

Utilities/Leases 918 336 291 199 204 1,948

TransferstoOtherOperators 1,534 680 220 280 70 2,783

AmtrakTransfers(IncldBurbankAirportShare) 421 742 1 2 63 1,230

StationMaintenance 735 156 71 157 48 1,168

RailAgreements 1,328 1,134 961 259 274 3,956

SubtotalOperations&Services 48,821 22,721 11,133 10,381 4,204 97,260

Maintenance‐of‐WayMoW‐LineSegments 15,480 5,825 1,757 3,963 1,675 28,700

MoW‐ExtraordinaryMaintenance 252 55 42 46 34 429

SubtotalMaintenance‐of‐Way 15,731 5,881 1,799 4,009 1,709 29,129

Administration&ServicesOpsSalaries&FringeBenefits 4,349 1,596 1,374 940 964 9,223

OpsNon‐LaborExpenses 1,950 854 416 424 180 3,823

IndirectAdministrativeExpenses 4,836 1,769 1,535 1,049 1,077 10,266

OpsProfessionalServices 483 177 153 105 108 1,026

SubtotalAdmin&Services 11,618 4,395 3,478 2,518 2,328 24,338

Contingency(Non‐TrainOps) 7 3 2 2 2 15

TotalOperatingExpenses 76,177 32,999 16,412 16,910 8,243 150,741

InsuranceExpense/(Revenue)Liability/Property/Auto 3,892 1,773 555 837 242 7,299

Claims/SI 2,348 1,070 335 505 146 4,403

ClaimsAdministration 213 97 30 46 13 400

PLPDRevenue (1,563) (712) (223) (336) (97) (2,932)

NetInsuranceExpense 4,889 2,227 697 1,052 304 9,170

TotalExpense 81,067 35,226 17,109 17,961 8,547 159,911

Loss (44,144) (16,340) (10,866) (9,048) (6,536) (86,934)

MemberSubsidiesTotalMemberSubsidies 44,144 16,340 10,866 9,048 6,536 86,934


OPERATING STATEMENT THROUGH THE THIRD QUARTER OF FY18

BY MEMBER AGENCY

152


SCHEDULE D Page 1 of 2

(Unaudited)

Amount % Amount %

Operating Revenues

Farebox Revenue 82,251,209 83,897,152 82,882,713 (1,645,943) (2.0%) (631,504) (0.8%)

Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy 149,390 1,261,506 490,407 (1,112,116) (88.2%) (341,017) (69.5%)

Subtotal-Pro Forma FareBox 82,400,599 85,158,658 83,373,120 (2,758,059) (3.2%) (972,521) (1.2%)

Dispatching 2,066,278 2,125,000 2,015,637 (58,722) (2.8%) 50,641 2.5%

Other Revenues 295,816 12,000 762,254 283,816 2365.1% (466,438) (61.2%)

MOW Revenues 12,432,624 13,350,179 12,383,836 (917,555) (6.9%) 48,788 0.4%

Subtotal Operating Revenues 97,195,317 100,645,837 98,534,847 (3,450,520) (3.4%) (1,339,530) (1.4%)

Operating Expenses

Operations & Services

1 Train Operations 43,816,030 44,642,448 41,616,027 (826,418) (1.9%) 2,200,003 5.3%

2 Equipment Maintenance 34,718,645 36,691,100 35,421,742 (1,972,455) (5.4%) (703,097) (2.0%)

3 Fuel 17,094,003 19,656,000 18,206,654 (2,561,997) (13.0%) (1,112,651) (6.1%)

13 Non-Sched Rolling Stock Repairs 77,766 100,000 992 (22,234) (22.2%) 76,774 7739.3%

13 Operating Facilities Maintenance 1,415,529 1,651,508 1,474,808 (235,979) (14.3%) (59,279) (4.0%)

1 Other Operating Train Services 541,759 470,313 448,882 71,446 15.2% 92,877 20.7%

13 Rolling Stock Lease 75,000 151,000 229,950 (76,000) (50.3%) (154,950) (67.4%)

4 Security - Sheriff 5,876,645 5,845,150 5,511,181 31,495 0.5% 365,464 6.6%

4 Security - Guards 2,046,089 2,837,374 1,283,361 (791,285) (27.9%) 762,728 59.4%

4 Supplemental Additional Security 87,273 690,000 520,105 (602,727) (87.4%) (432,832) (83.2%)

13 Public Safety Program 327,021 276,500 203,060 50,521 18.3% 123,961 61.0%

5 Passenger Relations 1,720,833 1,795,157 1,867,989 (74,324) (4.1%) (147,156) (7.9%)

6 TVM Maint/Revenue Collection 7,945,737 7,510,000 7,934,285 435,737 5.8% 11,452 0.1%

13 Marketing 1,369,074 1,363,700 715,869 5,374 0.4% 653,205 91.2%

13 Media & External Communications 381,400 442,720 249,218 (61,320) (13.9%) 132,182 53.0%

7 Utilities / Leases 2,747,270 3,289,276 2,614,407 (542,006) (16.5%) 132,863 5.1%

8 Transfers to Other Operators 4,034,172 6,591,654 6,003,132 (2,557,482) (38.8%) (1,968,960) (32.8%)

8 Amtrak Transfers 1,653,620 2,177,000 1,307,206 (523,380) (24.0%) 346,414 26.5%

13 Station Maintenance 1,734,200 1,686,750 1,196,262 47,450 2.8% 537,938 45.0%

9 Rail Agreements 5,366,390 5,366,390 5,154,904 - 0.0% 211,486 4.1%

Subtotal Operations & Services 133,028,455 143,234,040 131,960,034 (10,205,585) (7.1%) 1,068,421 0.8%

Maintenance-of-Way

10 MoW - Line Segments 39,617,895 40,606,047 37,354,862 (988,152) (2.4%) 2,263,033 6.1%

10 MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance 1,070,780 1,001,000 1,259,972 69,780 7.0% (189,192) (15.0%)

Subtotal Maintenance-of-Way 40,688,675 41,607,047 38,614,834 (918,372) (2.2%) 2,073,841 5.4%

Administration & Services

1 Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits 12,559,908 13,960,574 13,808,002 (1,400,666) (10.0%) (1,248,094) (9.0%)

1 Ops Non-Labor Expenses 6,655,332 7,374,100 5,046,234 (718,768) (9.7%) 1,609,098 31.9%

12 Indirect Administrative Expenses 15,544,844 15,870,446 14,089,937 (325,602) (2.1%) 1,454,907 10.3%

1 Ops Professional Services 3,154,457 3,083,850 1,962,798 70,607 2.3% 1,191,659 60.7%

Subtotal Admin & Services 37,914,541 40,288,970 34,906,971 (2,374,429) (5.9%) 3,007,570 8.6%

13 Contingency (Non-Train Ops) 39,321 252,000 - (212,679) (84.4%) 39,321 n/a

Total Operating Expenses 211,670,992 225,382,057 205,481,839 (13,711,065) (6.1%) 6,189,153 3.0%

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITYFORECAST OPERATING STATEMENT

FOR THE 12 MOS. ENDING JUNE 30, 2018

FULL FISCAL YEAR 2018 FORECAST

VARIANCE from Prior Year Over/(Under)

FORECAST 2018 ACTUAL

2018 ADOPTED BUDGET


Over/(Under)

153


SCHEDULE D Page 2 of 2

(Unaudited)

Amount % Amount %

Insurance Expense/(Revenue)

Liability/Property/Auto/Misc 9,247,974 12,475,400 11,060,626 (3,227,426) (25.9%) (1,812,652) (16.4%)

Claims / SI 5,200,144 4,000,000 5,115,698 1,200,144 30.0% 84,446 1.7%

Claims Administration 519,569 1,187,380 704,054 (667,811) (56.2%) (184,485) (26.2%)

PLPD Revenue (2,932,048) - (600) (2,932,048) n/a (2,931,448) 488574.7%

11 Net Insurance Expense 12,035,639 17,662,780 16,879,778 (5,627,141) (31.9%) (4,844,139) (28.7%)

Total Expense Before BNSF 223,706,631 243,044,837 222,361,617 (19,338,206) (8.0%) 1,345,014 0.6%

Total Loss Before BNSF (126,511,314) (142,399,000) (123,826,770) 15,887,686 (11.2%) (2,684,544) 2.2%

Member Subsidies*

Operations 124,736,220 124,736,220 119,147,694 - 0.0% 5,588,526 4.7%

Insurance 17,662,780 17,662,780 16,786,683 - 0.0% 876,097 5.2%

Total Member Subsidies 142,399,000 142,399,000 135,934,377 - 0.0% 6,464,623 4.8%

Surplus / (Deficit) Before BNSF 15,887,686 - 12,107,607 15,887,686 n/a 3,780,079 31.2%

14 BNSF LEASED LOCOMOTIVE COSTS

Lease cost Inc ship - - 1,784,000 - n/a (1,784,000) (100.0%)

Major Component Parts - - (94,291) - n/a 94,291 (100.0%)

Labor for Maintenance - - 1,079,244 - n/a (1,079,244) (100.0%)

Additional Fuel - - 1,046,235 - n/a (1,046,235) (100.0%)

Savings from lower cost of fuel - - - - n/a - n/aWheel truing, Software Mods, Brakes

- - - - n/a - n/a

Temp Facility Mods - - 140,343 - n/a (140,343) (100.0%)

PTC Costs - - 922,219 - n/a (922,219) (100.0%)

Contingency - - - - n/a - n/a

Total BNSF Lease Loco Expenses - - 4,877,751 - n/a (4,877,751) (100.0%)

Member BNSF Lease Subsidies* - 6,054,632 - n/a (6,054,632) (100.0%)

Surplus / (Deficit)-BNSF Lease - - 1,176,881 - n/a (1,176,881) (100.0%)

Total Expense 223,706,631 243,044,837 227,239,368 (19,338,206) (8.0%) (3,532,738) (1.6%)

Net Loss (126,511,314) (142,399,000) (128,704,521) 15,887,686 -11.2% 2,193,208 (1.7%)

All Member Subsidies 142,399,000 142,399,000 141,989,009 -

Surplus / (Deficit) 15,887,686 - 13,284,488 15,887,686 n/a

** Numbers may not foot due to rounding.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITYFORECAST OPERATING STATEMENT

FOR THE 12 MOS. ENDING JUNE 30, 2018

FULL FISCAL YEAR 2018 FORECAST

* Although member subsidies are billed quarterly and include the annual prepaid insurance premiums in the first quarter billing (and are so recorded in Oracle), amounts reflected here display only that amount ratably applied to the period shown .

VARIANCE from Prior Year Over/(Under)

FORECAST 2018 ACTUAL

2018 ADOPTED BUDGET


Over/(Under)

154


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: FY2017-18 Quarterly Accounts Receivable Status Report

– Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Issue This report presents a status update on the Authority’s Accounts Receivable for the quarter ended March 31, 2018. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. This report presents outstanding receivables to the Board and provides updates related to collection efforts. Background The Authority’s sources of funds include passenger fares, dispatching and Maintenance-of-Way revenues, Member Agencies operating and capital subsidies, and state and federal grant programs. As of March 31, 2018, the total outstanding accounts receivable balance, as indicated in the table, was $20.1 million. Of the total accounts receivable, $5.4 million was current (30 days or less) and $14.7 million was past due, of which $9.9 million were over 90 days. Approximately $3.4 million of invoices over 90 days is due from third party agreements while $6.4 million is related to shared-use agreements with other railroads, currently being handled by a working group formed to resolve these balances.

155

FY2017-18 Quarterly Accounts Receivable Status Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

The accounts receivables are composed of: Capital Contributions Receivable – Due from Member Agencies and other state and

federal grantors such as Federal Transit Administration for Capital and Rehabilitation projects (i.e., construction and rehabilitation of rail infrastructure system).

Due from Other Agencies – Due from other agencies such as California Department

of Transportation (Caltrans) for construction projects. Fares Receivable – Due from customers purchasing passenger fares for commuter

rail services. Operating Subsidies Receivable – Due every quarter from the five Member Agencies

relating to operating subsidies. Other Receivables– Cash received pending application to the correct account. Shared Use Receivables – Due from other rail partners such as Amtrak and Union

Pacific Railroad Company for sharing rail lines. Third Party Receivables – Due from both private and public agencies for projects such

as special train services, construction of capital projects on behalf of third parties and flagging services.

Finance continues to reconcile and collect outstanding receivables for fare, dispatching, Maintenance-of-Way, capital program, and third-party agreement revenue. To assist in collection efforts, the Board requested staff inquire into charging interest on outstanding fare receivables. Staff reviewed the existing Corporate Partner Program agreement and updated verbiage to include a 1.5% interest charge on receivable balances not paid within

Total 1-30 Days

31-60 Days

61-90Days

91-180 Days

Over 180 Days

CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVABLE 1.0$ 0.9$ 1.7$ 0.4$ (1.9)$ (0.1)$ DUE FROM OTHER AGENCIES 5.3$ 1.5 0.2 0.1 3.4 0.1 FARES RECEIVABLE 1.4$ 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 OPERATING SUBSIDIES RECEIVABLE (1.8)$ (0.9) - - 0.2 (1.1) OTHER RECEIVABLES (0.5)$ (0.0) (0.0) (0.2) (0.0) (0.3) SHARED USE RECEIVABLES 9.5$ 1.9 0.8 0.8 1.6 4.4

THIRD PARTY RECEIVABLES 5.3$ 1.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 3.1

Total 20.1$ 5.4$ 3.2$ 1.6$ 3.7$ 6.2$

% of Total 100% 27% 16% 8% 18% 31%

156

FY2017-18 Quarterly Accounts Receivable Status Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

30 days from the date of the invoice. In addition to this charge, accounts not in good standing may be placed on hold. This update to the Corporate Partner agreement became effective in February 2017 for use with new Corporate Partner customers. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Finance Lillian Tung, Financial Analyst II

Edison Abrenica, Financial Analyst II


157


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: FY2017-18 Quarterly Investment Report – Quarter Ended

March 31, 2018 Issue Section VII of the Authority’s Annual Investment Policy requires that the Treasurer make a quarterly investment report to the Board, and Section 53646 of the California Government Code encourages local agencies to file this report. This report is for the quarter ended March 31, 2018. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. This report presents an update on cash portfolio to the Board and provides an update related to account balances and interest earned. Background The Authority is currently managing a portfolio of $127.9 million in cash, cash equivalents and investment funds. The portfolio is comprised of restricted and unrestricted amounts of cash. Approximately $40.1 million (31.4%) of the portfolio was comprised of restricted funds. The remaining balance of $87.8 million (68.6%) was comprised of unrestricted funds as of March 31, 2018.

158

FY2017-18 Quarterly Investment Report – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Restricted Funds Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) The LAIF is a pooled fund managed by the State Treasurer in which the Authority is a voluntary participant. It is an investment alternative for California’s local governments and offers local agencies the opportunity to participate in a major portfolio that invests hundreds of millions of dollars in securities. The majority of funds in the LAIF account is restricted for Proposition 1B (Prop 1B) use.

Prop 1B was approved by California voters on November 7, 2006 to authorize $19.9 billion of state General Obligation Bonds for specific transportation programs intended to “relieve congestion, facilitate goods movement, improve air quality, and enhance the safety of the state’s transportation system.” Prop 1B funds are awarded to agencies based on various deciding factors such as anticipated project costs and potential benefits of the project. Prop 1B funds are designated for specific purposes such as rehabilitation, replacement and expansion of various assets including track, bridges, signals, rolling stock and ticket vending machines. Additionally, these funds have been applied to grade crossing improvements and the Positive Train Control system. The Authority has submitted applications to the State and is a recipient of Prop 1B funds. At the request of the Board, a list of projects allocated for LAIF funding have been included in this report (see attachment A). The current balance in the LAIF account is comprised of funding and interest allocated to over 40 Capital and Rehabilitation projects and an amount funded but not yet allocated to approved projects. Use of LAIF funds for projects is primarily identified through the annual budget process, however, discretionary grant opportunities also present additional funding for projects. At each fiscal year end, the LAIF balance is

159


presented in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) within the supplementary information section by grant program and agency. Bank of America (BofA) Money Market Fund The Authority has also established a separate restricted account held with Bank of America Money Market reserves (BofA). Funds invested in BofA, have historically been, and continue to be, restricted by the Board in connection with the lease/leaseback program. As of March 31, 2018, approximately $3.8 million is invested in BofA. Historically, the Board restricted the proceeds from the lease/leaseback transactions for capital maintenance of rolling stock to ensure it is in good condition to meet and maximize its useful life. Additionally, earnings from the transactions can be used for specific purposes as approved and directed by the Board. Interest Amount Earned Total interest earned on LAIF for the quarter ended March 31, 2018 is $136,545, representing a 1.51% annual interest rate. Investment Portfolio Compliance The composition of the investment portfolio as of March 31, 2018, complies with the provisions of the Authority’s Annual Investment Policy as the LAIF account has a balance of $36.4 million, consistent with the $50 million cap stipulated by policy1. Also, funds invested in BofA represent approximately 9.4% of the total investment funds, consistent with the 20% cap required by policy. Cash Sufficiency Approximately $87.8 million of operating cash was on hand as of March 31, 2018. The Authority has maintained $25 million in unrestricted cash as an informal minimum threshold. Staff has evaluated the $25 million minimum threshold and determined if it is necessary and appropriate based on future operating cash needs. This amount is equal to average monthly expenditures. Maintaining a 30-day reserve is consistent with the procedures of the Member Agencies. If the cash balance is projected to fall below $25 million for more than two consecutive months, staff will notify the Board. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

1 Based on the Investment Policy as adopted on January 13, 2017, the maximum deposit allowed in the LAIF account is $50 million, and funds invested in Money Market Funds cannot exceed 20% of total investment funds.

160


Prepared by: Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Finance Elizabeth Martinez, Financial Analyst I, Cash Management Jerri Stoyanoff, Accountant II, Grants Administration


161


Attachment A

Project Description Project Balance

STATION SURVEILLANCE

5,857,106.11

SECURITY DATA NETWORK

4,804,043.56

BOMBARDIER PASSENGER RAIL CAR REBUILD

4,780,207.53

MAINTENANCE FACILITIES HARDENING

3,750,243.35

TIER 4

3,536,683.48

PTC

1,348,885.90

VALLEYRR RAIL AND CURVES

1,089,984.05

VALLEY BRIDGE 35.75 REPL

1,034,613.98

TICKET VENDING MACH. REPL

945,499.26

RAIL CAR RESTORATION

905,995.07

ROLLING STOCK SPARE PARTS

599,064.04

VENTURA LARR CURVE 130

521,341.37

SECURITY AT COMM SHELTERS AND CP

503,961.11

VALLEY SUB BRIDGE AND CULVERT

492,022.58

DEFIBRILLATORS FOR CAB CARS

207,869.94

TUNNEL INTRUSION DETECTION SYSTEMS

200,038.68

GLENDALECHEVY CHASE DR

154,987.20

CALTRANS VCTC SEALED CORRIDOR

146,831.58

VALLEY REPL TIES RATED 3 & 4

139,082.68

VENTURA LA BRIDGE REPAIR

118,604.97

OVERHAUL OF GEN 1 RAILCARS

94,701.45

162


Attachment A (Continued)

VENTURA (LA) SUB ROW GRADING

89,986.60

ELECTRONIC TICKETING SYSTEM

84,072.19

VENTURA (VC) TRACK SOGR

70,822.63

REPLACE BRIDGE AND CULVERTS

64,080.70

MTACANOGA TRANS CORRIDOR

48,001.42

ROTEM

36,995.13

LOCO ENGINE OVRHLNONFED

36,853.41

CP BEECH TURNOUT REPLACEMENTS

32,727.01

SOC ENHANCEMENTS

31,939.00

SAN GABRIEL SIGNAL REHAB

25,182.50

TUNNEL 25 INTRUSION DETECTION

21,442.04

VENTURA (LA) SIGNAL REHAB

15,823.06

FIBER OPTIC BACKBONE RIVER

9,726.22

SAFETY RETROFIT COUPLERS

9,532.82

SWING GATES AND FENCING

6,454.66

MOORPARKSPRING ROAD

6,147.03

SYSTEMW RR EMF FUEL SYSTEM

2,674.67

ACCESS CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRADE

2,041.18

GLENDALEBROADWAY/BRAZIL

1,189.05

INWARD FACING CAMERAS

939.96

SAFETY RETROFIT TABLES

613.77

FRWRD FCNG CAMERAS ON 38 LOCOS

272.45

163



TRACTION MTRSNONFED

240.33

GLENDALEGRANDVIEW AVE

63.79

FY09 OC GRADE CRSSNG MNTRS

8.98

LED LIGHTS

0.00

GRADE CROSSING MONITORS

0.00

31,829,598.49

Funds programmed but not yet allocated

4,531,496.15

Bank Balance as of March 31, 20182

36,361,094.65

2 This total is programmed as follows: $2.5M for rehabilitation of track, signals, bridges and related assets and $2.0M for Tier 4 locomotives. Funds are allocated to approved projects as milestone invoices are received and coded.

164



TRACTION MTRSNONFED

240.33

GLENDALEGRANDVIEW AVE

63.79

FY09 OC GRADE CRSSNG MNTRS

8.98

LED LIGHTS

0.00

GRADE CROSSING MONITORS

0.00

31,829,598.49

Funds programmed but not yet allocated

4,531,496.15

Bank Balance as of March 31, 20182

36,361,094.65

2 This total is programmed as follows: $2.5M for rehabilitation of track, signals, bridges and related assets and $2.0M for Tier 4 locomotives. Funds are allocated to approved projects as milestone invoices are received and coded.

165


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: FY2018-19 Budget Development Update Issue Finance Policy 1.1 provides guidelines for the development of the Authority’s annual budget to ensure that a balanced budget is prepared in a timely basis and submitted to the Board for adoption prior to the start of each new fiscal year. This report provides a status update on the Fiscal Year 2018-19 (FY19) budget development progress to date. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. Development of the annual budget in a timely manner provides the short-term objective of providing an annual funding commitment for basic operations while securing multi-year funding commitments from its Member Agencies for the needed investments in Rehabilitation and Capital. Background The FY19 budget development process began on October 4, 2017 with a Budget Kick-off Meeting attended by over 50 employees. In keeping with a back-to-basics approach for the budget development, requests were compiled and submitted by all Cost Center managers. Those requests were analyzed and subsequently reviewed with each Cost Center manager and their respective Chief in a series of one-on-one meetings. The primary purpose of the meetings was to provide justification for each line item budget amount requested taking into consideration such factors as:

Historic levels of spending, Current levels of spending, Known adjustments for the forthcoming year, and

166

FY2018-19 Budget Development Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Overarching goal of fiscal sustainability and operational efficiency. These meetings began in October 2017 and concluded by mid-January 2018. The FY19 Preliminary Budget for Operations and Rehabilitation/New Capital was reviewed with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members on the following dates:

November 14, 2017 December 5, 2017 January 9, 2018 January 13, 2018

An overview of the FY19 Preliminary Budget for Operations and Rehabilitation/New Capital detailing the Total Request for Funding was reviewed with the Member Agency CEOs on the following dates:

January 19, 2018 February 16, 2018

The FY19 Preliminary Budget was presented to the Board at its Budget Workshop on February 23, 2018. Following the February 23, 2018 Budget Workshop, staff further analyzed FY19 requests considering trending estimated actuals and workload capacity. The budget was subsequently revised. The Revised FY19 Preliminary Budget, in which revenues were increased by $2.8m and expenditures were increased by $0.2m was presented to the Board and approved for future transmission at the March 23, 2018 Board meeting. On April 13, 2018, the Board approved transmission of the FY19 Preliminary Budget. This revised budget was reviewed with several of the Member Agencies as follows: April 10, 2018 Teleconference with Orange County Transportation Authority

(OCTA) Chief Financial Officer and regional rail staff April 16, 2018 Teleconference with Ventura County Transportation Authority

(VCTC) Chief Financial Officer and regional rail staff April 18, 2018 Teleconference with the Member Agency CEOs and/or their

respective regional rail staff

167


The FY19 Operating Budget as transmitted reflects the following:

The Preliminary FY19 Budget as transmitted reflects the following Operating Subsidy by Member Agency:

Rehabilitation During November and December 2017, and January of 2018, staff met with Member Agencies both jointly and individually to review the requested Projects for FY19 as per the following schedule:

Line Specific, Metro Friday, November 17, 2017 Line Specific, RCTC Monday, November 20, 2017 Line Specific, VCTC Monday, November 20, 2017 Line Specific, OCTA Tuesday, November 21, 2017 Line Specific, SBCTA Wednesday, November 22, 2017 All Share Projects Wednesday, December 13, 2017

During these meetings, staff provided an overview of the call for projects process detailing ranking, prioritizing and then seek to optimize the fiscal request from the Member Agencies that ensures fulfillment of the Authority’s Strategic Goals and annual investment in the varied asset classes. Questions regarding proposed scope of the projects were answered and additional supporting documentation was provided.

($ millions)

FY18

Adopted

Budget

FY19

Preliminary

Budget

Revenues $100.6 $100.8 $0.2 0.2%

Expenditures $243.0 $251.4 $8.3 3.4%

Net Local Subsidy $142.4 $150.6 $8.2 5.7%

FY19

vs FY18

($ millions)

FY18

Adopted

Budget

FY19

Preliminary

Budget

Metro $71.7 $75.1 $3.5 4.9%

OCTA $28.2 $29.4 $1.2 4.1%

RCTC $17.7 $19.7 $2.0 11.0%

SBCTA $15.0 $16.1 $1.2 7.7%

VCTC $9.8 $10.3 $0.4 4.3%

Total Subsidy $142.4 $150.6 $8.2 5.7%

FY19

vs FY18

168


The revised forecast for Rehabilitation requirements over the next three fiscal years are shown below:

FY2018-19: $200.8m FY2019-20: $160.3m FY2020-21: $200.3m

Completion of rehabilitation projects are multi-year in nature. As such, the funding for the FY19 Request is viewed as a 4-year funding commitment which would have the following estimated cash flow impacts over the next four fiscal years as noted below:

FY2018-19 $ 14.0m 7% FY2019-20 $ 68.8m 34% FY2020-21 $ 49.2m 25% FY2021-22 $ 68.8m 34%

Total: $200.8m 100% New Capital Staff met in December 2017 and January 2018 to determine projects to be recommended for New Capital in FY19. Projects are presented that will enhance safety and security, improve system reliability, increase ridership, maximize capacity, improve efficiency, provide environmental benefit, and contribute to the strategic goals of the Authority. New Capital Projects are subjected to the same ranking, prioritization and optimization as the Rehabilitation Projects described above. New Capital projects proposed for FY19 are in the amounts below:

FY2018-19: $24.5m FY2019-20: $54.4m FY2020-21: $65.1m

FY19 Budget Presentation with Member Agencies Staff presented to the OCTA Finance Committee on April 25, 2018 Staff is scheduled to present to the Riverside County Transportation Commission

(RCTC) Transit Committee on May 9, 2018 Staff is scheduled to present to the San Bernardino County Transportation

Authority (SBCTA) Transit Committee on May 10, 2018

Next Steps Staff will continue to work with Member Agencies to identify revisions or changes. Reports will be provided to the Board each month leading up to the request for Board approval of the budget.

169


Following are a few key dates and budget milestones yet to be accomplished: May – June Staff works with Member Agencies on adjustments May – June Staff to present to Member Agencies Committees and Boards as

requested June 22, 2018 Board action – FY19 Proposed budget for Adoption

Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Christine Wilson, Senior Manager, Finance


170


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Capital Grant Summary for January through March 2018 Issue Staff is providing an update to the Board summarizing capital grant acquisition, reprogramming and closeout activity for the period from January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns to the strategic goals to maintain fiscal sustainability and invest in our people and assets. The capital grant program helps to ensure reliable funding sources for maintaining the railroad in a State of Good Repair and adding capacity for increased reliability and future growth. Background The Authority applies for grant funding from federal, state, regional and local entities to deliver its rehabilitation and new capital programs. These programs are comprised of projects that rehabilitate, enhance and expand the Metrolink rail system. Grant Acquisition, Reprogramming and Closures This report focuses exclusively on grant acquisition, reprogramming and closeout activities undertaken by staff for the purposes of supporting the rehabilitation and new

171

Capital Grant Summary for January through March 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

capital programs. It discusses grants that were secured through a formal application and does not include funds applied for by other agencies and passed on to the Authority, nor does it include Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) prepared by the member agencies for their contributions to the annual budget. Grant Activity Summary for January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2018

Acquired Reprogrammed Closed

Grant Amount

$42.6 million $0 $1.2 million

Summary There were three federal grants acquired, one for $22.3 million, one for $6.6 million and one for $3.2 million, and one state grant acquired for $10.5 million

There were no funds reprogrammed

There was one state grant for $1.2 million submitted for closure

Grant Activity Discussion Acquisition With the addition of $22.3 million in a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant for preventive maintenance, $6.6 million in a FTA grant primarily for the FY18 Rehabilitation Program, $3.2 million in a FTA grant for the Positive Train Control Vital Overlay, and $10.5 million in a SB 1 State Rail Assistance grant for track and signal modernization at Los Angeles Union Station, the Authority currently manages 18 active federal grants totaling $220 million, 19 active state grants totaling $273 million and two active regional grants, totaling $92.9 million for a grand total of $585.9 million. Federal grants are summarized on Attachment A, state grants are summarized on Attachment B and regional grants are summarized on Attachment C. As reported in a separate report on this agenda, on April 26, 2018, the State announced a TIRCP award to the Authority for the SCORE program in the amount of $876 million. This is the largest single grant awarded to the Authority in its 25-year history. This action took place after the quarterly period reported here, but is important to mention here.

172

Capital Grant Summary for January through March 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

Closure Grants are closed when all projects are completed within the work performance period allowed under the grant. Authority staff submitted a state grant closeout request for grade crossings under the sealed corridor program, totaling $1.2 million. Next Steps The next report is anticipated to be provided at the end of the next quarter, if either grant award or reprogramming activity has occurred in that period. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this status report. Prepared by: Anne Louise Rice, Assistant Director, Grants Karen Sakoda, Planning Manager

Vicky Au, Grants Funding and Reporting Administrator Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development Mike Naoum III, Senior Manager, Grants Administration & Fiscal Management Jerri Stoyanoff, Grants Accountant II Dan-Thahn (Dawn) Nguyen, Accountant I Steven Hung, Financial Analyst I



173

GRANT NUMBER

GRANT

PROGRAM

CURRENT PRIMARY

GRANT USE

TOTAL GRANT

AMOUNT

AMOUNT

REIMBURSED

OR DRAWN

DOWN

REMAINING

BALANCE

CA-04-0045 Section 5309

Signal and

communication system

improvements 1,064,625$ 889,920$ 174,705$

CA-05-0205 Section 5309

Passenger car

procurement and parts 5,258,845$ 4,799,991$ 458,854$

CA-05-0223 Section 5309 Signal improvements 5,586,921$ 5,001,003$ 585,918$

CA-05-0235 Section 5309

PTC and locomotive

replacement 46,258,740$ 42,217,452$ 4,041,288$

CA-05-0258 Section 5309

Signal and

communication

improvements and

locomotive

replacement 8,891,620$ 8,370,802$ 520,818$

CA-05-0271 Section 5309

Locomotive

replacement and rail

car overhaul 21,228,712$ 19,470,022$ 1,758,690$

CA-54-0014 Section 5337

Locomotive

replacement and rail

car overhaul 31,591,144$ 23,485,280$ 8,105,864$

CA-54-0043 Section 5307

Locomotive

replacement 12,106,922$ 5,368,999$ 6,737,923$

CA-90-Y412 Section 5307

Rail procurement,

Riverside Layover

Facility 3,540,364$ 3,505,087$ 35,277$


Signal and

communication

improvements 1,606,720$ 1,557,762$ 48,958$


Locomotive

replacement and PTC 7,001,915$ 5,493,704$ 1,508,211$


Locomotive

replacement, signal

and communication

improvements 2,617,801$ 2,348,223$ 269,578$


Locomotive

replacement, signal

and communication

improvements 8,173,372$ 7,802,563$ 370,809$

CA-2017-009-01 Section 5337

FY 2017 and FY 2018

Metrolink System

Rehabilitation & Fare

Collection System

Upgrade 31,683,798$ 1,217,395$ 30,466,403$

CA-2017-085 Section 5337

Metrolink High Priority

State of Good Repair 5,465,114$ 1,587,380$ 3,877,734$

CA-2018-010

Section 5307 &

5337

Metrolink Preventive

Maintenance 22,284,474$ -$ 22,284,474$

CA-2018-000

Section 3028

(FY17 Only)

Positive Train Control

Vital Overlay 3,200,000$ -$ 3,200,000$

FR-TEC-0019-17

FY16 FRA

Approps

Positive Train Control

Interoperability 2,400,000$ 602,691$ 1,797,309$

TOTAL 219,961,087$ 133,718,274$ 86,242,813$

ATTACHMENT A

FEDERAL GRANTS

174

GRANT AWARD # E.A. #

GRANT

EXPIRATION

DATE

GRANT

PROGRAM

CURRENT PRIMARY

GRANT USE

TOTAL GRANT

AMOUNT

AMOUNT

REIMBURSED OR

DRAWN DOWN

REMAINING

BALANCE

07A0052-07-A2

R256GC

6/30/2018

(No extension

requested as

all funds will

be expended

by deadline)

Prop 1A High

Speed Rail

Commuter Rail

Connectivity

Base PTC System 22,800,000$ 22,239,478$ 560,522$

07A0052-08

R314GA 8/31/2019

Prop 1A High

Speed Rail

Commuter Rail

Connectivity

Locomotive replacement $ 60,000,000 26,471,660$ 33,528,340$

07A0052-08 A3

R314GB 1/31/2019

Prop 1A High

Speed Rail

Commuter Rail

Connectivity

Locomotive replacement $ 8,500,000 419,514$ 8,080,486$

08A0052-01R3677A 11/3/2020

Transportation

Congestion Relief

Fund

Replace Turnout at CP

Beech on San Bernardino

Line

$ 812,000 -$ 812,000$

6061-0001 992036 NONE 3/31/2019

Prop 1B Transit

Security Grant

Program

Security enhancements in

buildings and access

gates

$ 9,036,070 9,006,287$ 29,783$

6161-0001

NONE 3/31/2019

Prop 1B Transit

Security Grant

Program

Tunnel surveillance,

security enhancements in


gates

$ 8,214,070 7,470,418$ 743,652$

6761-0001 992190

NONE 7/31/2018

Prop 1A High

Speed Rail -

Intercity Rail

Connectivity

Surveillance cameras at

stations, security

enhancements in


gates

7,869,070$ 213,374$ 7,655,696$

6861-0001 992434

NONE 3/31/2019Prop 1B Intercity

Rail Funds

Security data network,

security enhancements in


gates, security

enhancements at comm

shelters and control

points

$ 6,869,070 27,623$ 6,841,447$

74A0910 992301NONE 2/28/2019

Federal Highway

Funds

San Bernardino Line

Corridor Study $ 499,749 26,976$ 472,773$

75A0435 992210

RA73BA 9/30/2019

Prop 1B Highway-

Railroad Safety

Crossing Account

Speed increases at

Control Point Soledad on


$ 2,708,000 2,289,213$ 418,787$

75A0436 992209

RA75BA 9/30/2019

Prop 1B Highway-

Railroad Safety

Crossing Account

Grade Crossing

Improvements at

Ramona Blvd in Baldwin

Park on San Bernardino

Line

$ 1,455,000 856,284$ 598,716$

75A0437 992207

RA74BA 9/30/2019

Prop 1B Highway-

Railroad Safety

Crossing Account

Grade Crossing

Improvements at

Hellman Ave in Rancho

Cucamonga on San

Bernardino Line

$ 1,790,000 929,222$ 860,778$

75A0438 992208

RA72BS 9/30/2019

Prop 1B Highway-

Railroad Safety

Crossing Account

Grade Crossing

Improvements at Citrus

Ave in Covina on San

Bernardino Line

$ 1,455,000 954,327$ 500,673$

75A0441 992114R00257 9/30/2019

Prop 1B Intercity

Rail Funds

Van Nuys Station

Platform $ 30,500,000 2,244,402$ 28,255,598$

FY08-FY17 PTMISEA

NONE 6/30/19-6/30/2022

Prop 1B Public

Transportation,

Modernization,

Improvement and

Service

Enhancement

Account

Locomotive replacement

and passenger car

overhaul

$ 55,903,509 38,833,799$ 17,069,710$

STATE GRANTSATTACHMENT B

175

15-16 LCTOP 992132

NONE 6/30/2019

State Cap and

Trade Low

Carbon

Transportation

Operations

Program

Tier 4 locomotive (all-

share expansion) $ 2,051,727 1,259,000$ 792,727$

16-17 LCTOP 992387

NONE 5/27/2019

State Cap and

Trade Low

Carbon

Transportation

Operations

Program

Ticket vending machines $ 938,926 -$ 938,926$

CALSTA SRA FY18-20

NONE 1/30/2021

State Cap and

Trade Low

Carbon

Transportation

Operations

Program

Track and signal upgrades

at Los Angeles Union

Station

$ 10,500,000 -$ 10,500,000$

TICRP 992205

R341GA 10/15/2018

State Cap and

Trade Transit and

Intercity Rail

Capital Program

$ 41,181,000 -$ 41,181,000$

TOTAL 273,083,191$ 113,241,578$ 159,841,613$

AQMD MOYER FY11-12 13441 6/30/2038 $ 34,660,000 -$ 34,660,000$

AQMD MOYER FY11-12 134411 6/30/2038 $ 17,340,000 -$ 17,340,000$

AQMD MOYER FY14-15 16056/130561 10/30/2038 $ 22,850,000 -$ 22,850,000$

AQMD MOYER FY15-16 160562 9/15/2038 $ 9,000,000 9,000,000$

AQMD MOYER FY15-16 160563 9/15/2038 $ 9,000,000 9,000,000$

TOTAL 92,850,000$ -$ 92,850,000$

GRAND TOTAL STATE AND REGIONAL $ 365,933,191 $ 113,241,578 $ 252,691,613

Note: $10.5M approved under CalSTA SRA grant is paid on a quarterly basis, the first payment received was for a total of $0.6 million

REGIONAL GRANTS

Tier 4 LocomotivesCarl Moyer Funds

ATTACHMENT C

176


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program Grant

Application Status Update Issue Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) grant program submittal. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to retain and grow ridership by pursuing funding that would allow more frequent and reliable service on the Metrolink system and increase regional mobility on by enhancing transit connections throughout the network. Background Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) Overview: On October 13, 2017, the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) released its 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) guidelines for a five-year program of projects for the programming period FY2018-23. TIRCP was created to provide grants from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, as authorized by Senate Bill (SB) 862, SB 9 and most recently, SB 1. The primary goals of the TIRCP are to reduce greenhouse gas emission; expand and improve transit to increase ridership, integrate rail services across the state and enhance transit safety.

177

2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program Grant Application Status Update Transmittal Date: May 4 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

The State programmed $4.3 billion in TIRCP funding over a 10-year period FY19-FY28, with $2.6 billion in the first five years, FY19-FY23, and $1.7 billion in the second five-year period, FY24-FY28. This initial amount is anticipated to be supplemented by additional revenues in two-year cycles, and program guidelines allow for multi-year agreements. Authority's Application to TIRCP Program: As previously reported, staff provided updates on the Authority’s integrated service and capital plan as well as its intent to pursue increased frequency of service through capital investments provided by grant opportunities at the November 17, 2017, January 12, 2018 and February 23, 2018 meetings. The package submitted for TIRCP grant award on January 11, 2018, is called the Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) Program and features modernizing and integrating capacity improvements, focusing on the five-county regional rail system including Metrolink’s regional rail network and benefitting all shared-track operators, passenger and freight and connecting modes. SCORE includes: Construct double tracking and siding extensions in key segments of the system

that resolve chokepoints and unlock capacity for additional service throughout the network on all lines

Construct additional main lines, including the fourth main track between Los Angeles and Fullerton and the third main track between Fullerton and San Bernardino on the BNSF Railway (BNSF) owned track

Construct capacity increases at Los Angeles Union Station (LINK US), including loop and run-through tracks, signal and communications modernization and substantial passenger amenities

Add, reconfigure and/or modernize key stations, including Vista Canyon (Santa Clarita), Simi Valley, Irvine, Riverside and Moreno Valley

Modernize Metrolink fleet

Restructure existing maintenance facilities, Central Maintenance Facility and Eastern Area Maintenance Facility, and construct new ones, including the Irvine Maintenance Facility

Construct selected grade improvements and grade separations

Develop complementary system enhancements, pre-construction studies and planning and design.

Please see Attachment A for a summary of the SCORE program.

178


The Authority’s request for the 2018 TIRCP call was $3.6 billion, which is the amount needed to deliver the first five years of the 10-year SCORE program. It also included some elements of the second five-year component of the program. These elements, primarily design and studies, are necessary to start now in order to deliver the full SCORE program by the 2028 Los Angeles Summer Olympics. The grantor asked that the Authority provide the entire SCORE program in this call and while noting that additional funds will be made available in future calls planned on a two year cycle starting in FY20. The development of the projects in SCORE was coordinated with member agencies, as well as stakeholders and partners. The Authority was the main applicant with BNSF Railway, Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency, California High Speed Rail Authority as co-applicants. The SCORE program, which meets all TIRCP objectives by modernizing and improving passenger rail frequencies and protecting goods movement growth on public and private shared tracks, while improving connectivity among high-speed rail service, Metro rail services and bus service throughout the region. These quantum improvements are achieved through delivery of the entire SCORE program, including three mega-projects: LINK US run-through and loop tracks and constructing the 4th main between Los Angeles and Fullerton and the 3rd main track between Fullerton and San Bernardino. SCORE Program Grant Results On April 26, 2018, the State announced a TIRCP award to the Authority for the SCORE program in the amount of $876 million. This is the largest single grant awarded to the Authority in its 25-year history. Please see Attachment B for the summary of all projects receiving TIRCP funds. For more details on each project, please see Attachment C. Notably, the Authority is called out as a planning integration partner and or project beneficiary in three other TIRCP awards: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro); LOSSAN North; and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). On April 25, 2018, the State announced awards in two other SB 1 funded programs that also support the SCORE program. Those awards total $224.5 million, representing 13% of the total $304 million in Local Partnerships Program and $1.4 billion in Trade Corridor Enhancement Program. Table 1 summarizes the awards.

179


Table 1: SB 1 Grant Awards that Support the SCORE Program1

The California Transportation Commission is scheduled to endorse these awards at its upcoming meetings on May 16 and June 28, 2018. Next Steps Staff will meet with CalSTA to determine the slate of projects that will be funded within the grant award. Consultations with the member agencies will occur following direction from CalSTA. The Board will be presented with the Authority's final project list as approved by CalSTA. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this status report. Staff will recommend amendment to the FY19 budget to reflect the projects included the TIRCP award as necessary.

1 Route 34/Rice Avenue, Montebello Blvd., and Turnbull Canyon Road grade separations projects were not part of the original SCORE project list but benefit regional rail projects in Southern California. Only the awarded amounts are totaled as they contribute to the overall SCORE program.

Program Line County

Total Project Cost

($M) Request ($M) Award ($M)

Transit and Intercity Rail Program

Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion

(SCORE) Systemwide Systemwide 10,125.30$ 3,685.62$ $875.70

Local Partnership Program

Vista Canyon Metrolink Station Antelope Valley Los Angeles 28.21$ 28.20$ 8.90$

Trade Corridors Enhancement Program

Rosecrans Marquardt Grade Crossing Orange County, 91/Perris Valley Los Angeles 155.30$ 9.00$ 9.00$

Eitwanda Ave Grade Separation San Bernardino San Bernardino 60.00$ 60.00$ 60.00$

Rte 34/Rice Ave Grade Separation Ventura County Ventura 79.19$ 68.61$ 68.61$

Montebello Blvd Grade Separation Riverside Los Angeles 128.61$ 49.00$ 49.00$

Turnbull Canyon Road Grade Separation Riverside Los Angeles 86.25$ 29.00$ 29.00$

Subtotal 215.61$ 215.61$

Grand Total $1,100.21

Note: TIRCP also awarded Metro $1B, LOSSAN North $148 M and SBCTA $30M. Each of these three awards identify integration planning activities with

with and benefits to Metrolink

180


Prepared by: Anne Louise Rice, Assistant Director, Grants Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development


181

Project Line / Location From To2019-2023 (Early Action & Early

Completion Projects)Cost 2024-2028 (Midterm Projects) Cost

Grand Total For

10 Years

Line Capacity Enhancements $2,788,756,192 $2,088,716,642 $4,877,472,834

San Bernardino Line Los Angeles Union

Station

San Bernardino Early SB Service Package (Hourly

Bi-Directional + 3/hr Peak)

$198,089,292 $0

Ventura County Line / LOSSAN

North

Burbank Junction Moorpark Early VC Service Package (30 min

Bi-Directional to Moorpark)

$164,724,733 Long-term VC Line Package $242,709,847

Antelope Valley Line Burbank Junction Lancaster Early AV Service Package (30 min,

Bi-Directional to Santa Clarita + AV

Express)

$502,832,437 Long-term AV Line Package $257,254,381

South Orange County Line Fullerton Junction SD County Line Reconfigure Irvine Station $81,193,608 Third Track Tustin - Laguna

Niguel), CP Songs, Olive Junction

$114,041,310

91/Perris Valley Riverside Station South Perris $0 Perris 2nd Main $21,917,783

CMF North Access CMF Los Angeles

Union Station

New CMF Access Track $12,560,974

LOSSAN North - Core Burbank Junction Los Angeles

Union Station

Burbank Junction + Env / Design of

BUR to Union Station

$8,218,504 HSR Compatible Tracks $0

LOSSAN South Los Angeles Union

Station

Fullerton

Junction

Soto to Commerce, Fullerton

Junction

$1,755,880,970 4th Main Track $886,813,061

91/Perris Valley / IEOC Line Fullerton Junction San Bernardino Riverside Station Improvements $65,255,674 3rd Main Track $565,980,261

Link Union Station Phases 1,2,3 + 2 Run-Through

Tracks

$950,398,000 Remaining Buildout $1,145,000,000

$2,095,398,000

Fleet Early SB, Early AV, and Early VC

Service Increment

$38,327,003 2023 - 2028 Increment $1,215,036,200

$1,253,363,204

Line Reliability Enhancements $458,138,242 $0 $458,138,242

San Bernardino Los Angeles Union

Station

San Bernardino Lone Hill - White, Rialto - Rancho $233,853,388 $0

Ventura County Line / LOSSAN

North

Burbank Junction Moorpark Raymer - Bernson $181,070,061 $0

91/Perris Valley Riverside Station South Perris Moreno Valley / March Field

Station and Track

$43,214,793 $0

Maintenance Facilities $410,613,383 $613,725,745 $1,024,339,127

Irvine Storage Tracks $58,339,970 Full Buildout $153,211,685

EMF Full Build Out $74,174,223 $0

Santa Clarita Early Env, Design, Property $55,619,838 Full Buildout $153,504,687

Lancaster Early Env, Design, Property $55,619,838 $0

Moorpark Early Env, Design, Property $55,619,838 Buildout $153,504,687

East Ventura Early Env, Design, Property $55,619,838 Buildout $0

South Perris Early Env, Design, Property $55,619,838 Buildout $153,504,687

Grade Separations $143,700,000 $258,277,727 $401,977,727

LOSSAN North - Core Burbank Junction Los Angeles

Union Station

Doran Street - Broadway/Brazil

Grade Separation

$83,700,000

San Bernardino Los Angeles Union

Station

San Bernardino Etiwanda Ave Grade Separation $60,000,000

LOSSAN South Los Angeles Union

Station

Fullerton

Junction

Pioneer Blvd & Norwalk/Los

Nietos Grade Separations

$258,277,727

Complementary System Enhancement Projects $14,570,686 $0 $14,570,686

SB Line -- Express Enabling

Projects (incl. I-10 Bypass)

Los Angeles Union

Station

San Bernardino Operations Planning, Railroad

Negotiations, Project Study Report

$695,432 TBD TBD

91/Perris Valley Riverside Station South Perris Initial design and Cost Estimate $360,595 TBD TBD

Outer VC Line / LOSSAN North Ventura Moorpark Operations Planning, Railroad


$540,892 TBD TBD

Riverside Line Los Angeles Union

Station

Riverside

Station

Operations Planning, Railroad


$540,892 TBD TBD

Ontario Airport Connection Operations Planning, Railroad


$695,432 TBD TBD

New Stations Initial Station Siting for Infill

Stations

$507,500 TBD TBD

Electrification / Rail Fleet

Upgrades

Rail Vehicle Technology Review,

Analysis of Additional Station

Rqmts, Fleet Sizing, Facility Rqmts,

Rail Fleet Plan Update

$927,243 TBD TBD

Next Gen Higher Capacity Signal

System

Project study, design, and testing $10,302,700 TBD TBD

TOTAL PROGRAM $4,804,503,505 $5,320,756,314 $10,125,259,819

ATTACHMENT ASCORE PROJECT SUMMARY - Year of Expenditure $

182

Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program 2018 Awards

Page 1 of 6

# Agency Project Title Key Project Elements TIRCP Funds (FY18/19 to

FY22/23)

Multi-Year Funding

Agreement (FY23/24 to

FY27/28)

Total Project Cost

(FY18/19 to FY27/28)

1

Alameda Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit)

Purchase Zero Emission High Capacity Buses to Support Transbay Tomorrow and Clean Corridors Plan

Deploys 45 zero-emission buses to support the Transbay Tomorrow and Clean Corridors project, primarily on the MacArthur-Grand corridor, and to add capacity on the Bay Bridge Transbay network.

$14,000,000 $67,145,000

2

Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)

#Electrify Anaheim: Changing the Transit Paradigm in Southern California

Deploys 40 zero-emission electric buses to double service levels on up to 8 routes, add 2 new routes, and implement a new circulator/on-demand first-mile/last-mile service. Also includes construction of a new maintenance facility with solar canopy structures.

$28,617,000 $45,201,000

3

Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA) and Long Beach Transit (LBT)

From the Desert to the Sea: Antelope Valley Transit Authority and Long Beach Transit Zero Emission Bus Initiative

Deploys 7 zero-emission battery electric buses and upgrades charging infrastructure serving AVTA local and commuter bus routes, bringing the entire AVTA system to fully electric status (the first in the nation) by 2019. Deploys 5 zero-emission battery electric buses and related infrastructure for Long Beach Transit services. Increased frequency on up to 5 local and community transit routes operated by LBT.

$13,156,000 $18,581,000

4 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

The Transbay Corridor Core Capacity Program

Deploys 272 new rail vehicles and completes a communication-based train control system (CBTC), allowing an increase in train frequency to 30 trains per hour through the Transbay tunnel as well as an increase in train length to 10 car trains during peak hours to alleviate crowding. Allows for over 200,000 new riders per day to ride BART.

$144,490,000 $174,110,000 $3,409,000,000

5

Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA)

The Northern California Corridor Enhancement Program

Rail projects to increase ridership by moving Capitol Corridor trains to a faster Oakland to San Jose corridor, saving 10-15 minutes compared to 2018 travel times. Also funds statewide service and ticket integration, providing opportunities for riders on at least 10 rail and transit systems to plan travel and purchase tickets in a single, seamless transaction.

$80,340,000 $275,041,000

Attachment B

183


Page 2 of 6

6 City of Fresno Southwest Fresno Community Connector

Purchase of 6 zero-emission battery-electric buses and the construction of charging infrastructure to allow extension of 15-min service connecting Southwest Fresno to the northern part of Fresno and creating a new route providing access to job centers.

$7,798,000 $8,638,000

7 City of Los Angeles (LA DOT)

Los Angeles City: Leading the Transformation to Zero-Emission Electric Bus Transit Service

Acquire 112 zero-emission buses to replace existing propane vehicles and add new vehicles, in order to increase frequency of all existing DASH routes to 15-minute service and add 4 new routes, serving communities throughout the City of Los Angeles as recommended in the comprehensive Transit Service Analysis.

$36,104,000 $102,790,000

8 City of Santa Monica

Electric Blue: Electrification of City of Santa Monica's Big Blue Bus

Purchase 10 zero-emission battery electric vehicles to add new express service and increase ridership on route 7, which connects Santa Monica with the Purple and Expo Metrorail lines and Downtown LA.

$3,050,000 $9,698,000

9

Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA)

Dublin/Pleasanton Capacity Improvement and Congestion Reduction Program

Increase BART ridership through construction of a new multi-level parking structure to create over 500 additional parking spaces, including prioritized vanpool parking, at the Dublin-Pleasanton BART station.

$20,500,000 $34,500,000

10

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro)

Los Angeles Region Transit System Integration and Modernization Program of Projects

Capital improvements that will broaden and modernize transit connectivity in Los Angeles County and the Southern California region by advancing new transit corridors simultaneously: Gold Line Light Rail Extension to Montclair, East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, West Santa Ana Light Rail Transit Corridor, Green Line Light Rail Extension to Torrance, and the Orange/Red Line to Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Connector (North Hollywood to Pasadena). Includes support for the development of a Vermont Transit Corridor Project and regional network integration with Metrolink, Amtrak, and additional transit services. Projects will add over 120,00 additional riders per day by 2028.

$330,200,000 $758,299,000 $5,767,700,000

184


Page 3 of 6

11

Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN)

All Aboard 2018: Transforming SoCal Rail Travel

Improve on-time performance and rail corridor capacity for Pacific Surfliner and Coaster trains by investing in signal optimization, a more robust capital maintenance program and new right of way fencing. These projects prepare the corridor for higher frequency services on the Pacific Surfliner and COASTER. Also includes study of San Diego maintenance/layover facility relocation.

$40,412,000 $65,570,000

12

Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN)

Building Up: LOSSAN North Improvement Program

Investments that increase Pacific Surfliner service to Santa Barbara from five to six round trips, and to San Luis Obispo from two to three round trips, and also improves travel time, reliability and safety for both Metrolink and the Pacific Surfliner in the Los Angeles to San Luis Obispo corridor.

$147,930,000 $201,669,000

13

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB)

Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project

Supports all-electric passenger service on the Caltrain system and increases the ridership capacity by expanding electric multiple units (EMUs) rail cars under procurement. Lengthens platforms to accommodate longer trains. Additional funding also improves wayside bicycle facilities and expands onboard Wi-Fi.

$123,182,000 $41,340,000 $203,638,000

14 Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT)

Accelerating Rail Modernization and Expansion in the Capital Region

Expanded service to Folsom. Combines with previous TIRCP award to allow for 15 min service during weekdays, plus 3 peak express trains in the peak hour direction. Begins initial effort to replace the existing fleet with low-floor rail vehicles (LRVs). Includes funding 20 expansion and replacement vehicles and an investment in the highest priority platform conversions to allow efficient and accessible boarding to the new vehicles.

$40,535,000 $23,815,000 $144,350,000

15

San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA)

Diesel Multiple Unit Vehicle to Zero- or Low-Emission Vehicle Conversion and West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit

Pilot effort to develop a Zero Emission Multiple Unit (ZEMU) train set that would operate on the Redlands Passenger Rail Corridor, along with conversion of Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) rail vehicles used in the Redlands Passenger Rail service, creating the zero emission fleet operations. This conversion includes statewide testing that could impact future equipment acquisition for other rail services, like Metrolink, statewide.

$30,000,000 $306,240,000

185


Page 4 of 6

16

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

Ride Between the Line: Enhancing Access to Transit in San Diego

Construction of multi-modal ADA compliant transit islands including rapid boarding stations along 2.3 miles of University Avenue in the City of San Diego for faster transit services, increased ridership and safer movements for pedestrians and bicyclists.

$5,763,000 $7,204,000

17

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS)

Blue Line Rail Corridor Transit Enhancements

Increased ridership through investments allowing Blue Line trolley frequency increases and the addition of a new Rapid Bus service connecting Imperial Beach and the Otay Mesa International Border Crossing for 15-min frequency to the Blue Line Trolley, also includes supplemental funding to acquire eleven, 60-foot articulated zero-emission buses, as well as station improvements.

$40,098,000 $50,200,000

18

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA)

Transit Capacity Expansion Program

Increases ridership and reduces greenhouse gas emissions by funding an additional 8 zero-emissions expansion vehicles for the Muni light rail system, bringing the total expansion fleet to 50 vehicles. These vehicles provide for more frequent and longer trains, reducing crowding.

$26,867,000 $287,309,000

19

San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA) & San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC)

Valley Rail

Creates new round trips between Fresno, Merced and Sacramento on the Amtrak San Joaquin line, initiates phased service expansion on the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) train service beginning with 1 train originating in Sacramento and connecting to San Jose during the peak period. Creates new ACE service out of Ceres with zero-emission feeder bus connections to Merced that will connect with San Jose and Sacramento. These services will connect Merced, Ceres, Modesto, Stockton and Sacramento, as well as between Fresno and Sacramento and allow for ridership growth. Includes numerous new stations, and improved connectivity to Bay Area and Bakersfield services.

$426,700,000 $73,800,000 $904,600,000

186


Page 5 of 6

20

San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans)

SamTrans Express Bus Pilot

Introduce 4 limited stop express bus routes along US-101 in San Mateo, Santa Clara, and San Francisco Counties, using 37 zero-emission vehicles, for reduced travel times and improved reliability of operations. Proposed routes include San Bruno to Sunnyvale, Foster City to San Francisco, Redwood Shores to San Francisco, and San Mateo to San Francisco. Creates 15-minute peak-period service along US-101 in conjunction with the completion of the managed lanes project in late 2021, and includes service to the Transbay Terminal. Service will be integrated with Caltrain and AC Transit service.

$15,000,000 $36,503,000

21

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)

Coastal Express/Pacific Surfliner Peak Hour Service Expansion and Integration Project

Complements rail service for commuters between Ventura and Santa Barbara counties by enhancing bus services that will allow seamless use of both rail and transit service to commute to employment centers in Goleta from Oxnard and Ventura in Ventura County with 5 zero-emission coach buses. Improvements will result in a travel time reduction of 45 minutes while providing a service extension to Oxnard.

$9,600,000 $10,175,000

22

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)

Goleta Train Depot

Improves transit facility for bus, train, bicycle and pedestrians by constructing a modern, multi-modal train station that provides a safe, functional and inviting facility that accommodates improved bus transit service and shuttles from Santa Barbara Airport and the University of California Santa Barbara.

$13,009,000 $19,709,000

23

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (SCVTA)

VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Extension, Phase II

Extends BART into downtown San Jose and out to Santa Clara, creating 4 new stations. Will serve over 52,000 new riders per day in 2035 and more than 100,000 by 2075 while increasing connectivity to Caltrain, Amtrak, and transit services at San Jose Diridon station.

$238,360,000 $491,640,000 $4,779,935,000

187


Page 6 of 6

24

Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA)

North State Intercity Bus System

New service between the North State and Sacramento, through intercity bus service using 7 battery electric coaches, with connections to the San Joaquin and Capitol Corridor train services, and the Sacramento international Airport. Funds the I-5 Backbone Service (Redding-Red Bluff-Williams-SMF Airport-Sac) and the North Valley Feeder (Red Bluff-Corning-Orland-Willows-Williams).

$8,641,000 $9,516,000

25

Solano Transportation Authority (STA)

Solano Regional Transit Improvements

Increases frequency and reduces travel time on a restructured, zero-emission, electrified SolanoExpress system connecting Solano County to Sacramento and a number of Bay Area communities including the Walnut Creek and El Cerrito del Norte BART stations, as well as the Vallejo Ferry Terminal.

$10,788,000 $24,204,000

26

Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART)

SMART Larkspur to Windsor Corridor

Completes critical rail segments extending rail service to Larkspur with its regional ferry service and northward to Windsor. Also provides for project development efforts related to the extension of service to Healdsburg and Cloverdale.

$21,000,000 $144,100,000

27

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA - Metrolink)

Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE)

Delivers more frequent, more reliable rail services throughout Southern California, with station reconfiguration with run-though tracks for Metrolink and Pacific Surfliner trains at Los Angeles Union Station to improve train movement through the station, and 30-min services on multiple Metrolink corridors in the LA Basin. Includes significant investments to improve the frequency and performance of rail services to Moorpark, Santa Clarita, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange County. Part of a high-performance long-range vision.

$763,712,000 $111,996,000 $

2,049,700,000

28

Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC)

Rail Extension to Monterey County

Extension of 2 round trip passenger rail services from Gilroy to Salinas, including a layover facility and positive train control. Adds 95,000 new riders in the first year, connecting Salinas to the Silicon Valley.

$10,148,000 $81,519,000

TOTALS $2,650,000,000 $1,675,000,000 $19,064,435,000

188

1

Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program

Third Round Selected Projects – Project Detail Summary

April 26, 2018

Total Funding Awarded:

$2.65 billion of FY18-19 through FY22-23 of SB1 and GGRF Funding

$1.675 billion of Additional Multi-Year Funding Agreement Funding

28 projects recommended for funding, with budgets totaling over $19 billion

Estimated 31,942,000 metric tons of CO2e (MTCO2e) reduced

26 of 28 projects are located within disadvantaged communities or low-income

communities and contribute direct, meaningful and assured benefits to disadvantaged

communities, low-income communities or low-income households

(AB 1550 categories are collectively referred to as Priority Populations by the California Air Resources

Board in their Draft Revised Funding Guidelines, released in April 2018. Because of this term was not

used at the time of guidelines development and the call for projects, this document retains the use of

the term AB 1550 community benefits and other similar terms.)

Attachment C

189

2

1. Alameda Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit)

Project: Zero Emission High Capacity Buses to Support Transbay Tomorrow and Clean

Corridors Plan

Award: $14,000,000

Total Budget: $67,145,000

Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions 14,000 MTCO2e

(Additional project benefits accrue to the Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher

Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $7,425,000 to the project)

Award contingent on regional funding measure passage or other non-TIRCP funds of an

equivalent amount.

Acquires 45 zero-emission buses (including up to 5 for support service integration) and

associated infrastructure to transform the MacArthur-Grand Corridor Local and Transbay

services, and improve network connectivity with Amtrak services at Emeryville. Converts

one of the highest ridership corridors serving many AB1550 community members to fully-

electric service, allowing significant reduction in corridor emissions. This corridor was one of

4 top corridors identified in the AC Transit Clean Corridors Plan. Project award includes

$500,000 of funding to address network integration opportunities with Amtrak rail and bus

services at Emeryville and with other transit providers at Transbay Terminal (including the

SamTrans Express Bus Pilot), as well as to enhance AB 1550 benefits of the service.

This project is expected to be coordinated with other SB 1 funding, including the California

Transportation Commission’s Local Partnership Program, in order to maximize project

benefits, and was rated and selected on the basis of that coordination.

Key Project Ratings:

Reduced Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Medium-High

Increased Ridership Medium

Service Integration Medium

Improve Safety Medium

AB 1550 Community Benefits Medium-High

Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration Medium

Project Readiness High

Funding Leverage Medium-High

Attachment C

190

3

2. Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)

Project: #Electrify Anaheim: Changing the Transit Paradigm in Southern California

Award: $28,617,000


Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions: 61,000 MTCO2e



Deploys 40 zero-emission electric buses and 10 zero-emission micro-cruisers to double

service levels on 8 routes, add 2 new routes, and implement a new circulator/on-demand

first-mile/last-mile service in Downtown Anaheim. Also includes construction of a new

maintenance facility with solar canopy structures, capable of charging a significant portion

of the fleet with renewable energy. Project includes a public-private partnership that

includes a trip-planning and ticketing application development to increase regional visitor

use of the regional rail and ATN transit system. This component will be coordinated with

statewide integrated travel efforts. Increased service levels benefit passengers on

connecting rail services at the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center and

increase network ridership. Project leads to a 57% zero emission ATN fleet by 2020. Provides

frequent service in corridors that serve AB 1550 community residents.


Reduced GHG Reductions Medium-High

Increased Ridership Medium-High

Service Integration Medium-High




Project Readiness Medium-High

Funding Leverage Medium

Attachment C

191

4

3. Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA and Long Beach Transit (LBT)

Project: From the Desert to the Sea: Antelope Valley Transit Authority and Long Beach

Transit Zero Emission Bus Initiative

Award: $13,156,000


Estimated GHG Reductions 23,000 MTCO2e


Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $2,127,000 to the project.)

Deploys 7 zero-emission battery electric buses and upgrades charging infrastructure serving

AVTA local and commuter bus routes, bringing the entire AVTA system to fully electric status

(the first in the country) by the end of 2019. Converts local rural routes 50, 51, and 52, and

commuter route 790 (connecting the Palmdale Transportation Center with the Newhall

Metrolink Station), to zero emission status.

Deploys 5 zero-emission battery electric buses and related infrastructure for Long Beach

Transit (LBT) services. Buses provide cleaner and more frequent service on LBT routes 22,

45/46, 170, 180, and 190. Each route will receive one additional bus in order to enhance

frequency, and all routes provide improved and extended feeder bus service to either the

Metro Rail Green Line or Blue Line, including from Downey (a 2.2 mile extension of route 22

previously provided with operations funding by the Low Carbon Transit Operations

Program).

The Long Beach Transit STAR Initiative, advanced in part by this award, provides a

transformative change to the route structure within the LBT service area by providing

increased frequency of service – both weekdays and weekends, expanded service in

unserved and underserved areas, and modified service times – both earlier and later, as well

as improved connections and enhanced bus stop amenities. By extending routes and

strengthening connections to both the Blue Line and Green Line, this award will provide

customers in disadvantaged communities with more and faster travel options to further

destinations such as downtown Los Angeles.

Project award includes $250,000 of funding to address network integration opportunities

(with Metrolink, Amtrak and Los Angeles Metro) as well as to enhance AB 1550 benefits of

the service.

Long Beach Transit is also the beneficiary of additional SB 1 funding allowing it to expand its

electric bus fleet, with $504,501 being awarded from SB 1 2017-18 State Transit Assistance

Attachment C

192

5

State of Good Repair funds in support of the purchase of 10 zero-emission battery electric

buses.







Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration Medium-High



4. Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

Project: The Transbay Corridor Core Capacity Program

Award: $144,490,000

Multi Year Funding Agreement $174,110,000

[Total Award: $318,600,000]

Total Budget: $3,409,000,000

Estimated GHG Reductions 4,272,000 MTCO2e


equivalent amount.

This project also has a Full Funding Grant Agreement contingency related to future federal

funding through the Core Capacity Program of the Federal Transit Administration.

The Core Capacity Program will allow the number of trains operating through the Transbay

Tube to increase from 23 to 30 per hour, and peak hour train lengths to be increased from

an average of 8.9 to 10 cars, maximizing throughput capacity in the most heavily used part

of the BART system.

This project installs a new communication-based train control (CBTC) system, which

increases the frequency and capacity of trains operating on the system by reducing

headways. The CBTC system will replace the existing train control system originally built 40

years ago and reaching the end of its useful life. The new CBTC system uses proven

technology already used in similar systems worldwide and will help relieve overcrowding by

increasing the frequency of service on the most congested segment of the system, which in

Attachment C

193

6

turn improves safety on loading platforms. Existing ridership on the Transbay Corridor

exceeds capacity during peak hours and the overall increase in peak hour capacity created

by the Core Capacity Program is estimated to be 45%.

The funding in this program is sufficient to procure approximately 272 new rail vehicles,

which contributes to the overall goal of expanding the rail car fleet by 306 cars. The

expansion of the rail car fleet will allow for trains of 10 cars, creating additional capacity in

the system. In conjunction, these components will relieve current levels of crowding during

peak hours while creating the opportunity for ridership growth while providing improved

service to residents of disadvantaged communities through increased frequency and

capacity of trains.

This project is recommended for a multi-year funding agreement due to its extended

timeline for delivery. Federal funding priorities across multiple Bay Area projects may result

in adjustment of TIRCP award levels among highly-rated Bay Area projects.


Reduced Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions High

Increased Ridership High


Improve Safety High




Funding Leverage High

5. Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA)

Project: Northern California Corridor Enhancement Program

Award: $ 80,340,000



The project provides funding to reroute Capitol Corridor services between Oakland and

Newark, and to establish a new connection to Dumbarton Express Bus service, as well as

employer operated bus shuttles, at the foot of the Dumbarton Bridge in Alameda County.

Reduces Oakland Coliseum to San Jose journey times by about 13 minutes, providing key

service differentiation and access to new markets in the congested corridor. The project also

benefits from the prior TIRCP award in the Travel Time Savings project, which will deliver

Attachment C

194

7

additional time savings between Newark and San Jose in 2018. The project also expands

park and ride capacity to the benefit of Capitol Corridor and Dumbarton Bridge services.

In addition, the project invests in statewide service and ticket integration pursued through

the next phases of the statewide Integrated Travel Program, providing opportunities for

riders on at least 10 rail and transit systems to plan travel and purchase tickets in a single,

seamless transaction. This investment will take place over about five years, and will lead to

significant improvements in ridership, efficiency and connectivity on rail and transit systems

across California by providing a single, unified mechanism by which customers can travel on

multiple modes of transport. It will be developed with a framework that allows for rapid

expansion following the pilot program to interested public and private sector partners.

The corridor also benefits from the SB 1-funded enhancement of the State Transportation

Improvement Program capacity, with $20 million of funding programmed by the California

Transportation Commission for Coast Subdivision Rail Corridor Improvements in March of

2018 (implemented by Caltrans). This funding includes the installation of Positive Train

Control in the Coast Subdivision corridor, enhancing safety for all trains in the corridor.

Project award includes $2 million of funding to address network integration opportunities

among the East Bay-Altamont-Dumbarton services (including connectivity in the vicinity of

Shinn Junction and connections to bus services on the Dumbarton Bridge), service and ticket

integration with agencies not specifically receiving a TIRCP award (including the San Joaquin

Regional Transit District), integration opportunities with the Second Transbay Crossing,

integration with statewide fleet planning, and to enhance AB 1550 benefits of the Capitol

Corridor projects.

Greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits are expected to further increase following the

connectivity work completed in this effort, including increased benefits from improved

connectivity with Stanford University shuttles and AC Transit services.

This project is coordinated with significant contributions from non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1

revenue sources. These include the Caltrans award of a FY 2017-18 SB 1 Adaptation Planning

Grant of $250,000 to CCJPA to develop a Proposed Alternatives Study to design and evaluate

feasible alternatives for the railroad tracks in the Alviso Wetlands. Corridor planning in the

Bay Area will also be coordinated with the results of the Metropolitan Transportation

Commission’s Goods Movement Investment Strategy, which received a $44,000 grant award

from the FY 2017-18 SB 1 Sustainable Communities Formula Grant Program. Finally, in

January of 2018, CalSTA approved $7,839,471 of funding from the State Rail Assistance

Program for the CCJPA’s investments in project development related to this project.

A number of California Transportation Commission-recommended SB1 programming actions

would also make significant additional improvements to the performance of the Bay Area

Attachment C

195

8

Capitol Corridor route. These recommendations include $175 million of Trade Corridor

Enhancement Program (TCEP) funding for the 7th Street Grade Separation in Oakland, and a

$4.2 million TCEP investment in the Emeryville Quiet Zone project.

$7.98 million of SB 1 Local Partnership Program Formulaic Funding was also awarded to the

7th Street Grade Separation East Segment by the California Transportation Commission in

March of 2018.




Service Integration High

Improve Safety High

AB 1550 Community Benefits Medium

Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration High



6. City of Fresno

Project: Southwest Community Connector

Award: $7,798,000




Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $840,000 to the project)

This project includes the purchase of six long-range battery electric buses for cleaner and

more frequent service on routes 29 and 38, allowing service frequencies every 15 minutes

throughout the day when current services generally exceed 30 minutes. These routes will

allow direct access from the southwest to northern part of Fresno, and provides new

connectivity to serve future job, shopping and educational centers in addition to AB 1550

communities.

This project is coordinated with the recent Transformative Climate Communities grant

award of $70 million to the City of Fresno by the Strategic Growth Council to provide

additional community benefits.

Attachment C

196

9

The City of Fresno is also the beneficiary of additional SB 1 funding allowing it to expand its

electric bus fleet, with $1,060,828 being awarded from SB 1 2017-18 State Transit Assistance

State of Good Repair funds for the purchase of 1 replacement bus.

This project also provides geographic diversity to the state’s transit investments.


Reduced Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Medium




AB 1550 Community Benefits High


Project Readiness Medium

Funding Leverage Medium-Low

7. City of Los Angeles (LA DOT)

Project: Leading the Transformation to Zero-Emission Electric Bus Transit Service

Award: $36,104,000




Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $16,240,000 to the project; the Low Carbon

Transit Operations Program, contributing $919,350; and the Transformative Climate

Communities program, contributing $1,713,015)

Increases ridership and reduces greenhouse gas emissions through investments that

support a shift to zero emission technology while improving service frequency on all existing

DASH routes, spanning 28 communities throughout the City of Los Angeles, and offering

expanded service in the underserved San Fernando Valley. Purchases 112 zero-emission

battery electric buses, including replacing existing propane vehicles and adding new vehicles

to the existing fleet, in order to increase frequency to 15-minute service on all existing DASH

routes. Increased frequency will be implemented through a combination of modifying

existing routes and adding four new routes that will improve access to key activity centers,

network hubs, as well as first-mile last-mile connections and support improved regional rail

and bus connectivity.

Improves local and regional system integration through improved connectivity with multiple

rail and transit systems, as well as improvements in existing and future connectivity with

Attachment C

197

10

expanding LA Metro Rail, Bus Rapid Transit, and other bus services. Improves geographic

equity through reductions in air pollutants, improving public health and decreasing health

disparities experienced by disadvantaged and low-income communities.

Includes the acquisition of 56 chargers and facility upgrades at Sylmar and Washington Yards

to support electric buses. Leverages Transformative Climate Communities grant funding

which will support expansion of economic opportunities through education and training,

including support for local businesses in the Watts community. Supports sustainable

housing and land use development while providing meaningful benefits to disadvantaged

and low-income communities that will improve mobility and access through expanded and

enhanced service.

This project is coordinated with the recent Transformative Climate Communities grant

award of $35 million to the Watts neighborhood of the City of Los Angeles by the Strategic

Growth Council to provide additional community benefits.


and to enhance AB 1550 benefits. Project is also recommended for technical assistance to

enhance AB 1550 benefits.


Reduced GHG Reductions High








8. City of Santa Monica

Project: Electric Blue: Electrification of City of Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus

Award: $3,050,000





Attachment C

198

11

Increases ridership and reduces greenhouse gas emissions through investments that

support a transition to cleaner technology and implementation of new express bus service

that complements existing, heavily-used Rapid 7 bus service between Santa Monica and

Downtown Los Angeles. Investment includes purchase of ten new zero-emission battery

electric buses that will be deployed on an express route operating every 20 minutes on

weekdays from Wilshire/Western Station in downtown Los Angeles, connecting with LA

Metro’s Purple Line, to downtown Santa Monica where it provides critical first-mile last-mile

connectivity to the LA Metro’s Expo Line and that will complement the existing local service

by adding needed capacity and faster travel. The express bus service will target key

destinations including the Santa Monica College and is anticipated to reduce travel time by

up to 25%, approximately 15 minutes for end-to-end riders, by stopping at only 7 of the 21

stops currently served by Rapid 7.

Investments complement existing efforts including transit signal prioritization on the Pico

corridor in Los Angeles, new pre-paid fare media incentives to attract new riders, and

implementation of queue jump lanes at select intersections. Supports improved mobility

and reduced air pollutants within disadvantaged and low-income communities.

The City of Santa Monica is also the beneficiary of additional SB 1 funding allowing it to

expand its electric bus fleet, with $469,210 awarded from SB 1 2017-18 State Transit

Assistance State of Good Repair funds towards the purchase of 1 replacement bus.










9. Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA)

Project: Dublin/Pleasanton Capacity Improvement and Congestion Reduction Program

Award: $20,500,000


(This project will facilitate greenhouse gas emissions reductions, but specific quantification

will be established following completion of integration efforts identified below. While this

project is not located within an AB 1550 disadvantaged community, low-income community,

Attachment C

199

12

or low-income community within ½-mile of a disadvantaged community, funding has been

provided to identify opportunities to enhance benefits to such communities. Therefore, the

project may provide benefits to AB 1550 communities once the scope is finalized and

implementation begins.)

Increases ridership to BART and other transit lines through the construction of a new, multi-

level parking structure at the Dublin-Pleasanton BART station on county owned land. The

new multi-level parking structure will accommodate over 500 additional parking spaces daily

and will include electric vehicle charging stations with preferred parking for vanpools to

maximize utilization. The location is a highly congested area at the intersection of six transit

providers. Capacity at the current BART parking lot is often reached early in the morning,

which forces commuters—who would otherwise be park-and-riders—to drive to their

destination. Parking structure will be built with convertible uses in mind.


with regional and local bus services, including service in the I-680 and I-580 Corridors, to

develop strategies to maximize achievement of greenhouse gas reductions, and to identify

opportunities for AB 1550 benefits.









10. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro)

Project: Los Angeles Region Transit System Integration and Modernization Program

Award: $ 330,200,000

Multi Year Funding Agreement: $ 758,299,000

[Total Award: $1,088,499,000]

Total Budget: $5,767,700,000


(Additional project benefits accrue to the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, which is

expected to contribute $683,469 to the Gold Line Foothill Extension portion of the program)

Attachment C

200

13

A transformative investment in Los Angeles Metro’s transit capacity expansion program that

will significantly increase ridership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across their

network, adding approximately 62 miles of new light rail and bus rapid transit service. This

investment provide funding to complete five projects before 2028, including the following:

1. Gold Line Light Rail Transit Extension to Montclair (12.3 miles)

2. East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor (9.2 miles)

3. West Santa Ana Branch Light Rail Transit Corridor (20+ miles)

4. Green Line Light Rail Extension to Torrance (4.6 miles)

5. Orange/Red Line to Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Connector (North Hollywood to

Pasadena) (16+ miles)

The program also invests at least $5 million of TIRCP funding in the project development

phase of the Vermont Transit Corridor project, a key future investment in the overall

network, expected to be ready for completion by 2028 as well.

This set of network investments performs significantly better in combination than as

separate investments and leverages large investments of local funding approved by local

voters. The five fully funded corridor projects add more than 120,000 riders per day by 2028

and more than 230,000 riders per day after 50 years.

Project award includes $7 million of funding to address network integration opportunities

with other rail and transit systems, including linkages to the statewide rail system, Ontario

Airport, and with San Bernardino County transit services, and to enhance AB 1550 benefits.

This project is recommended for a multi-year funding agreement due to its extended

timeline for delivery.

This project budget contains significant non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1 (SB1) revenues from the

State Transportation Improvement Program, which programmed $95,000,001 of new

funding for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Project in March of 2018.

A number of California Transportation Commission-recommended SB1 programming actions

would also make significant additional improvements to the performance and ridership of

the Los Angeles Metro network. These recommendations include $75 million through the

Local Partnership Program for the Los Angeles Orange Line BRT system, enhancing the value

of the Orange/Red Line to Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit Connector and the East San Fernando

Valley Transit Corridor. Recommended programming actions also include a $150 million

investment of Congested Corridor program funds in the Airport Metro Connector 96th Street

Transit Station project (which received $40 million of TIRCP funding in 2016), which

increases access from LAX Airport to the entire LA Metro network.

Attachment C

201

14

$23,941,000 of SB 1 Local Partnership Program (LPP) Formulaic Funding was also awarded to

the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor and $19,745,000 of LPP Formulaic Funding

awarded to the Green Line Extension (Redondo Beach-Torrance) by the California

Transportation Commission in March of 2018.

Prior TIRCP awards have also invested in improvements to the Blue Line and the future

service frequency at Union Station through establishing new Red/Purple Line Turnaround

facilities. These investments are critical to providing the network capacity and efficiency

needed as connecting services at Los Angeles Union Station all grow future ridership.





Improve Safety Medium-High





11. Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN)

Project: All Aboard 2018 - Transforming SoCal Rail Travel

Award: $40,412,000



Increases ridership through investments in improved on-time performance, safety and rail

corridor capacity for Pacific Surfliner and Coaster trains by investing in signal optimization,

more robust capitalized maintenance, and right of way fencing. Prepares the corridor for

higher frequency services being introduced by the Pacific Surfliner (expected to reach 17

roundtrips during the project life) and on the Coaster, resulting from previously funded

capital projects, and allows them to operate in the corridor on a regular interval schedule.

Also includes study of San Diego maintenance/layover facility relocation opportunities.

TIRCP funding to enhance capitalized maintenance is phased out over a ten year agreement

period during which ridership and revenue for services is expected to increase. Overall

project benefits will grow beyond those currently modeled as run-through capacity at Los

Angeles Union Station is phased in to the corridor beginning in 2023.

Attachment C

202

15

Project award includes $250,000 of funding to address network integration opportunities,

including development of better schedules among Coaster, Metrolink, and Amtrak services,

and to enhance AB 1550 benefits.

Most project elements will be implemented through a partnership with SANDAG and North

County Transit District (NCTD).

The corridor also benefits from the SB 1 funded expansion of State Transportation

Improvement Program capacity that is advancing Phase 2 of the San Onofre to Pulgas

Double Tracking project, with $30,040,000 of funding programmed by the California

Transportation Commission in March of 2018. Prior TIRCP awards have also invested in

improvements to the San Diego portion of the LOSSAN Corridor, including significant double

track investments that will increase capacity and reliability in the corridor for all users.

A California Transportation Commission-recommended SB1 programming action would also

make significant additional improvements to goods movement in the LOSSAN Corridor, with

$10.5 million from the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program recommended for the

Sorrento to Miramar Phase 2 Intermodal Improvements Project.

$18,940,000 of SB 1 Local Partnership Program (LPP) Formulaic Funding was also awarded to

the advancement of a number of San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission-

sponsored projects in the LOSSAN Corridor by the California Transportation Commission in

March of 2018.





Improve Safety High





Attachment C

203

16

12. Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN)

Project: Building Up: LOSSAN North Improvement Program

Award: $147,930,000


Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions: 1,160,000 MTCO2e

Investments that increase frequency on Pacific Surfliner service to Santa Barbara from five

to six round trips, and to San Luis Obispo from two to three round trips, and that improve

travel time, reliability and safety for both Metrolink and the Pacific Surfliner in the Los

Angeles to San Luis Obispo rail corridor. Travel time and reliability savings on the trains will

lead to significant ridership gains, and also more flexibility in scheduling service on a regular

interval schedule during peak periods.

Project includes significant signaling and switch upgrades, siding and station improvements,

investment in the Goleta Layover Facility (coordinated with Santa Barbara County

Association of Governments (SBCAG) projects also recommended for TIRCP awards in this

cycle), and a more robust capitalized maintenance program intended to reduce travel time

and delays in the corridor. TIRCP funding to enhance capitalized maintenance is phased out

over a ten year agreement period during which ridership and revenue for services is

expected to increase.

Project benefits are enhanced through companion TIRCP investments by Metrolink in the

Los Angeles Union Station to Moorpark segment and in Los Angeles Union Station run

through capacity. Benefits are also enhanced through Proposition 1B investment in the

Seacliff Siding Extension project and the State Transportation Improvement Program

investment of $12.5 million in the Central Coast Layover Facility in San Luis Obispo.


State Rail Assistance Program.

The project safety benefits would also be enhanced by the California Transportation

Commission recommended programming action of SB1 Trade Corridor Enhancement

Program funds totaling $68,606,000 for the SR34 & Rice Avenue Grade Separation.

The project will be coordinated with the efforts of the SB 1 Sustainable Communities

Formula Grant on the South Coast Rail Station Multimodal Access Plan, which received

$41,105 in December of 2017.

Attachment C

204

17





Improve Safety High





13. Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB)

Project: Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project

Award: $123,182,000

Multi Year Funding Agreement $ 41,340,000

[Total Award: $164,522,000]



Provides for all-electric service and seating capacity increase on Caltrain, taking advantage

of currently available options on the existing rolling stock contract. All-electric service

significantly improves corridor operations and capacity.

The project also includes targeted funding for 8-car platforms, improves wayside bicycle

facilities (bike sharing and bike parking), and installs a broadband communications system

that expands onboard Wi-Fi and enhances reliability by creating the capability to conduct

remote diagnostics and optimize ongoing operations and maintenance.

Project award includes $3 million of funding to address network integration opportunities,

including development of integrated regular interval schedules and connections to other

corridors in conjunction with the development of the Caltrans Business Plan (including to

SamTrans’ US 101 Express Bus Project), integration with statewide fleet planning, and to


This project is recommended for a multi-year funding agreement due to the project delivery

schedule.

This project is coordinated with expenditures from non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1 (SB1) revenues

from the State Rail Assistance Program on this and complementary projects, as well as

Attachment C

205

18

expenditures from other non-TIRCP funds, over the life of the multi-year funding

agreement.










14. Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT)

Project: Accelerating Rail Modernization and Expansion in the Capital Region

Award: $40,535,000

Multi Year Funding Agreement $23,815,000

[Total Award: $64,350,000]




anticipated to contribute $2,599,360 to the more frequent operations of the Folsom line

service.)

Procures 7 new low-floor light rail vehicles (LRV) to support 15-minute service frequencies

during weekdays to Folsom, plus three Express Trains in each rush hour in the peak-demand

direction. Includes funding for capacity enhancements on the Gold Line to support both

limited stop and more frequent service. Express service is partially supported by the 2015

TIRCP award to SacRT that allowed overall fleet expansion through the refurbishment of rail

vehicles.

Also procures 13 new low-floor LRVs to support the first phases of fleet replacement (total

need is 36 replacement vehicles), as well as conversion of the highest-priority stations to

provide low-floor boarding and allow efficient and accessible boarding. This investment will

deliver benefits that increase over time as additional station and fleet conversions are

funded.

Attachment C

206

19


California Transportation Commission-recommended Solutions for Congested Corridor

Program (SCCP) programming action to the US50 Multimodal Corridor Enhancement

Program. $20.3 million of funding for SacRT related to this project is included in the

recommended SCCP budget.


including development of improved connections to other rail and transit services, and to



schedule.










15. San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA)

Project: DMU to ZEMU - Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) Vehicles to Zero-Emission Vehicle

(ZEMU) Conversion

Award: $30,000,000



(This project is an additive phase to the 2016 selected project for Redlands Passenger Rail.

GHG benefits are based on the incremental increase associated with updated ridership and

the emissions benefits associated with running zero emission multiple unit trains in the

corridor.)

This project provides for the development and purchase of an additional rail vehicle by

SBCTA that will demonstrate the ability to provide zero emission service using multiple units

train sets in California. The project will also fund the conversion of Diesel Multiple Unit

(DMU) vehicles used in the Redlands Passenger Rail service, so that regular revenue

Attachment C

207

20

operations are provided by zero emission fleet, dramatically changing the corridor-level

emissions of the new rail service.

This project is of statewide significance as it lays the groundwork for conversion of diesel rail

services to zero emission for commuter and intercity rail services statewide. Research

efforts that are part of this project scope are expected to be coordinated with Caltrans, the

California Air Resources Board, federal agencies, and California academic and research

institutions, in order to maximize the future value of this effort. The project will also provide

for the testing of ZEMU service on other routes throughout the state, including on the

Metrolink system and on other candidate corridors to be selected through statewide

stakeholder outreach. The project budget may be augmented by additional non-TIRCP

resources to increase its overall statewide benefits over time.

Low-income residents of communities along the corridor will be the direct beneficiaries of

using a rail system that has invested in renewable technologies to further reduce GHG

emissions, and improve air quality in a severely impacted, non-attainment air quality region

in southern California.

This project budget contains significant non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1 revenues, including already

approved funding from the State Transit Assistance program ($27.26 million), and the State

Transportation Improvement Program ($12,826,000). In addition, additional funding for the

project is included in the California Transportation Commission-recommended programming

actions for the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program ($65 million) and the Local

Partnership Program ($10,831,000). Total funding from TIRCP is $39,204,000 over 2 cycles.

Project is also recommended for technical assistance to enhance AB 1550 benefits.










Attachment C

208

21

16. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

Project: Ride Between the Lines: Enhancing Access to Transit in San Diego

Awarded: $5,763,000



Invests in an improved safety and travel experience for bus riders, cyclists and walkers along

the busiest bus route in San Diego, along University Avenue (Route 7). Investments include

construction of ADA-compliant transit islands, separated bike lanes, improved transit

signage, shelters, storm water improvements, bike storage, and other amenities that

facilitate rapid boarding and support Complete Streets along University Avenue. Upgrades

19 local bus stops over 2.5 miles. Results in faster, safer service between residential

communities in Mid-City with transit and rail connections downtown, with many transit-

dependent and low-income residents benefiting from the service improvements.

This project also provides geographic diversity to the state’s transit investments and AB

1550 community benefits.


Reduced GHG Reductions Medium



Improve Safety High





17. San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS)

Project: Blue Line Rail Corridor Transit Enhancements

Award: $40,098,000




anticipated to contribute $3,200,000 to the total budget)

Attachment C

209

22

Increased ridership through significant capacity enhancements to station and rail

infrastructure between Old Town and the American Plaza trolley stations, and at 12th &

Imperial, where the Green Line terminates. Resulting improvements will provide for more

reliable and higher frequency service, concurrent with the opening of the Blue Line Mid-

Coast Extension.

Also provides for an expanded Rapid bus service, running at 15-minute headways, between

Imperial Beach and the Otay Mesa International Border Crossing, connecting to the Blue

Line at Iris Avenue. Includes funding to acquire 11 60-foot articulated zero-emission electric

buses, as well as station improvements on the new Rapid 925 corridor. This project is

coordinated with the first phases of the zero emission bus pilot for MTS.



enhance AB 1550 benefits (including cross-border travel benefits).

This project budget contains non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1 revenues from the State Transit

Assistance State of Good Repair program ($1,747,000).


Reduced GHG Reductions Medium-High








18. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA)

Project: Transit Capacity Expansion Program

Award: $ 26,867,000



(This project is an additive phase to the 2016 selected project for Muni’s Light Rail

Modernization and Expansion Program. GHG benefits are based on the incremental increase

associated with updated ridership and the emissions benefits associated with running 50

light rail vehicles (out of 64 planned) in the corridor.)

Attachment C

210

23

Increases ridership and reduces greenhouse gas emissions by funding an additional 8

expansion vehicles for the Muni light rail system, bringing the total expansion fleet

expansion funded through the TIRCP and local fund sources to 50 vehicles. Total funding

from TIRCP is $113,140,000 over the 3 cycles.

The new vehicles feature significantly increased energy efficiency and have very low life

cycle emissions while using zero emission electricity. Continued investment in capacity for

high-frequency transit is a critical element in the City and County of San Francisco’s plans to

provide low-carbon footprint jobs and housing.

Surging demand on the Muni system continues to cause congestion with existing service,

and the new zero-emission vehicles will allow Muni to carry additional riders who would

otherwise be crowded out of the system through providing for more frequent and longer

trains, including riders from disadvantaged communities in San Francisco. The project also

supports integration transit services at the Transbay Transit Terminal.

Operational safety is significantly improved with the new vehicles, which have better

operator visibility to the front and sides of the vehicle, smoother acceleration and braking,

and crash energy management features that protect both passengers and the operator in

case of an impact.

This project is matched by significant investment in light rail modernization provided by an

array of sales tax commitments, revenue bonds, and federal funding sources. These projects

deliver many additional benefits that will make the light rail system even more attractive to

riders, including efforts to improve travel time and reliability throughout the system,

including the potential to acquire additional vehicles to complete the light rail expansion

program if RM3 or other local sources are approved.







Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration Medium-Low



Attachment C

211

24

19. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA) and San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC)

Project: Valley Rail

Award: $426,700,000


[Total Award: $500,500,000]



Integrated expansion of intercity and commuter rail service between Ceres, Modesto

Stockton and Sacramento, as well as between Fresno and Sacramento, allowing growth in

both peak period and off peak travel. Results in an early extension of San Jose-bound

commuter rail service to Sacramento using existing commuter rail equipment (expected by

2020), and 4 trains out of Ceres (with feeder electric bus connections from Merced) to

Sacramento and San Jose by no later than 2023 (primary train services go to one destination

with a connection available to the other). Also results in 2 new round trips between Fresno,

Merced and Sacramento, on top of the 2 round trips available today (additional connections

by bus or commuter rail services to Sacramento available in Stockton from the 5 round trips

that serve the Bakersfield to Oakland market, and to San Jose for all trains originating in

Fresno or Bakersfield). Total rail service between Stockton and Sacramento will be 9 round

trips across all available routes and service providers (including 1 Sacramento to Stockton

only round trip).

Includes numerous new stations serving Madera and Oakley (served by San Joaquin trains);

Ceres, Modesto, Ripon, Manteca, and North Lathrop (served by ACE trains); and Lodi, Elk

Grove, Sacramento City College, Sacramento Midtown, Old North Sacramento, and

Natomas, with shuttle connections to the Sacramento Airport (served by both ACE and San

Joaquin trains). Results in improved connectivity for Bay Area and Bakersfield services.

Phased service expansion beginning with 1 existing Altamont Corridor Express train

originating in Sacramento, allowing a one-seat ride to and from San Jose during the peak

period.

Includes zero emission bus procurement to support feeder services, and acquires rolling

stock to support service increase, coordinated with consideration of statewide rolling stock

requirements and opportunities. Also coordinated with 2016 TIRCP investments in

expanding platforms and train lengths to up to 10 cars in order to add capacity on the 4 ACE

round trips that currently cross Altamont Pass.

Attachment C

212

25

This project budget contains significant non-TIRCP Senate Bill 1 revenues from the State Rail

Assistance Program and the enhanced State Transportation Improvement Program,

including $36 million in San Joaquin Corridor 2nd Platforms. The project budget also includes

significant contributions from SB 132 TIRCP funds.


schedule.


including development of improved connections to other rail and transit services and

consideration of network integration improvements throughout the Central Valley, and to

enhance AB 1550 benefits. Project is also recommended for technical assistance to enhance

AB 1550 benefits.










20. San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans)

Project: SamTrans Express Bus Pilot

Award: $15,000,000



(Additional project benefits accrue to the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program,

contributing $3,500,000 to the total budget)

Introduces four (4) limited-stop express bus routes (at least 3 bi-directional) along US-101 in

San Mateo, Santa Clara, and San Francisco Counties, using 37 new zero-emission electric

buses, for reduced travel times and improved reliability of operations. Proposes 15-minute

peak-period service along US-101 in conjunction with the completion of the managed lanes

project in late 2021, and includes service to the Transbay Terminal. Proposed routes include

San Bruno to Sunnyvale, Foster City to San Francisco, Redwood Shores to San Francisco, and

San Mateo to San Francisco.

Attachment C

213

26

California Transportation Commission-recommended programming actions of $233.2 million

from the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program and $20 million from the Local

Partnership Program for the US 101 Managed Lanes Project would provide for the highway

improvements necessary to offer this transit service.

Service will be coordinated with Caltrain and AC Transit services through their respective

integration efforts.










21. Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)

Project: Coastal Express/Pacific Surfliner Peak Hour Service Expansion and Integration

Project

Award: $9,600,000




Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $575,000 to the project.)

Complements rail service for commuters between Ventura and Santa Barbara counties by

enhancing bus services that will allow seamless use of both rail and transit service for

commute to employment centers in the Santa Barbara area from Oxnard and Ventura in

Ventura County with 5 zero-emission over-the-road electric buses. Includes service

extension to Oxnard, and development of layover facilities that can host expanded zero-

emission bus service in the future.

California Transportation Commission-recommended programming actions of $132,880,000

from the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, and $51 million from the Trade

Corridor Enhancement Program, to the US 101 HOV Lanes project would contribute

significant additional benefits to bus riders in the corridor not yet captured in the project

Attachment C

214

27

ratings. The proposed investment will lead to significant rider travel time reductions once

the HOV lanes are completed. Current estimates expect a 45-minute round trip travel time

reduction for passenger using these buses, and the ridership gain from this improved travel

time will further expand the greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits of the project.

The project will be coordinated with the efforts of the SB 1 Sustainable Communities

Formula Grant on the Clean Air Express Short Range Transit Plan, which received $100,000

in December of 2017.



Reduced Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Medium








22. Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)

Project: Goleta Train Depot Improvements

Award: $13,009,000



(While this project has not been specifically counted as providing AB 1550 benefits, funding

has been provided to focus on identifying and enhancing benefits to such communities.)

Improves the transit facility for bus, train, bicycle and pedestrians by constructing a modern,

multi-modal train station and provides a safe, functional and inviting facility that

accommodates improved bus transit service, shuttles from Santa Barbara Airport and the

University of California Santa Barbara. Includes a zero emission shuttle bus to serve the

Santa Barbara airport and improvement in local bus service providing station access to AB

1550 communities.



identify opportunities for AB 1550 benefits. These efforts will be coordinated with TIRCP

Attachment C

215

28

projects awarded to SBCAG for the Clean Air Express and LOSSAN for the improvement and

expansion of service between Los Angeles and San Luis Obispo.









23. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (SCVTA)

Project: VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Extension, Phase II

Award: $ 238,360,000


[Total Award: $ 730,000,000]

Total Budget: $4,779,935,000


(This project is an additive phase to the 2016 selected project. GHG benefits are based on the

incremental increase associated with updated ridership and emissions benefits.)

This project has a Full Funding Grant Agreement contingency related to future federal

funding through the New Starts Program of the Federal Transit Administration.

Extends BART by 6 miles and 4 stations into downtown San Jose and to Santa Clara by 2027.

Serves more than 52,000 new riders per day by 2035 and more than 100,000 riders by 2075.

Provides significant new service to AB 1550 communities, and a high degree of connectivity

to other rail and transit services at a variety of stations, including San Jose Diridon station.

Also leverages broader investments in BART capacity, allowing for frequent, all-day travel

throughout the BART system using the 10-car train capacity and expanded Transbay tunnel

capacity recommended for awards of other TIRCP funding. Total funding from TIRCP is $750

million over 2 cycles.

An element of the project budget includes funding for the BART Communications Based

Train Control (CBTC) system to be installed on this Santa Clara County segment. The BART

Core Capacity project budget has been adjusted to account for this overlap.

Attachment C

216

29


schedule. Federal funding priorities across multiple Bay Area projects may result in

adjustment of TIRCP award levels among highly-rated Bay Area projects.






Improve Safety High





24. Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA)

Project: North State Intercity Electric Bus System

Award: $8,641,000




Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $875,000 to the project, and to the Low

Carbon Transit Operations Program, which is anticipated to contribute $10,000 to the North

Valley Feeder route.)

New service between the north state and Sacramento, through a coordinated and

connected intercity bus system using 7 battery electric over the road coaches, including

connections to the San Joaquin and Capitol Corridor train services, and the Sacramento

international Airport. Funds the I-5 Backbone Service (Redding-Red Bluff-Williams-SMF

Airport-Sac) and the North Valley Feeder (Red Bluff-Corning-Orland-Willows-Williams),

providing 4 inter-connected round trip services per day on each route. The project will be

implemented in coordination with intercity and commuter rail services that connect to the

new service in Sacramento.




Attachment C

217

30








25. Solano Transportation Authority (STA)

Project: Solano Regional Transit Improvements

Award: $10,788,000




Incentive Program, which may contribute up to $2,148,000 to the project.)

Increases frequency and reduces travel time on a restructured, zero-emission, electrified

SolanoExpress system serving travelers along the I-80/680 corridor, connecting Vallejo,

Benicia, Suisun, Fairfield, and Vacaville to Sacramento and to the Walnut Creek and El

Cerrito del Norte BART stations, as well as the Vallejo Ferry Terminal.

SB1 also has the potential to fund other improvements on the 80/680 Corridor in which

much of this service would operate, with a California Transportation Commission

recommendation for $53.2 million from the Trade Corridor Enhancement program for 80-

680-12 Interchange improvements and $33.6 million from the Local Partnership Program for

680/SR-4 interchange improvements. Both of these investments would remove sources of

delay and lead to reduced travel times during the life of the project by buses travelling in the

corridor and provide increased rider benefits not yet reflected in the project rating.










Attachment C

218

31




26. Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART)

Project: Larkspur to Windsor Corridor Project

Award: $21,000,000




equivalent amount.

Completion of the Larkspur and Windsor Extensions, allowing for direct connection to the

Larkspur Ferry in 2019 and service to Windsor by 2021. Completes critical rail segments

extending rail service to Larkspur with its regional ferry service and northward to Windsor’s

transit-oriented Town Green. Also provides for project development efforts related to the

extension of service to Healdsburg and Cloverdale, including efforts related to ensuring

efficient provision of goods movement requirements in the corridor in the context of

growing passenger service.


including development of improved connections to other rail and transit services both in the

East Bay and in Napa and Solano counties, and related to efficient expansion to Cloverdale

and the connecting services to the North State, as well as to enhance AB 1550 benefits.





Improve Safety High





Attachment C

219

32

27. Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA - Metrolink)

Project: Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE)

Award: $ 763,712,000


[Total Award: $ 875,708,000]

Total Budget: $2,049,700,000

Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions: 5,714,000 MTCO2e

Delivers initial run-through capacity for Metrolink and Surfliner trains at Los Angeles Union

Station, and 30-min bi-directional service on multiple Metrolink corridors in the LA Basin.

Includes significant investments to improve the frequency and performance of services to

Moorpark, Santa Clarita, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange County. Part of a high-

performance long-range vision for transformation of the Southern California rail system.

The project includes significant work on the early phases of Link US at Los Angeles Union

Station, enabling the first run-through services to be provided by 2023. Part of the early

work in Phase 1 is funded through SB 1 State Rail Assistance investments that improve the

track and signals at the throat of Union Station, with $10,500,000 of SRA funds awarded in

January 2018.

The project provides for 30-minute bi-directional service on the highest ridership segments

of the Metrolink system. It features station and signal improvements (allowing 5-min

headways on certain segments and faster speeds on other segments), investments in

turnouts and crossovers, additional station platforms, and targeted siding extensions or

double track. Leverages investments already being made by the State Transportation

Improvement Program in Van Nuys Station and in the Rosecrans-Marquardt Grade

Separation, including targeted LA-Fullerton corridor investments to improve operations and

reduce conflicts between passenger and freight trains. Allows for tightly timed transfers at

Riverside Downtown station, enhancing connectivity to the Perris Valley Line and operations

on the Riverside, 91 and IEOC lines. Funds the reconfiguration of the Irvine Station, allowing

for local-to-express connections to be made in both directions, and funds the initial train

layover facility in Irvine so that Metrolink trains can originate and terminate in Irvine

overnight, benefiting service patterns on the Metrolink Orange County Line and the Inland

Empire Orange County Line. Includes double track and bridge improvements north of

Control Point Songs in territory controlled by North County Transit District. Includes

targeted rolling stock investments, coordinated with statewide rolling stock considerations.

Attachment C

220

33

The project also benefits from investments being made by the State Transportation

Improvement Plan, including $3 million in the Laguna Niguel-San Juan Capistrano passing

siding.

Project award includes a minimum of $10 million of funding to address network-wide

environmental and integration planning, development of integrated regular interval

schedules and connections to other corridors, integration with statewide fleet planning,

implementation planning to achieve maximum greenhouse gas reduction benefits from each

phase, and to enhance AB 1550 benefits.

The project benefits would also be enhanced by the California Transportation Commission-

recommended programming actions of SB1 Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP)

funds and Local Partnership Program (LPP) funds. Recommended TCEP programming

includes $60,000,000 for the Etiwanda Grade Separation in the City of Rancho Cucamonga

on the Metrolink San Bernardino Line, as well as funding for the Rosecrans-Marquardt

Grade Separation, Montebello Boulevard Grade Separation and Turnbull Canyon Road

Grade Separation, all within the Southern California Rail Project. These grade separation

projects benefit the Metrolink 91 Line, the Metrolink Orange County Line, and the Metrolink

Riverside Line, as well as the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner. Finally, the project is enhanced by the

recommended programming action of $8,908,000 to the Vista Canyon Metrolink Station

from the LPP, benefiting the Metrolink Antelope Valley Line.





Improve Safety High





Attachment C

221

34

28. Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC)

Project: Rail Extension to Monterey County

Award: $10,148,000



Extension of 2 round trip passenger rail services from Gilroy to Salinas, track improvements

including the implementation of positive train control along the Salinas-Gilroy corridor,

along with a two-train layover facility that can be expanded to support up to six-trains,

providing future expansion and rail capacity in the corridor. Adds about 95,000 new riders in

the opening year (with further growth over time) from the Salinas market to San Jose and

Silicon Valley.

This project will be eligible to receive its TIRCP construction funding subject to a future

agreement with Union Pacific Rail Road.

Project award also includes $500,000 of funding to address network integration

opportunities, including development of improved connections to other rail and transit

services, planning related to infill stations, integration with statewide fleet planning

requirements and opportunities, and to enhance AB 1550 benefits.





Improve Safety High





Attachment C

222


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update Issue Staff will provide an update on current legislative issues in State and Federal Government Affairs. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives

The Board may choose to act upon the information provided. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability by encouraging federal, state and local funding for Authority priorities. This report also supports improved communications to customers and stakeholders by sharing news, information and the Authority’s legislative priorities with elected officials. Background State Update Activity in the legislature heightened in April as members worked to move their bills past the first major committee deadline. The deadline for all bills with a state fiscal impact to pass their respective policy committees was Friday, April 27, 2018. Successful bills are referred to the appropriations committee in each house, where bills will be examined for their cost to implement or cost to local governments to comply. Much of this year’s legislative session has been focused on housing policy, the aftermath of the wildfires, the Governor’s goal to have 5 million zero emission vehicles on California roads by 2030, and

223

State and Federal Legislative Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

one of the most hotly debated bills in Sacramento involved an attempt to tie housing policy goals with public transportation. State Bills Introduced by Senator Wiener, Senate Bill (SB) 827 seeks to promote transit-rich housing by authorizing the construction of up to four story buildings near major transit stops. While SB 827 received a lot of attention, it did not successfully pass the Transportation & Housing Committee. Committee members voiced a number of concerns during the bill’s hearing, particularly regarding the consequences of usurping local land use decisions. Senator Ben Allen's SB 961, would create "Neighborhood Infill Finance and Transit Improvement (NIFTI-2) Districts" around rail stations and along high-frequency bus corridors. The districts would collect a tax increment from increased property and sales taxes and use the funds to invest in district improvements. The bill passed out of Senate Governance and Finance 7-0 with bipartisan support. While these districts will require the concurrence of the county, unlike other "enhanced infrastructure finance districts" (EIFDs) there will be no voter approval required to issue bonds to implement a district plan. The bill requires 40% of the tax increment to be directed to deed-restricted affordable housing and 60% to transit capital, programs promoting ridership, and first-last mile connections. Senate Bill 1119 (Newman) passed out of Senate Environmental Quality Committee. The Authority’s Board adopted a support position on the bill, which would allow more flexibility to the recipients’ use of Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds, a Cap & Trade formula-based program. SB 1119 is expected to be voted on the Senate Floor in the coming weeks. Assemblymember Freddie Rodriguez (D-Pomona) amended Assembly Bill 1912, which seeks to retroactively and prospectively apply significant changes to existing Joint Powers Authority (JPA) agreements by holding member agencies jointly and severally liable for the retirement obligations of the JPA. The bill was first heard at the Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee, and was unanimously passed when amended to limit debt obligations to pension liabilities. The bill was then passed by the Judiciary Committee on a 7-2 vote and has been referred to the Committee on Appropriations to help determine the cost to the state and local bodies to implement. There have been wide concerns that the potential liability costs could total billions statewide to the member agencies of JPA's. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Board of Directors adopted an oppose position, citing deep concerns that increased pension obligations could fundamentally alter the agency's debt liability, negatively impacting credit rating and threatening bond sales. Metro contends that that retroactive nature of the bill places an unfair burden on agencies who approached agreements in good faith, only to have the state significantly alter those agreements after the fact.

224


The bill was introduced as a response to the dissolution of a JPA in the San Gabriel Valley, which resulted in 200 employees receiving only 37% of their retirement benefits. It should be highlighted that JPA employees contracted with CalPERS do not accrue any social security, and CalPERS remains the sole retirement for thousands of Californian employees. Therefore, thousands of public servants can be vulnerable and unprotected should their JPA become insolvent. The bill is likely to be hotly debated, in large part due to the potential for the bill to be a powerful disincentive for the creation of Joint Powers Authorities. Staff continue to monitor all bills that could affect the Authority, Member Agencies and local communities. Administration The California Air Resources Board (CARB) began soliciting feedback on the Draft Revised 2018 Funding Guidelines and supplementary materials. These funding guidelines are important for agencies that administer funds allocated by CARB and apply to funding opportunities included in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). On April 17, the California High-Speed Rail Authority Board met in Southern California. Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer was asked to make opening remarks on the Authority’s interactions with the High-Speed Rail Authority. Elissa K. Konove, Deputy Chief Executive Officer and staff traveled to Sonoma, California for the California Foundation on the Environment and the Economy (CFEE) Roundtable Infrastructure Conference on Climate Financing. State Grant Awards Update Finally, the Authority received the excellent news that the state awarded $876 million in direct funding to the Authority's Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program through the Transit, Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP). TIRPC is a discretionary grant program created in the original Cap & Trade authorization, and with the passage of SB 1 received an additional revenue source. This funding was awarded due to the excellent application submitted and refined by the Authority's Planning department, and due to the diverse and passionate advocacy of its delegation members. The Authority deeply appreciates the support of several state legislators, federal delegation members, regional bodies, chambers of commerce, and stakeholder organizations. As part of staff's outreach on SCORE, briefings were conducted with 70 delegation offices and regional partners. These briefings included visits to Washington D.C., Sacramento, district offices, and local, regional and state transportation committees. Thirteen support letters were submitted as part of the SCORE program application, and a successful outreach campaign was coordinated with application partners to achieve

225


phone calls in support of the request from high-level targets and legislative leadership. Staff coordinated closely with its application partners to ensure program support. Conversations in Sacramento have been complimentary of the need for additional investments in future years. Staff continues to work toward full funding of the SCORE program. Federal Update Earlier this month, Speaker Ryan gave direction to authorizing committees to consider infrastructure in a piecemeal manner, rather than as a large and comprehensive package. It is foreseeable that rather than a new bill, infrastructure priorities may be realized through the regular order of reauthorizing infrastructure bills with approaching sunsets. As such, the House moved to clear its Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) bill as the current extension is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2018. Chairman Shuster dropped his effort to privatize the nation's Air Traffic Control system and the House is poised to pass the bill prior to the recess. Work is already underway on the next “infrastructure” bill which will be the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee plans to address the bill prior to the June 2018 recess. Senate action is expected to coincide with the House bill. Similarly, both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are moving to mark up their annual authorization bills in May 2018. These bills are traditionally very bipartisan and their early consideration this year – combined with the FAA and WRDA bills – could signal leadership's acknowledgement that legislation will become more difficult to consider as the election approaches. With this as a back drop, House Appropriations has released its planned markup dates for the year and has already scheduled markups for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 MilCon and Legislative Branch bills. Recall, the Bipartisan Budget Act increased spending in FY19 for defense and non-defense accounts by $5 billion each. These increases are on top of large increases provided in FY18. Additionally, the legislation calls for $10 billion in additional FY19 infrastructure spending which is in addition to the $10 billion provided in FY18. Without the passage of a new infrastructure package (authorizing bill), the increases for infrastructure agreed upon in the budget deal are singularly subject to the appropriations process. Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriators are currently finalizing their work for FY19 and draft bills should be released within the last few weeks of May 2018. The broad increases present a unique opportunity to secure funding for commuter rail priorities- and specifically bill language proposed by staff, but are limited due to jurisdictional demarcations between appropriations and authorizing committees.

226


Additionally, the increases in the Consolidated Appropriations Act that finalized FY18 appropriations have drawn rebuke from members of the Republican party. A group of members have pressured White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney to request the rescission of increases that could benefit the New York / New Jersey (NY/NJ) Gateway Project. With a potential legislative effort to rescind the increases in the background, work on FY19 appropriations face a steep climb. This increases the likelihood for a Continuing Resolution – which holds all policies and allocations steady – further limiting the potential to seek language changes that could better benefit the Authority. Senate Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs Committee held a confirmation hearing on April 17 for Thelma Drake as Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Administrator. Drake is a former Republican Congresswoman from Virginia. Senator Menendez (D-NJ) has threatened to delay the nomination over the NY/NJ Gateway tunnel project. FRA Administrator Ron Batory’s confirmation was delayed seven months after unanimous committee approval, due to NY and NJ senator holds on his nomination over the Gateway project. The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee will be considering the Surface Transportation Board (STB) nominations of Patrick Fuchs (Senate Commerce staffer) and Michelle Schultz [lawyer for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) and wife of former Trump White House lawyer]. Both nominees are Republicans, and Senate Democrats are awaiting nominees for their two Democratic seats on the five member board. One seat is currently open and the second Democratic seat is currently held by an incumbent Democrat who is in her maximum 1 year holdover period. If the President does not send any Democratic STB nominees to the Senate, the two Republican nominees will likely be held up on the Senate floor by the Democrats. On April 19, 2018 Matt Sturges was named FRA Deputy Administrator. The position is a political appointment, but not requiring Senate confirmation. Sturges was Majority Staff Director of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee under Chairman Bill Shuster. Finally, the Department of Transportation (DOT) announced the $1.5 billion Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation Discretionary Grants program. BUILD is a rebranding of the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program with an emphasis on infrastructure projects in rural areas. Staff is already reviewing the program to determine what applicability the program could have for our maintenance and capital programs. Applications are due in July 2018. Positive Train Control (PTC) While DOT has provided $2.9 billion for PTC implementation, about $2.3 billion has actually been obligated to railroads as of the end of fiscal 2017, according to the DOT’s

227


Inspector General. Four agencies out of the 37 funding recipients have spent all the federal money received; more than half of those railroads reported expending more than 50 percent of their money. "While the U.S. rail industry and Congress are committed to implementing PTC nationwide, progress has been slower than anticipated, and ensuring that the rail industry has a sense of urgency will be a key watch item for the Department," the Inspector General said in the report. FRA said it expects to obligate the remaining $12.1 million in PTC grants by May 31, 2018. On April 11, 2018, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) held a Hearing entitled “FY 2019 Budget Rail Safety and Infrastructure: Stakeholder Perspectives.” Positive Train Control was a major topic during the hearing as executives from Amtrak and the Association of American Railroads discussed the progress that rail companies are having with implementing PTC technology. They also discussed what kind of funding levels are adequate to complete these projects according to their intended timelines. The installation deadline is the end of this year, December 31, 2018. According to the latest FRA update, positive train control is currently equipped and operable on 78% of freight locomotives and 56% of passenger locomotives. However, on track segments, only 73% of freight and 27% of passenger tracks have been completed. Next Steps The Board directs staff to act on the provided information. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Whitney O’Neill, Senior Manager, Government and Regulatory

Affairs


228


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Positive Train Control Program – Update of Project

Status, Including Interoperability with BNSF Railway, Union Pacific Railroad, Amtrak and North County Transit District

Issue Staff is providing an update on the Authority’s Positive Train Control (PTC) Program. Also included are the following exhibits: Exhibit A: Recent Change Orders to Contract No. H1636-10 Positive Train Control

System with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc., (Parsons)

Exhibit B: Recent Change Orders to Contract No. H1655-14 with Wabtec Railway Electronics (Wabtec)

Exhibit C: PTC Project Status Report Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment. The federally-mandated PTC system increases the safety of the Authority’s commuter rail system and its passengers. Background In 2008, Federal legislation (the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008) was passed requiring Authority, along with other commuter railroads and most freight railroads in the United States, to implement an interoperable PTC system by December 31, 2015. In October 2015, Congress passed legislation to extend the deadline for PTC

229

Positive Train Control Program – Update of Project Status Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

implementation by three years to December 2018, with authority for the Secretary of Transportation to grant railroads up to two additional years (to 2020) to comply with the law if they meet certain requirements. Since the Authority has substantially deployed its PTC system, this legislation has minimal impacts for Metrolink in its role as a host railroad. However, the extension of the deadline provides additional time for host railroad North County Transit District (NCTD) to be in service with PTC and to accommodate the Authority as a tenant. Tenant railroads Amtrak, Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and BNSF Railway (BNSF) also have additional time before they are required by regulation to operate in PTC on Authority-hosted line segments. Notwithstanding these extensions, the Authority is aggressively pursuing full PTC operation on its host territories for its tenants and where it operates as a tenant on other host territory. PTC is an advanced technology train collision/derailment avoidance system which uses safety-critical predictive enforcement to automatically engage the brakes and stop a train in advance of:

Potential train-to-train collision

Train over-speed

Unauthorized entry into a track work zone, or

Movement through a misaligned switch Federal regulations require that all PTC systems be interoperable with any with railroads they share tracks with. Accordingly, the Authority’s PTC system must provide for seamless interoperable movements with BNSF, UPRR and Amtrak over Authority-hosted territories and the Authority must be able to interoperate seamlessly over BNSF, UPRR and NCTD’s host territories. In October 2010, the Board awarded Contract No. H1636-10, Positive Train Control System to Parsons Transportation Group (Parsons) for the role of PTC “Vendor/Integrator” (V/I) responsible for designing, developing, installing, testing, and integrating the complex components of the PTC system. In January 2014, the Authority reached an agreement with Parsons to “de-scope” the computer-aided dispatch system (CAD) and back office server (BOS) from the V/I contractor scope and contract directly with Wabtec Railway Engineering (Wabtec) for the provision of these components under Contract No. H1655-14. In March 2015, the Authority commenced PTC in revenue service on its first subdivision. In July 2015, the Authority was operating PTC in revenue service across all its lines and on all its trains, becoming the first railroad in the nation to achieve this milestone.

230


Status Update

In March 2018, another major milestone was achieved with the commencement of interoperable PTC revenue service with UPRR. Significant complexities were overcome to ensure PTC compatibility with both BNSF and UPRR, becoming the first commuter railroad to achieve interoperable PTC with both Class I railroads. With this accomplishment, the Authority’s trains now remain under seamless PTC protection as they cross on to BNSF and UPRR-owned lines. Likewise, BNSF and UPRR trains are now capable of communicating with interoperable PTC while operating on the Authority-owned lines. Despite this progress, currently only a portion of the UPRR and Metrolink trains are operating with PTC in-service over each other’s territory due to software limitations. On an average weekday, the Authority operates 51 of its trains across BNSF territory (portions of the Orange County, 91 and IEOC lines) and eighteen trains across UPRR territory (portions of Ventura and Riverside lines). After an initial ramp-up period, all fifty-one Metrolink trains that cross BNSF territory are protected with interoperable PTC in-service. Meanwhile on UPRR territory, the Class I freight has opted to only commence interoperable PTC on the Ventura line at this point, deferring its busier and more complex Riverside line until sufficient confidence is achieved. As a result, six of the eighteen daily Metrolink trains operate on UPRR lines with PTC active. Similarly, while BNSF has the majority of its trains PTC-protected over Authority-owned territory, UPRR is only operating approximately three of twenty daily trains with PTC on Authority lines until PTC software upgrades become available to fix a limitation in the number of locomotives that the Authority can input in its system. This upgrade is expected before the end of this quarter. Update on Amtrak and NCTD Interoperability With interoperability now well underway with BNSF and UPRR, a key focus for the Authority is achieving the same milestone with Amtrak and NCTD. Staff continues to coordinate extensively with both railroads and is utilizing the lessons learned with BNSF and UPRR to support their advancement towards achieving universal interoperable PTC coverage in Southern California. Currently, the Authority is targeting mid- to late-summer to commence interoperable revenue service with both railroads, though the timeline is dependent on FRA approvals (for NCTD), PTC readiness of those partner railroads and potential issues that may arise during the testing process. Amtrak has many railroad partners that it must achieve interoperability with, but recent progress in Amtrak’s commencement of interoperable PTC with BNSF and UPRR has increased confidence that the approximate targets for interoperability with the Authority will be achieved. At the Authority’s March 9, 2018 Board Meeting, Amtrak presented a schedule showing the commencement of PTC revenue operations in June 2018. While that schedule has slipped by a few weeks, work is progressing and currently targeting late-June/July for the initial commencement of PTC revenue service (with a limited number of trains). Amtrak has committed to proceeding with lab testing with the Authority in May, as soon as it

231


completes lab-to-lab testing with UPRR which is currently underway. In April, the Authority’s PTC On-Board group performed an assessment of Amtrak’s on-board installations, finding issues with quality or completeness on many of the units inspected and raising concerns about the readiness of their full fleet for PTC operations by July. Therefore initial PTC operations are expected to begin with a limited fleet, until Amtrak has fully-commissioned all of its units for PTC, which Amtrak has committed to completing by the end of August 2018. Staff is carefully monitoring Amtrak’s PTC progress and will keep the Board informed. If Amtrak is not able to have all of its trains operating with PTC at the same level of reliability as Metrolink, BNSF, and Union Pacific by the August target date, the Authority may have to develop a policy that addresses the operation of trains that are not PTC-equipped on its host territory. Much of these interoperability efforts by the Authority are being performed under an FRA grant for the advancement of interoperable PTC. Status of Other Program Elements In addition to interoperability, a key priority for project staff is continual improvement in the reliability and functionality of the PTC System. In 2017 the team advanced PTC system reliability from trending in the mid-80 percent range to the high-90 percent range. Performance took a hit after the commencement of interoperability in October 2017 (which added new complexity) and has slowly improving. At this point, improvement in system reliability and functionality is primarily dependent upon the deployment of vendor software upgrades that address some known causes of failed runs. PTC staff closely tracks and monitors the status of PTC on all daily train runs, investigating the causes of PTC failures to continue improving PTC system performance and reliability. To date the Authority has operated over 160,000 passenger train trips with the full protective collision avoidance and over-speed prevention benefits afforded by PTC. Staff continues to seek closure to the Conditional Certification, which was received from the FRA in September 2016 (as one of the first railroads in the nation to achieve that status). Staff submitted a response to the FRA in December 2016 addressing many of the conditions and is primarily reliant on the industry to develop any artifacts necessary to address remaining conditions. Subsequently, staff has joined forces with the Class 1 Freight Railroads who are collectively pursuing clearance of the conditions associated with their certifications and anticipates submitting this summer a detailed document to the FRA requesting an unconditional I-ETMS platform non-vital overlay PTC System certification. However, given the FRA’s anticipated increase in workload as the December 31, 2018 deadline approaches, the timeline for achieving full PTC System Certification (as “non-vital” overlay system) is uncertain. Staff continues to work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and its freight railroad partners to put in-service the 220 MHz radio spectrum, which the Authority acquired in late 2016. After a prolonged acquisition process, additional interference studies and FCC approvals are required prior to utilizing the spectrum. The Authority must also coordinate closely with its railroad partners to integrate the spectrum into the shared

232


regional communication network. All of the required approvals and coordination efforts are expected to be resolved in order to formally put the spectrum in-service by Q3 2018. PTC staff continues to support the installation, testing and deployment of PTC on the Tier 4 Locomotives to assure that these locomotives are placed in service with a fully-functioning and FRA-approved PTC System. Staff is also supporting PTC implementation on line extensions and other new capital projects. In particular, on the Redland Passenger Rail Project (RPRP) staff is pushing the development of PTC technology to work on diesel multiple unit (DMU) locomotives and provide “near-side signaling” functionality to minimize the impacts of crossings near stations. Exhibits A and B provide lists of the authorized, pending and potential contract change orders that are factored into the project budget under Contract H1636-10 with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. and Contract H1655-14 with Wabtec Railway Electronics, respectively. Contract H1636-10 is in the very final close out phase while the H1655-14 Contract is targeted to be closed out in summer 2018. Despite the many challenges that have been encountered, the core project will complete on-budget and without claims. Ongoing support of the software and hardware for these mission critical train control functions has been migrated to long-term maintenance, software license, or other Authority contracts. Ongoing efforts related to interoperability, system upgrades and full certification are being handled under the appropriate PTC Operating and Rehabilitation programs or the two recent FRA grants, as appropriate. Staff will continue to pursue funding opportunities as they become available to assist with the cost of PTC system enhancements, future phases and required upgrades. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Darrell Maxey, Deputy Chief Operating Officer, PTC & Engineering Fiailoa Ah-Sue, PTC Technical Services Manager


233


Exhibit A

Change Order Summary

Parsons Transportation Group - Contract No. H1636-10

Approved Contract Changes PTC

Budget Other

Budget Previously Reported Change Orders 1 – 128 (Incl. CIS & 3rd Party Projects)

$3,877,014 $8,569,416

CO 129 – ITCM Upgrade for Interoperability $9,933 $0TOTAL Approved Contract Changes $3,886,947 $8,569,416 Pending Contract Changes - - -TOTAL Pending Contract Changes $0 $0 Forecasted Potential Contract Changes Final Contract Close-out Adjustments TBD TBDTOTAL Forecasted Potential Contract Changes TBD TBD

H1636-10 Contract Authority

Base Contract* $111,291,418.00 Change Order No. 002 Increase by Board $670,277.00 Sales Tax Allowance* $4,100,000.00 Exercised Options $1,236,551.00 Contingency (Change Orders & Third Party Projects) $15,713,211.00 Total $133,011,457.00

*Table reflects original Authorized values for Base Contract and Sales Tax Allowance, which have been reduced via contract change orders, resulting in an offset against additive changes.

234


Exhibit B

Change Order Summary

Wabtec Railway Engineering - Contract No. H1655-14

Approved Contract Changes PTC Budget

Other Budget

CO 001 - Additional SAN Hardware $79,301 $0 CO 002 - Elimination of Allowances for Optional CDRL Docs ($500,000) $0 CO 003 - Customer Information System (CIS) $0 $200,000 CO 004 - DOC Monitor Stands $760 $0 CO 005 - Individual and Composite CRC Calculator (IC3) - Planning Phase

$120,000 $0

CO 006 - CIS Hardware and Software Configuration $0 $84,960 CO 007 - Full NTP of CIS Scope $0 $300,000 CO 008 - Full NTP of IC3 Scope $500,000 $280,000 CO 009 - Equip & Commission PTC Test Lab at MOC $0 $521,000 CO 010 - Wayside Status Relay Services (WSRS) $0 $350,000 CO 011 - Monitors and Video Cards for PVL $0 $2,966 CO 012 - Key Exchange Server Upgrade Ph. I $0 $121,600 CO 013 - Additional Work Station $12,365 $0 CO 014 - Time Extension for On-Site Support for Lab and Back Office

$0 $138,750

CO 015 - Time Ext. for On-Site Support for Lab and Back Office $0 $185,000CO 016 - Travel Expenses for Demo of Ph.2 to Project Team, ELT and Board

$0 $8,742

CO 017 - Time Ext. for On-Site Support for Lab and Back Office $0 $77,083 CO 018 - Changes to CIS, Shipping Allowance & Time Ext. ($29,437) $0 TOTAL Approved Changes $182,989 $2,270,101 Pending Contract Changes - - - TOTAL Pending Changes $0 $0 Forecasted Potential Contract Changes Contract Close-out Adjustments TBD TBDTOTAL Forecasted Potential Contract Changes TBD TBD

235

Project Status Report Nov 2017 – Apr 2018

EXHIBIT C

236

Positive Train ControlProject Status ReportNov 2017 – Apr 2018

Note: Line in right margin

indicates update to content.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 3

II. PROJECT SCOPE ................................................................................................................................................. 7

III. STATUS OF PROGRAM ELEMENTS .................................................................................................................. 13

a. System‐wide Engineering & Regulatory Deliverables ....................................................................... 13

b. PTC Coverage and Performance ........................................................................................................ 13

c. Wabtec TMDS® CAD and BOS ............................................................................................................ 15

d. V/I Contractor .................................................................................................................................... 16

e. Safety ................................................................................................................................................. 16

f. Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................................. 16

g. Railroad & Inter‐Agency Coordination .............................................................................................. 16

h. Signal Relocation and Reconfiguration .............................................................................................. 17

i. WIUs, Track & Signal Modifications ................................................................................................... 17

j. Communication System ..................................................................................................................... 17

k. 220 MHz Radio Spectrum .................................................................................................................. 17

l. Dispatch and Operations Center (DOC) & Metrolink Operations Center (MOC) .............................. 18

m. Train Tracker/Customer Information System (CIS) ........................................................................... 18

IV. PROJECT PHOTOS ............................................................................................................................................ 20

V. MANAGEMENT ISSUES ................................................................................................................................... 22

VI. SCHEDULE ....................................................................................................................................................... 24

a. Overview ............................................................................................................................................ 24

b. Critical Path ........................................................................................................................................ 24

c. Schedule Risks .................................................................................................................................... 25

d. Chronology of Events ......................................................................................................................... 26

e. Summary Schedule ............................................................................................................................ 29

VII. COST STATUS .................................................................................................................................................. 30

a. Cost Detail .......................................................................................................................................... 31

VIII. CONTRACT CHANGES ...................................................................................................................................... 33

IX. FUNDING ......................................................................................................................................................... 35

a. Secured and Programmed Funds ...................................................................................................... 35

b. Funding Next Steps ............................................................................................................................ 36

c. Member Agencies .............................................................................................................................. 37

X. Appendix A: Abreviations ............................................................................................................................... 38

237

3


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Project Overview: The Southern California Regional Rail Authority, henceforth described as “The Authority” is

implementing an interoperable Positive Train Control (PTC) System on all of its line segments where passenger

operations are conducted (as set forth in the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA08) and 49 CFR 236

Subpart I). Federal regulations mandate that the PTC System prevent train‐to‐train collisions, over speed

derailments, incursion into work zones, and movements through a misaligned switch. These mandated

requirements are performed by automatic control systems, which override the loss of situational awareness by

train operators (locomotive engineers). The Authority’s PTC system is designed and deployed to comply with the

standards and guidelines established by the Interoperable Train Control (ITC) Committee, which is composed of an

industry group representing the seven largest U.S. Class 1 freight railroads ‐ BNSF, CSX, NS, UPRR, KCS, CN and CP.

The PTC system being deployed by the Authority and the ITC railroads is the Rung 1, I‐ETMS, or Interoperable

Electronic Train Management System.

As part of the PTC system deployment, The Authority replaced its legacy computer‐aided dispatch (CAD) system

with a new PTC‐compatible CAD system. The new CAD system, as well as the PTC and other related railroad

command and control systems, include both a primary and secondary or redundant sets of hardware and

software located at the existing Metrolink Operations Center (MOC) and at the new Dispatch and Operations

Center (DOC). The DOC is a new hardened 23,000 square foot, two‐story building in Pomona, which was

constructed as an element of the PTC program scope. It serves as the primary facility to house the Authority’s

critical railroad operational command and control systems including PTC, CAD, CIS (customer information system),

NMS (Network Management System) and CNC (communication network control) system. The DOC (formerly Train

Control and Operations Support Facility (TCOSF)), also houses personnel associated with supervising, operating

and maintaining the railroad’s command and control systems. The secondary systems are operated on hot

standby status at the MOC to provide very high levels of system reliability. The PTC lab and secondary systems at

the MOC will also be used for testing new versions of software and hardware, and for training.

The Authority’s PTC program began in late 2008 with a core group of dedicated Authority staff and a multi‐

disciplinary consultant team assembled to oversee and manage the expedited delivery of the Authority’s PTC

program. From spring of 2009 through spring of 2010, this team performed discovery and preliminary

engineering on the emerging PTC system technology in order to develop contract documents to a sufficient level

of maturity for a competitive solicitation of a major turnkey PTC contractor. The term adopted for this contractor

was “Vendor/Integrator” or “V/I contactor”. The V/I contractor’s scope was to design, develop, procure, install,

test, integrate, commission and obtain FRA certification for an interoperable, Rung 1, I‐ETMS PTC system. In

October 2010, the Authority awarded the PTC Vendor/Integrator (V/I) contract (H‐1636‐10) to Parsons

Transportation Group (PTG). The V/I contractor (Parsons), together with its suppliers and subcontractors, was

responsible for delivering approximately 60% of the overall PTC program. Authority staff, consultants, and other

Authority contractors, suppliers and vendors were responsible for delivering or managing or overseeing the

remaining 40% of the overall program. From late‐2010 to late‐2015, most of the project team, including the V/I

contractor, Authority project staff and consultants were co‐located in a project office located in Rancho

Cucamonga, about 40 miles east of downtown Los Angeles. In late‐2015 as the project began transitioning into

operations and close‐out, the remaining V/I contractor and the Authority’s consultant team relocated to

Authority‐owned facilities in Pomona.

In March 2015, the Authority commenced PTC in revenue service on its first subdivision. In July 2015, the

Authority was operating PTC in revenue service across all its lines and on all its trains, becoming the first railroad

in the nation to achieve this milestone.

238

4


Status Update Summary: In March 2018, another major milestone was achieved with the commencement of

interoperable PTC revenue service with UPRR. Significant complexities were overcome to ensure PTC

compatibility with both BNSF and UPRR, becoming the first commuter railroad to achieve interoperable PTC with

both Class I railroads. With this accomplishment, the Authority’s trains now remain under seamless PTC

protection as they cross on to BNSF and UPRR‐owned lines. Likewise, BNSF and UPRR trains are now capable of

communicating with interoperable PTC while operating on the Authority‐owned lines. Despite this progress,

currently only a portion of the UPRR and Metrolink trains are operating with PTC in‐service over each other’s

territory due to software limitations.

On an average weekday, the Authority operates fifty‐one of its trains across BNSF territory (portions of the

Orange County, 91 and IEOC lines) and eighteen trains across UPRR territory (portions of Ventura and Riverside

lines). After an initial ramp‐up period, all fifty‐one Metrolink trains that cross BNSF territory are protected with

interoperable PTC in‐service. Meanwhile on UPRR territory, the Class I freight has opted to only commence

interoperable PTC on the Ventura line at this point, deferring its busier and more complex Riverside line until

sufficient confidence is achieved. As a result, six of the eighteen daily Metrolink trains operate on UPRR lines with

PTC active. Similarly, while BNSF has the majority of its trains PTC‐protected over Authority‐owned territory, UPRR

is only operating approximately three of twenty daily trains with PTC on Authority lines until a PTC component

upgrade becomes available to fix a limitation in the number of locomotives that the Authority’s PTC system can

reliable handle. As the only railroad currently attempting to process and store the entire nation‐wide fleets of

both BNSF and UPRR trains in its PTC system, this issue is unique to the Authority and its vendor for the PTC

component at issue, known as a Mobile Device Manager (MDM). The Authority is working closely with its vendor

to overcome this limitation, with an upgrade in the development and testing process

With interoperability now well underway with BNSF and UPRR, a key focus for the Authority is achieving the same

milestone with Amtrak and NCTD. Staff continues to coordinate extensively with both railroads and is utilizing the

lessons learned with BNSF and UPRR to support their advancement towards achieving universal interoperable PTC

coverage in Southern California. Currently the Authority is targeting mid‐ to late‐summer to commence

interoperable revenue service with both railroads, though the timeline is dependent on FRA approvals (for NCTD),

PTC readiness of those partner railroads and potential issues that may arise during the testing process. Amtrak

has a challenging road ahead given the number of railroad partners that it must achieve interoperability with, but

recent progress in Amtrak’s commencement of interoperable PTC with BNSF and UPRR has increased confidence

that the approximate targets for interoperability with the Authority will be achieved.

At the Authority’s March 9, 2018 Board Meeting, Amtrak presented a schedule showing the commencement of

PTC revenue operations in June 2018. While that schedule has slipped by a few weeks, work is progressing and

currently targeting late‐June/July for the initial commencement of PTC revenue service (with a limited number of

trains). Amtrak has committed to proceeding with lab testing with the Authority in May, as soon as it completes

lab‐to‐lab testing with UPRR which is currently underway. In April, the Authority’s PTC On‐Board group performed

an assessment of Amtrak’s on‐board installations, finding issues with quality or completeness on many of the

units inspected and raising concerns about the readiness of their full fleet for PTC operations by July. Therefore

initial PTC operations are expected to begin with a limited fleet, until Amtrak has fully‐commissioned all of its

units for PTC, which Amtrak has committed to completing by the end of August 2018. Staff is carefully monitoring

Amtrak’s PTC progress and will keep the Board informed. If Amtrak is not able to have all of its trains operating

with PTC at the same level of reliability as Metrolink, BNSF, and Union Pacific by the August target date, the

Authority may have to develop a policy that addresses the handling of trains that are not PTC‐equipped on its host

territory. Much of these interoperability efforts by the Authority are being performed under an FRA grant for the

advancement of interoperable PTC.

239

5


In addition to interoperability, a key priority for project staff is continual improvement in the reliability and

functionality of the PTC System. In 2017 the team advanced PTC system reliability from trending in the mid‐80

percent range to the high‐90 percent range. Performance took a hit after the commencement of interoperability

in October 2017 (which added new complexity) and has slowly improving. At this point, improvement in system

reliability and functionality is primarily dependent upon the deployment of vendor software upgrades that

address some known causes of failed runs. PTC staff closely tracks and monitors the status of PTC on all daily train

runs, investigating the causes of PTC failures to continue improving PTC system performance and reliability. To

date the Authority has operated over 160,000 passenger train trips with the full protective collision avoidance and

over‐speed prevention benefits afforded by PTC.

Staff continues to seek closure to the Conditional Certification, which was received from the FRA in September

2016 (as one of the first railroads in the nation to achieve that status). Staff submitted a response to the FRA in

December 2016 addressing many of the conditions and is primarily reliant on the industry to develop any artifacts

necessary to address remaining conditions. Subsequently, staff has joined forces with the Class1 Freight Railroads

who are collectively pursuing clearance of the conditions associated with their certifications, and anticipates

submitting this summer a detailed document to the FRA requesting an unconditional I‐ETMS platform non‐vital

overlay PTC System certification. However, given the FRA’s anticipated increase in workload as the December 31,

2018 deadline approaches, the timeline for achieving full PTC System Certification (as “non‐vital” overlay system)

is uncertain.

Staff continues to work with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and its freight railroad partners to

put in‐service the 220 MHz radio spectrum, which the Authority acquired in late 2016. After a prolonged

acquisition process, additional interference studies and FCC approvals are required prior to utilizing the spectrum.

The Authority must also coordinate closely with its railroad partners to integrate the spectrum into the shared

regional communication network. All of the required approvals and coordination efforts are expected to be

resolved in order to formally put the spectrum in‐service by Q3 2018.

PTC staff continues to support the installation, testing and deployment of PTC on the Tier 4 Locomotives to assure

that these locomotives are placed in service with a fully‐functioning and FRA‐approved PTC System. Staff is also

supporting PTC implementation on line extensions and other new capital projects. In particular, on the Redland

Passenger Rail Project (RPRP) staff is pushing the development of PTC technology to work on diesel multiple unit

(DMU) locomotives and provide “near‐side signaling” functionality to minimize the impacts of crossings near

stations.

Further details of the progress (or setbacks) over the period can be found in the section of this report titled

“Status of Program Elements”.

The project remains on‐track to successfully close‐out the core PTC program scope on budget, despite the many

challenges that have been encountered throughout the project and across the industry. Additional scope and

budget were added to the PTC program in late‐2016 and early‐2018 on account of the successful award of two

FRA/FTA grants. This second phase of PTC includes $2.4 million in new funding for components related achieving

and sustaining interoperability followed by $3.2 million in FY17 FAST Act funding for upgrades related to pursuing

vital status. With the additional funding, the PTC program budget increased to $227.2 million (including $5 million

from V/I contractor settlement in 2014). Staff will continue to pursue grant opportunities as they become

available to assist with the cost of PTC system enhancements, future phases and required upgrades.

Successful completion of the core PTC program is being achieved by thoroughly and efficiently transitioning from

contractor‐led scope to Authority staff operations and appropriately allocating staff charges for ongoing upgrades

240

6


and other PTC operating costs to the appropriate PTC Operating and annual rehabilitation budgets, as well as

other applicable third party expansion sources outside of the PTC capital program budget. Staff has also

negotiated maintenance and support contracts with vendors, which are applied to the PTC Operating budget.

Staff was successful in mitigating risks and the project is anticipated to close out without any claims filed.

Through April 2018, expenditures to date on the project total $220.3 million or 97% of the current authorized

program budget of $227.2 million. Expenditures for the six‐month period (Nov. 2017 – Apr. 2018) total slightly

under $1 million, with the largest expenditures for technical consultants and program management split between

the core program and the interoperability scope of the FRA Rail Technology grant. Full details of the program

budget and schedule can be found in the corresponding sections of this report.

241

7


PROJECT SCOPE

The Authority’s PTC system is a locomotive‐centric system overlaid on existing methods of control and operation,

providing an enhanced level of safety through enforcement of train authority limits, permanent speed restrictions

and temporary speed restrictions. PTC is an advanced technology train collision/derailment avoidance system

which uses safety‐critical predictive enforcement to automatically engage the brakes and stop a train in advance

of:

• Potential train to train collision,

• Train over‐speed,

• Unauthorized entry into a track work zone, or

• Movement through a misaligned switch

In 2008, Federal legislation (the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008) was passed requiring Authority, along with

other commuter railroads and most freight railroads in the United States, to implement an interoperable PTC

system by December 31, 2015. In October 2015, Congress passed legislation to extend the deadline for PTC

implementation by three years (to December 31, 2018) with authority for the Secretary of Transportation to grant

railroads up to two additional years (to December 31, 2020) to comply with the law if they meet certain

requirements.

The PTC project team has designed, furnished and installed, tested and commissioned a PTC system in

coordination with its railroad partners. A key aspect of the Federal regulations is the requirement that all PTC

systems be interoperable with any with railroads they share tracks with. Therefore the Authority’s PTC system

must provide for seamless interoperable movements with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF), Union

Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) and Amtrak over Authority‐hosted territories and the Authority must be able to

interoperate seamlessly over BNSF, UPRR and North County Transit District (NCTD) host territories. Since the

Authority has substantially deployed its PTC system, the 2015 deadline extension legislation had minimal impacts,

but provides additional time that is necessary for host railroad NCTD to be in service with PTC and to

accommodate the Authority as a tenant. Tenant railroads Amtrak, BNSF and UPRR also have additional time

before they are required to operate in PTC on Authority‐owned lines.

The PTC system is designed and implemented as an ITC‐compliant interoperable safety critical system and built

around the Wabtec I‐ETMS Rung 1 compliant platform. The system provides a fail‐safe response to system

vulnerabilities, such as the loss of communication of vital data. The system is overlaid on the existing wayside

signal system and method of operations (traffic control or centralized traffic control). Ultimately, validation of the

system completeness comes from the FRA issuance of PTC System Certification. The Authority received a letter of

Conditional Certification from the FRA in September 2016.

The major hardware/software/firmware components of the PTC system are as follows: PTC Back Office Server

System; On‐Board System; Wayside Signal Systems; Communication Network Components; Network

Management System; Communications; and Computer‐Aided Dispatching System. In 2010, the Authority solicited

and awarded a major systems integration contract to a “Vendor/Integrator” (V/I) Contractor. The V/I contractor

was responsible for designing, providing, installing, testing, and integrating the multiple complex systems and

start‐up of these components, warranty of the system and provision of comprehensive operation and

maintenance training to Authority staff and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) contractors. In January 2014, an

agreement between Parsons and the Authority removed the CAD and BOS work streams from the V/I contractor

scope and the Authority contracted directly with Wabtec Railway Electronics for provision of those components.

242

8


The V/I contractor remained responsible for the integration and testing of those components as part of the

overall PTC system.

The following graphic provides a high‐level depiction of the PTC system components.

To adequately and comprehensively prepare for a production‐ready PTC system, the project scope included

assessment, validation and modification of Authority system assets (track, signals, communication systems and

networks, wireless radio spectrum, information technology systems, locomotives and cab cars). This work was

necessary to ensure implementation of a system that can be sustained for the long term without degrading

overall service, performance, capacity or reliability.

For more detail, the PTC program can be broken down into the following major Project Elements:

System‐wide Engineering & Regulatory Deliverables – This large component of work included rail corridor and

track mapping, PTC database development, general system assessment and validation, braking algorithm studies,

submittals to regulatory agencies and staff training. The PTC system is dependent upon a high precision, highly

accurate track database, to allow trains to navigate across track segments and allow the on‐board Train

Management Computer (TMC) to react to signals, civil speed restrictions, switch position and clearance points. In

order to achieve the precision and accuracy required for PTC System functionality, a system‐wide re‐engineering

of the Authority’s historical geographic information systems (GIS) was required. This GIS re‐engineering included

developing new track charts, new “composite” right‐of‐way maps, interactive “head end” videos and other

related tools. These tools served as the foundation for establishment of coordinates for all required PTC critical

feature data points within sub‐meter accuracy on each subdivision. Critical features are all integer milepost,

signals, crossings, switches, interlocking limits, permanent speed restrictions, track detection circuits, and

clearance points for every switch location installed on the main and siding tracks. The total number of these

243

9


critical features is nearly 8,000. Upon completion of the office and field mapping, the software containing the

track database is developed, tested, validated and verified and then loaded onto the back office server and on‐

board systems. The Authority also validated the system assets, including all signal systems, communication

messaging loads and passenger/commuter train braking algorithms. In conjunction with re‐mapping the railroad,

a new System Timetable and revised CAD database were developed to incorporate changes and the improved

accuracy of from the mapping effort plus a general reassessment and revision of the wayside signal system. A set

of updated and very accurate maps (PTC Track Chart and Composite Map) and an updated timetable were

completed and distributed in 2013, followed by subsequent updates. These documents, and the on‐going

updates, are controlled under the Configuration and Change Management processes.

Prior to PTC operation, it was essential that Authority Engineering, Operations and Maintenance personnel be

familiar with how the PTC systems are intended to operate and how to address issues when component parts are

not functioning properly. Additionally, rigorous Configuration and Change Management policies and processes

must be well‐established throughout the agency with clearly defined lines of responsibility and accountability. A

training program developed by the V/I contractor has transferred knowledge of all PTC components, systems and

system interfaces to more than 600 Authority staff and contractors who require various levels of system training

in conjunction with the implementation of PTC.

Vendor/Integrator Contract – In early 2010, the Authority issued a request for proposal (RFP) for a specialized V/I

contractor to design, procure, install, and test and start‐up the PTC system. Parsons Transportation Group (PTG)

was awarded the V/I contract and issued a Limited Notice to Proceed (LNTP) on October 15, 2010. The V/I

contractor scope included implementing the following PTC core functions:

The Back Office Server (BOS) is the repository for track geometry, wayside signaling configuration and

permanent speed restriction data bases. This component was subsequently removed from the V/I

contractor scope and contracted directly from Wabtec Railway Electronics. The BOS which features both

common ITC railroad software and Authority specific software will be linked to the CAD through the

common Train Management Dispatch System (TMDS®) platform. The BOS “normalizes”, or translates,

each railroad’s (including the Authority’s) unique CAD messages to a common language that that can be

understood by the on‐board systems of different railroads. It is a key mechanism to achieving

interoperability among different railroad operators.

The On‐Board PTC System is a compilation of software and hardware that provides train operations

information (such as current position, calculating braking distances, managing restrictions) and enforces

safety critical restrictions in the event of train engineer failure to correctly respond to the train operations

information.

The Communications Network Component (CNC) ties PTC system components such as the

Locomotive/cab‐car, Wayside Interface Unit (WIU), Back Office Server and Base Stations, together using a

reliable, hardened redundant wired and wireless communication network.

A PTC compatible Wayside Signal System includes installing wayside interface units (WIUs) and the

necessary hardware and software to interface with the CNC. The Authority has procured and installed the

WIUs in its service territory. In some cases, existing signal system locations were upgraded and

reconfigured to allow for compatibility with the PTC system. The V/I contractor is responsible for the

communication of the WIU to the communication network.

A PTC compatible Computer‐Aided Dispatching (CAD) System. Since the Authority’s legacy Digicon CAD

system was no longer commercially supported, from both a software and hardware standpoint, and was

not PTC‐compatible, a new PTC compatible dispatching system was included as part of the V/I contract

244

10


scope. In January 2014, this component was removed from the V/I contractor scope and contracted

directly from Wabtec Railway Electronics. The new CAD system is capable of dispatching the railroad

consistent with current operations as a Centralized Traffic Control System and with the accuracy and

precision required for PTC functionality. This system is the dispatcher’s interface to the PTC Back Office

System for issuing and removing authorities. Hardware and software for both primary and secondary hot

standby CAD, BOS, and path diversity for the CNC systems are required within the system. Wabtec’s

CAD/BOS scope includes disaster recovery (DR) and redundant backup, training and testing. The DR CAD

site and equipment are also be used for testing software and hardware updates, troubleshooting and

training. Employees in Charge (EICs) have been provided remote portable units connected to the CAD

system, allowing EICs the capability of managing Work Authorities by electronically requesting, receiving

and releasing authorities. These remote terminals are not part of the PTC system.

In January 2014, an agreement between Parsons and the Authority removed the CAD and BOS work streams from

the V/I contractor scope and the Authority contracted directly with Wabtec Railway Electronics for provision of

those components. The V/I contractor remained responsible for the integration and testing of those components

as part of the overall PTC system.

In addition to the aspects of the contract described above, the V/I contract also contained a number of options,

including the “NCTD Option” to have the V/I contractor install PTC on the North Country Transportation District

(NCTD) territory, a “Customer Information System” (CIS) to provide dispatch and arrival information to

passengers, and a “Hardware and Technology Refresh.” In January 2011, the Authority provided formal

notification to the V/I Contractor that it would not exercise the NCTD option.

Railroad & Inter‐Agency Coordination ‐ The PTC system must be fully and mutually compatible and interoperable

with host and tenant railroads. The Authority is host to BNSF, UPRR and Amtrak; and a tenant on BNSF, UPRR and

NCTD railroads. Interoperability ensures safe operation of mixed freight and passenger services to allow seamless

uninterrupted movement among different host railroads. For the Authority, interoperability is based on

compliance with the Interoperable Train Control Committee (ITC) standards and guidelines. The Rung 1 level of

these requirements are essentially complete, and member governance currently in development by the UP, BNSF,

CSX, and NS. Additional requirements may be developed as the various other railroads deploy interoperability.

Host and tenant railroads need to execute PTC Interoperability Agreements, which are similar to Shared Use

Agreements or Association of American Railroads (AAR) interchange agreements.

Communication Modifications/Radio Spectrum – The PTC system relies on communications. If the

communications systems supporting rail operations (PTC, CTC, voice radio) is not reliable, train delays will rise to

an unacceptable level. The communication network is divided into two main categories. The first category is PTC

“local” data messages from signals to trains, and between trains and signals and base stations. These PTC data

messages are transported mainly over a special designated PTC radio network using specialized PTC radios located

on trains, at wayside signals and control points and at base stations. A diverse set of communication paths is used

including the 220 MHz spectrum, cellular telephone modems, and 802.11 MHz Wi‐Fi. A working group, which

includes representatives of the Authority, the PTC consultant team, the V/I contractor, and PTC 220 LLC

(representing the interests of the Class 1 railroads), has been established to coordinate the design and

implementation of the 220 MHZ radio system in the LA Basin area. PTC 220 LLC, through its consultant TTCI, is

managing the frequency assignments for PTC use. The second communication network category is the backhaul or

long haul network, which is used to transport PTC and other critical railroad operational data and voice messages

in‐between the central operations centers and the base stations and other key communication nodes. The

245

11


backhaul transport technology includes combinations of both private and commercial (MPLS) and wired copper

and fiber optic lines and wireless digital microwave, data radio (ATCS) and Ethernet radios.

To address the projected long term (20+ years) PTC messaging demand, the Authority procured on the secondary

commercial market, one MHz of bandwidth, (40 separate 25KHz broadband channels) in the 220 MHz band to

support PTC data communication over the Authority’s host service territory and neighboring railroad service

territory where the Authority operates as a tenant. The procured spectrum will provide the required

communication links between the On‐Board system, the EIC units, WIUs and a network management system

(NMS). The ITC freight railroads/PTC ‐220 LLC have acquired and licensed 18 broadband 25 KHz channels in the

220 to 222 MHz frequency range. About 9 of the 18 PTC 220 channels had power and height limitations. However,

these limitations have been addressed in a waiver before the FCC. The greatest spectrum demand will be in urban

areas such as Southern California/Los Angeles and Chicago metropolitan areas which feature high train densities

and large complex track and signal systems in a congested environment. The Authority license is for the upper

AMTS bands 217.5 to 218.0 and 219.5 to 220.0 MHz. From the beginning of the project in 2009 until 2016, the

AMTS spectrum acquisition was bogged down in a multi‐year protracted legal, bankruptcy and FCC licensing

process. Current status of the spectrum procurement and deployment is provided in the corresponding section of

this report.

In order to provide a robust, reliable and diverse communication network to support the local wireless PTC train

to base station and wayside signal to train messages, the Authority expanded its communication network in a

multi‐year program by building a private fiber optic, microwave, Ethernet radio (back‐haul) transport combined

with commercial telecommunication circuit leases. The combined private and commercial system provides the

communication capacity, reliability and diversity to support the network link between the Operations Center, PTC

Back Office Server and wayside and Base Stations. This “communication backhaul” work was performed

separately and generally not included within the V/I contractor’s scope although there is some overlap. The

Communication System Improvements for PTC is funded in part by the FRA High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail

grant and Prop 1A funding, as shown in the Communication System Improvements for PTC table in the Funding

section. Because PTC is a communication intensive system, it is highly dependent on an underlying robust,

reliable, communications network with path and technology diversity.

WIU’s & Track Modifications – the Authority’s program included procuring and installing wayside interface units

prior to the V/I contractor’s efforts of connecting the WIUs to the communication network. The WIUs provide

status information relating to signals, and switches. The existing signal system, aspects strings, signal circuit plans

have been thoroughly assessed for deficiencies that would cause the signal system or PTC system to function at

any level less than the required high reliability and availability. Outside of the PTC program, the Authority also

evaluated the system for unused turnouts to be removed or unprotected turnouts for which derails were needed

to protect against potential runaway cars fouling the main track. These efforts will also allow for eventual higher

speed operations.

Signal Relocation and Reconfiguration – As part of the PTC program, select work has been done to relocate

and/or reconfigure signals and enhance system safety. In the fall of 2010 the signal at CP Roxford was modified to

enhance visibility and provide a greater preview. In 2012, the Authority determined that the signal system at CP’s

Mission and Terminal near LAUS and CP’s Burbank Jct. Olive and Brighton on the Valley subdivisions would require

equipment rehabilitation including conversion of relays to microprocessors and installations of LED lamps and

configuration changes to allow compatibility with the PTC System. Most of this upgrade work at these five CP’s

was funded outside of the PTC program, through the use of annual signal system rehabilitation grant funding. In

addition to the signal relocation and reconfigurations previously described, the Authority has reviewed, validated

246

12


and re‐configured existing signal aspect strings, communications and signal drawings to ensure a consistency of

operations, and modified signal application program logic as needed. This validation work provided a test of the

configuration and change management practices across the various overlapping operating components including

Operating Timetables, Track Charts, Signal Aspects, PTC Subdivision files, CAD, as required by PTC regulations.

Consistent behavior of the signaling system leads to consistent expectations of conditions in advance of the train,

and makes the human more likely to notice changing conditions. The signal reconfiguration effort promotes

situational awareness by providing a consistent pattern of stimulus and response of the wayside signal system to

track conditions in advance of the train. The Authority also continues to monitor signal preview for train

operations to determine if additional signal relocations are warranted.

New Train Control Facility and Metrolink Operations Center – Preliminary investigations of the Authority’s

Operations Center (MOC) uncovered vulnerabilities (seismic, fire and power) and space and layout deficiencies

that are inconsistent with the high degree of reliability and utilization imposed by the PTC system requirements.

As a result, the PTC Program includes design and construction of a new train control facility, known as the

Dispatch and Operations Center (DOC) (previously known as Train Control and Operations Support Facility

(TCOSF)). This facility provides a "secure and hardened" building for the Authority’s centralized command and

control systems including; dispatching, PTC back office servers, centralized communication network control of

fiber, wireless and leased communication networks and information technology (IT) systems. The DOC is located

in Pomona on a 3.5 acre parcel that was previously acquired, adjacent to the Authority’s San Gabriel and

Pasadena Subdivisions and near the existing MOC. Before the primary systems at the DOC were in placed in

service, the MOC was the initial interim site for installation of the new CAD system, PTC and network

management system. With the transition to the DOC in early 2015, MOC underwent a modest “hardening” and

improvement program to support its role as the disaster recovery (DR) site operated on a “hot‐standby” basis as a secondary centralized command and control system as well as a site to perform hardware and software testing

and version updates and training. Other alternatives to the MOC as a DR site were considered including relocating

some if not all of the back office PTC/CAD computers and servers to a high availability commercial data center

easily accessible to the Authority’s fiber backbone. In particular, one potential data center site near the Los

Angeles MTA Gateway center building was considered. Prior to deciding to proceed with construction of the DOC,

other alternative sites were studied including an alternative to co‐locate the Authority dispatching function to the

BNSF Division offices and dispatch center in San Bernardino.

247

13


STATUS OF PROGRAM ELEMENTS

System‐wide Engineering & Regulatory Deliverables – The Authority continues to pursue full PTC System

Certification from the FRA as a ‘non‐vital system’ after submitting additional information in late 2016 and 2017 to

address the “conditions” of the Conditional Certification that was granted to the Authority in September 2016.

The Authority originally submitted the large and complex PTCSP document to the FRA on June 30, 2015, becoming

the first commuter railroad in the nation to submit a PTCSP and to receive Conditional PTC System Certification

from the FRA. As a result, there was limited precedent for the document or the overall certification process. At

the direction of the FRA, the PTCSP underwent a number of re‐submittals through the comprehensive review

process resulting in a substantial reorganization and streamlining of the document, reducing from over 18,000

pages (including all appendices and attachments) to less than 6,000 pages. The PTCSP Version 2.0 was

resubmitted in December 2015, followed by a nine‐month review process which resulted in the letter of

Conditional Certification in September 2016. For the near term, the Authority is seeking certification as a non‐

vital overlay system, consistent with most other railroads utilizing the I‐ETMS platform. Additional efforts will

begin under a new phase of the project to pursue vital status, which is dependent on the industry’s development

and testing of necessary system upgrades.

The Authority conducts periodic meetings with the FRA to follow‐up on the status of certification and other PTC

issues. On May 1, 2018, staff participated in a Commuter Railroad PTC Workshop which took place in

Washington, D.C., organized by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). The status of PTC

implementation across the nation was a key topic of the Summit, along with challenges related to the up‐coming

December 2018 deadline for PTC deployment. The Authority was invited to provide a presentation on PTC Lessons

Learned. Currently only a small number of commuter railroads besides SCRRA and Amtrak have met the statutory

requirements regarding PTC, therefore most commuter railroads will need to submit requests for extension. The

FRA maintains a report on the status of all railroads’ PTC deployments across the nation, which reflects the

Authority’s advanced progress relative to most other commuter railroads. The report can be found at:

https://www.fra.dot.gov/app/ptc/

PTC Coverage and Performance – One of the primary on‐going efforts of the project staff is to expand PTC

operations to revenue trains on lines hosted by our freight partners and vice versa. In March 2018, another major

milestone was achieved with the commencement of interoperable PTC revenue service with UPRR. Significant

complexities were overcome to ensure PTC compatibility with both BNSF and UPRR, becoming the first commuter

railroad to achieve interoperable PTC with both Class I railroads. Previously, in October 2017, the Authority

achieved interoperable PTC revenue service with BNSF, marking the first instance of interoperable PTC operations

on the I‐ETMS platform. Up until this point, the railroads only had PTC enforcement in effect on their own trains

operating in their own host territory. With this latest accomplishment, the Authority’s trains now remain under

seamless PTC protection as they cross on to BNSF and UPRR‐owned lines. Likewise, BNSF and UPRR trains are now

capable of communicating with interoperable PTC while operating on the Authority‐owned lines. Despite this

progress, currently only a portion of the UPRR and Metrolink trains are operating with PTC in‐service over each

other’s territory due to software limitations.

On an average weekday, the Authority operates fifty‐one of its trains across BNSF territory (portions of the

Orange County, 91 and IEOC lines) and eighteen trains across UPRR territory (portions of Ventura and Riverside

lines). After an initial ramp‐up period, all fifty‐one Metrolink trains that cross BNSF territory are protected with

interoperable PTC in‐service. Meanwhile on UPRR territory, the Class I freight has opted to only commence

interoperable PTC on the Ventura line at this point, deferring its busier and more complex Riverside line until

sufficient confidence is achieved. As a result, six of the eighteen daily Metrolink trains operate on UPRR lines with

248

14


PTC active. Similarly, while BNSF has the majority of its trains PTC‐protected over Authority‐owned territory, UPRR

is only operating approximately three of twenty daily trains with PTC on Authority lines until a PTC component

upgrade becomes available to fix a limitation in the number of locomotives that the Authority’s PTC system can

reliable handle. As the only railroad currently attempting to process and store the entire nation‐wide fleets of

both BNSF and UPRR trains in its PTC system, this issue is unique to the Authority and its vendor for the PTC

component at issue, known as a Mobile Device Manager (MDM). The Authority is working closely with its vendor

to overcome this limitation, with an upgrade in the development and testing process.

With interoperability now well underway with BNSF and UPRR, a key focus for the Authority is achieving the same

milestone with Amtrak and NCTD. Staff continues to coordinate extensively with both railroads and is utilizing the

lessons learned with BNSF and UPRR to support their advancement towards achieving universal interoperable PTC

coverage in Southern California. Currently the Authority is targeting mid‐ to late‐summer to commence

interoperable revenue service with both railroads, though the timeline is dependent on FRA approvals (for NCTD),

PTC readiness of those partner railroads and potential issues that may arise during the testing process. Amtrak

has a challenging road ahead given the number of railroad partners that it must achieve interoperability with, but

recent progress in Amtrak’s commencement of interoperable PTC with BNSF and UPRR has increased confidence

that the approximate targets for interoperability with the Authority will be achieved.

At the Authority’s March 9, 2018 Board Meeting, Amtrak presented a schedule showing the commencement of

PTC revenue operations in June 2018. While that schedule has slipped by a few weeks, work is progressing and

currently targeting late‐June/July for the initial commencement of PTC revenue service (with a limited number of

trains). Amtrak has committed to proceeding with lab testing with the Authority in May, as soon as it completes

lab‐to‐lab testing with UPRR which is currently underway. In April, the Authority’s PTC On‐Board group performed

an assessment of Amtrak’s on‐board installations, finding issues with quality or completeness on many of the

units inspected and raising concerns about the readiness of their full fleet for PTC operations by July. Therefore

initial PTC operations are expected to begin with a limited fleet, until Amtrak has fully‐commissioned all of its

units for PTC, which Amtrak has committed to completing by the end of August 2018. Staff is carefully monitoring

Amtrak’s PTC progress and will keep the Board informed. If Amtrak is not able to have all of its trains operating

with PTC at the same level of reliability as Metrolink, BNSF, and Union Pacific by the August target date, the

Authority may have to develop a policy that addresses the handling of trains that are not PTC‐equipped on its host

territory.

The Authority is advancing much of the interoperability efforts as a result of the successful award of $2.4 million

in funding from the FRA for the development and deployment of new systems and tools that are needed to

achieve and sustain interoperable PTC. Included in this scope is a Trouble Ticket Management System, to manage

PTC issues between the interoperable railroad partners. In March 2018, the Authority was awarded $3.2 million in

additional funding from an FY17 FRA/FTA grant scoped for reliability and security enhancements and effort

towards implementing a vital system, once the technology has matured and becomes available for testing and

production deployment.

In addition to interoperability, a key priority for project staff is continual improvement in the reliability and

functionality of the PTC System. In 2017 the team advanced PTC system reliability from trending in the mid‐80

percent range to the high‐90 percent range. Performance took a hit after the commencement of interoperability

in October 2017 (which added new complexity) and has slowly improving. At this point, improvement in system

reliability and functionality is primarily dependent upon the deployment of vendor software upgrades that

address some known causes of failed runs. PTC staff closely tracks and monitors the status of PTC on all daily train

runs, investigating the causes of PTC failures to continue improving PTC system performance and reliability. In July

249

15


2015, the Authority became the first railroad in the nation to have PTC operational across its entire host network

(territory, equipment and crew). Since that time, the Authority has successfully operated approximately 160,000

passenger train trips with the full protective collision avoidance and over‐speed prevention benefits afforded by

PTC. Staff is pushing its key vendor(s) to continue developing the PTC software and hardware sub‐systems to

address defects and deliver the full‐functionality required for extremely high levels of reliability and functionality

expected of the PTC system.

In September 2017, the Authority successfully expanded its PTC speed enforcement in the Los Angeles Union

Station (LAUS) terminal area. Currently most PTC systems exclude the terminal areas due to the complex number

of tracks, switches and other features, as well as the low operating speeds. In response to derailments at

Hoboken, NJ and Brooklyn, NY terminals in 2016, the Authority undertook a concerted effort to configure and test

PTC to implement speed enforcement at LAUS. Previously, in late 2016, the Authority added non‐revenue trains,

known as “deadhead moves” to operate under PTC, for a total of 236 PTC‐equipped train runs each weekday. PTC

staff is also supporting the installation, testing and deployment of PTC on the F‐125 Tier 4 Locomotives to assure

that these locomotives are placed in service with a fully‐functioning and FRA‐approved PTC System.

Wabtec TMDS® CAD and BOS – Wabtec remains in the Final Acceptance and close‐out phase of its contract,

pending the close‐out of open defects to address in its TMDS CAD and BOS systems. Wabtec has completed the

majority of its base scope under its contract, having put the TMDS CAD and BOS systems in service beginning in

2014. A major focus of staff is to address the open defects and remaining functionality requirements TMDS CAD

and BOS systems, with the vendor performing software development sprints followed by extensive testing efforts

by Authority staff prior to deployment on the production network.

In June 2017, the Authority finalized the execution of a long‐term maintenance and support agreement (MSA)

with Wabtec, to ensure that the complex PTC software and hardware system components are current, licensed

and compliant with industry and regulatory‐agency driven upgrades. The Agreement allows for the authorization

of additional task order scopes of work related to the TMDS system.

The Authority’s PTC‐compatible CAD system went in service in May 2014 and successfully completed 60‐day

Reliability Testing in July 2014. This important achievement represented the resolution of years of challenges and

impacts to the project. This effort was closely managed by the Authority after removing the CAD and BOS scope

from the V/I contractor and contracting directly with Wabtec. Wabtec’s TMDS® system is largely an off‐the‐shelf

proven product that was configured with Authority ‐specific data. In addition to the CAD system, Wabtec also

delivered its TMDS BOS system with incremental releases for each subdivision ahead of the field functional testing

on each subdivision. The successful delivery and functionality of these systems is evidenced by the achievement

of the PTC System‐wide in‐service milestone in June 2015 and on‐going successful operations.

Adding to the base contract scope, Wabtec’s contract capacity was increased by the Board in October 2014 to

allow for the provision of an ‘Individual and Composite Cyclic Redundancy Calculator’ (IC3) and completion of the

Authority’s CIS. IC3 is an independent system to verify that PTC messages sent across the network are accurate

and complete. The system performs a back‐check of messages that are generated in the CAD and transfer

through the BOS to the On‐board system. This effort was added through a change order to Wabtec’s scope in

2015. In December 2015, Wabtec deployed a test version of the IC3 system in the PTC lab and continues to slowly

advance its development of the system. IC3 deployment is a safety enhancement and a requirement before

migrating from a non‐vital to a vital system.

Another important subsystem developed and deployed by Wabtec is Key Exchange Services (KES), which provides

secure transfer of PTC communications between interoperable railroad partners. The challenge of developing this

250

16


system was one of the contributors to delays in achieving interoperability. The railroad partners proved

interoperability utilizing a manual work‐around process, but deployment of this system was necessary to fully

operate and sustain interoperable PTC long‐term.

Also added to the Wabtec scope is the development and deployment of an upgrade Customer Information System

(CIS), aka Train Tracker, which provides real time predictive arrival and departure as well as tracking information

of Authority and Amtrak trains. This system, which had been a lower or secondary priority below the delivery of

the Train Control Systems (i.e. TMDS CAD, BOS, IC3, KES), leverages the train position information available in the

CAD and PTC systems. See “Train Tracker/Customer Information System (CIS)” section below.

V/I Contractor – As prime contractor, Parsons Transportation Group and its subs built‐out and tested the

Authority’s PTC system from late‐2010 through late‐2015, followed by a contractually‐required 120‐day

Availability Test Period to validate overall system reliability. The Availability Test Period was successfully

completed January 1, 2016 – April 30, 2016, resulting in commencement of the V/I contractor’s two year PTC

system warranty, beginning on May 1, 2016. The V/I contractor is currently in an extended close‐out process with

the final acceptance invoice and associated documentation under review. At this point, the activities required to

operate, maintain and sustain PTC have been fully‐transferred from the V/I contractor and consultants to agency

staff, with key vendors and technical staff available through Maintenance and Support Agreements (MSAs) and

on‐call contract task orders.

Safety – For the construction phase of the project, the V/I contractor established a Local Safety Committee which

included its Safety Manager and representatives from the Authority to participate in Safety Committee meetings.

A Safety Plan has been submitted and accepted for the project. The Authority also coordinated with the V/I

contractor on Site Specific Work Plans (SSWPs) to allow V/I crews safe access to the ROW and conducting testing.

To date, there have been no lost time accidents on the project.

Quality Assurance – A Project Quality Assurance Plan has been submitted and approved by the Authority, with

contractual responsibilities identified. The Authority performs audits and analysis of best practices.

Railroad & Inter‐Agency Coordination – In addition to the on‐going coordination with railroad partners on technical issues, the Authority is working closely with its partners on PTC governance, legal and commercial

issues. Prior to commencing interoperable PTC with each railroad, the Authority has developed agreements on

the handling of PTC operational issues and potential liability implications when, for instance a host track

dispatcher authorizes a tenant to proceed with PTC cut‐out, or dealing with trains unequipped for PTC.

Agreements have been developed between the Authority and the legal counsels, operating and engineering

departments of its interoperable partners.

The Authority’s coordination with the FRA and Class 1 freight railroads and Amtrak Pacific Surfliner Intercity

Service remains a key factor in the project’s success. Regular meetings are held with the freight, passenger and

commuter railroads operating in Southern California, as well as the rest of the industry, PTC 220 LLC and other

stakeholders, on issues such as testing of the overall communication network for the basin, including a shared slot

plan and other issues related to spectrum usage, interoperability, trouble ticket exchange processes and

certification. Staff is actively participating in several PTC committees including an American Association of

Railroads (AAR) and American Public Transportation Association (APTA) committees that will establish agreements

related to PTC governance, compatibility and inter‐operability. The Authority is also coordinating with other

transit and regulatory agencies, APTA, NTSB, I‐ETMS Users Group and the California PUC to provide knowledge

251

17


transfer when possible. The Authority has hosted numerous visitors from other railroads in order to share lessons

learned.

Future system enhancements are also a key topic of consideration between the Authority and its railroad

partners. The FRA has indicated that the PTC systems being installed by BNSF and the Authority do not meet the

threshold for approval as a “vital” system. As a result, the FRA would certify the systems as non‐vital until “vital”

status is eventually achieved through future software and hardware upgrades. The distinction between vital and

non‐vital status will have limited impact to the Authority’s daily PTC operations, but it represents a significant

future work effort and cost that will be likely be required in order for the Authority to remain compatible with its

freight partners.

Signal Relocation and Reconfiguration – Signal relocation and re‐configuration work was required at number

of locations to make the signals compatible for PTC; therefore, a portion of that work was funded under the PTC

program (project numbers 450010 and 450020). This work included physically relocating signals, replacing relays

with microprocessors or replacing other obsolete equipment that will not communicate with PTC radios. As part

of this work stream, signal modifications have been completed at CPs Brighton, Olive, Burbank, Dayton, Terminal

and Mission, Roxford, Woodman, Dayton, Doran St., CPs Currier, Rochester and Nolan.

WIUs, Track & Signal Modifications – The installation of WIU modules and antennas is complete across all

subdivisions with 210 WIUs installed, 168 wayside antennas and 168 wayside radios installed. On‐going effort is

required to maintain the installed components, including implementing software upgrades which are furnished by

the vendors, but require the project team or agency to test and install the upgrades. Since the equipment has

been installed, there have been software upgrades to the WIU’s, Wayside Message Servers (WMS’s) and radios.

Prior to the deployment of the Network Management System (NMS), these updates were laborious, requiring a

site visit and physical modification to each device.

Communication System – Build‐out of a robust communication network, including base station sites and

towers, was substantially completed in late 2013, including the installation of PTC communications equipment in

the tunnels. Since the completion of installation work, the Authority has been engaged in extensive testing of the

overall network performance. Because it is a regional radio network, and the first regional network to be

installed, there is a lot of coordination involved with freight railroads who share the network. There is potential

for future changes and additional testing required as other railroads complete their build‐out and utilization of the

regional network. In 2015, the Authority, in conjunction with the BNSF, UPRR and PTC 220, undertook a

significant, coordinated effort upgrading the area‐wide slot plan, 4‐second super frame and radio software in

order support future expansion needs. Coverage and reliability testing and channel planning will continue to be

re‐examined as the industry governance plans develop.

Work on the PTC‐related Communications Backhaul Project for Valley, Ventura and East San Gabriel (VVSG) is

complete, including acceptance testing, as‐built documentation and project close out. The project included fiber

optic lines, digital microwave, and commercial telecommunication MPLS multicast circuits. The related

communication project in Orange County was substantially completed in November 2012, including the

construction of a fiber backbone with digital microwave hop. Overall, the combined projects include the

construction or modification of 31 communication towers and were completed in time to avoid any impacts to

the PTC implementation. A separate Project Status Report is available for more information on these projects

(issued through project completion).

220 MHz Radio Spectrum – Staff continues its efforts to put its PTC radio spectrum in‐service, currently

anticipated by late 2018. The protracted efforts to acquire 220 MHz radio spectrum were completed in late 2016

252

18


culminating six years of legal and regulatory challenges related to the acquisition process. After acquisition,

additional approval steps are required from the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) prior utilizing the

spectrum, including ensuring that usage of the spectrum will not interfere with other existing users in adjacent

spectrum bands. Staff has performed the engineering studies and is awaiting final FCC approval. Coordination

efforts are also required to put the spectrum in‐service with the Authority’s partners in the shared regional

communication network.

The Authority originally entered into an agreement to purchase the spectrum license in 2010, but faced extensive

challenges and delays both by the seller’s bankruptcy proceedings and technical hurdles with the FCC. In order to

avoid delays to the overall PTC system deployment and testing, the Authority developed a strategic approach

involving both the lease of different spectrum (from PTC‐220 LLC.) and multi‐pronged legal actions before the FCC

and the bankruptcy court. In September 2016, the FCC approved the license transfer agreement, which was

followed by the finalization of bankruptcy proceedings and completing the full purchase of the 220 MHz spectrum

license.

Dispatch and Operations Center (DOC) & Metrolink Operations Center (MOC) – Construction on the DOC (previously known as the Train Control and Operations Support Facility (TCOSF)) in the city of Pomona, was

completed in late 2014. Occupancy by Authority staff began in December 2014 and it was cutover to become the

primary site for dispatching in February 2015. Contract close‐out with the Design/Build contractor is now

proceeding after a delay related to contract requirements for LEED Certification. Final steps are being taken to

achieve certification prior issuing final payment.

The V/I contractor and Authority staff supported the build‐out and commissioning of the data center which

houses the TMDS® CAD and BOS, other PTC systems, as well as critical Authority business operations systems.

With the DOC site is up and running, the MOC became the secondary disaster recovery (DR) site with capabilities

for training and testing. The V/I contractor also provided additional improvements needed to support PTC

operations and dispatching out of the facilities, including the provision of a second generator and minor electrical

work at the DOC, repairs and modifications to the MOC to support and sustain its use as Disaster Recovery (DR)

secondary control center site and a PTC/CAD systems test lab. Most of the PTC test lab hardware and software

was furnished by Wabtec under the H1655‐14 contract. The MOC test lab enables staff to perform PTC and CAD

software regression testing and PTC, CAD and Communications hardware testing. Authority staff has taken over

lab testing responsibilities from the V/I contractor. These upgrades and repairs are necessary to support future

recurring PTC operations and are not part of the core PTC capital project budget.

Train Tracker/Customer Information System (CIS) – Currently, work on the Train Tracker system is largely

complete with the system in production service and extensively used by the Authority’s customers. Public roll‐out

of the Train Tracker website began in October 2017 as a beta testing release, collecting public feedback and close

monitoring, before transitioning to full‐production. The system leverages data from the PTC system to provide

real time train location information and predictive arrival information for trains at each station. This system

(previously known as the Customer Information System (CIS)) is not funded as part of the core PTC program, but

was developed under a change order to Wabtec’s PTC contract and the relies on GPS location data and station

stop events that are derived from the PTC system.

This sub‐project has been in development under failed attempts by prior vendors for nearly a decade. Most

recently, in 2014 an initial phase of CIS functionality was deployed under the V/I contract but further

advancement of the system progressed slowly, due in part to a direct interface that is required with the CAD and

BOS systems. As a result, the Authority negotiated agreements with Parsons and Wabtec to complete the work

253

19


under a new contract directly between the Authority and Wabtec. This approach consolidated CIS under one

entity with the CAD and BOS vendor. CIS development and deployment was originally exercised as an option of

the V/I contract that was funded outside of the PTC program budget.

Under the current contract, deployment was separated into three phases. Phase I delivered basic train schedule

information and manually broadcast ad‐hoc messages, such as service interruptions, on changeable message signs

at stations, as well as audio messaging functions using the MPLS “multicast” service that enables simultaneous

audio updates to be easily sent out across the system. Phase II tied CIS into the CAD system to provide predictive

train departure and arrival times. Phase III tied CIS into the PTC system to provide real‐time GPS location data,

along with predictive arrival algorithms to calculate next train arrival information, enhanced web services,

including integration with the Authority’s new website, displays for mobile devices and interfaces for social media.

254

20


PROJECT PHOTOS

Top left: PTC Onboard Engineer performing

quality inspection of an Amtrak locomotive PTC

onboard installation.

Below right: PTC test monitoring station on the

Authority’s PTC test train during interoperability

testing with UPRR.

255

21


Above: New Tier IV locomotives are being inspected and commissioned for PTC operations by project staff.

Below: Locomotives in Keller Yard preparing for interoperable testing with UPRR.

256

22


MANAGEMENT ISSUES

1.

On‐going software and component

upgrades required to achieve and maintain

interoperability

DESCRIPTION: The need for on‐going updates to the PTC software and hardware components, particularly as other railroads throughout the country test and deploy PTC, presents a risk to the Authority’s schedule and budget. The Authority is required to maintain current and compatible versions of industry‐wide PTC software with the other railroads for interoperability, but frequent updates are straining PTC resources and budgets.

HANDLING APPROACH: The Authority is working closely with its railroad partners to coordinate the deployment of software versions required for interoperability. Authority staff has developed strong capabilities for performing software updates internally – including the build‐out of a PTC lab for testing updates before they are implemented in the field – though on‐going testing of software releases is a significant strain on Authority resources. The Authority has executed a maintenance and support contract with Wabtec that is intended to assist and streamline the deployment of software updates. Staff has also applied for and received grants that include the implementation of PTC software updates. Specifically, in 2016 FRA awarded funding related to achieving and sustaining interoperability with the Authority’s railroad partners. Absent any additional capital funding, the cost of future software and hardware upgrades will be absorbed in the annual operating and rehabilitation budgets or as component of new capital projects such as the new F‐125 locomotive program or service extension projects.

2.

PTC Operations, Maintenance,

Dispatch & Train Crew staff training and experience to support PTC system

DESCRIPTION: Authority and Service Contractor staff (dispatchers and engineers/ conductors, equipment workers) require a high‐level of training and experience in the operation and maintenance of the PTC systems to successfully operate PTC without impacting the Authority’s revenue operations and on‐time service requirements. A deep bench of well‐trained PTC, Signal and Communication, Operations, Configuration Management support staff, locomotive engineers and IT specialists are needed to fully‐deploy the PTC system and sustain its operations.

HANDLING APPROACH: The Authority hired and trained a group of PTC operating personnel and is coordinating with the V/I contractor on training and job‐shadowing. The Authority is coordinating with the Authority’s Operating Contractor (Amtrak) to ensure all crews are trained and identify if additional personnel can be drawn to expand the base of PTC‐trained engineers. A key strategy that has been employed is to provide continued hands‐on experience to the systems in shadow mode and delegate responsibility to staff for troubleshooting issues directly while V/I contractor staff is still engaged on the project.

3.

Review, approval and certification of the PTC Safety Plan (PTCSP) which is

largely dependent on the quality of the submitted plan and the availability of

FRA resources which may not align with the Authority’s

proposed schedule

DESCRIPTION: The timeline and process for PTC Safety Plan approval and system certification are largely outside of the Authority’s control and is not well‐understood throughout the industry. The FRA’s definition and requirements for certification may evolve based on pressures and changes within the industry. The FRA may identify new requirements or flaws in the Authority’s PTCSP submittal and withhold approval thereby delaying the Authority’s project completion milestone.

HANDLING APPROACH: The Authority communicates regularly with FRA officials in order to ensure close coordination and seek the FRA’s support in achieving project goals. In May 2015, the FRA through the US DOT Secretary committed to approving the Authority’s PTC SP by the end of the calendar year. Previously the FRA committed to not impacting the Authority’s testing schedule and upheld that commitment with efficient approvals of Authority’s test documents. After initially submitting the PTCSP in in June 2015, it was determined that significant revisions and streamlining of the document were required. The Authority coordinated closely with the FRA on the resubmittal continues to coordinate with the FRA and the industry to understand and prepare for industry‐wide circumstances that could affect requirements and result in a delay to the Authority achieving its PTC System Certification

257

23


milestone. Recently, the Authority received FRA approval to commence provisional revenue service operations (PRSO) which is a significant step forward.

4.

Acquisition of necessary FCC

spectrum and the subsequent

approvals required for use of the PTC

220 MHz communication

network.

DESCRIPTION: Extensive delays to the purchase and utilization of spectrum, due to legal objections by a 3rd party attempting to block the purchase, seller bankruptcy issues and regulatory challenges with the FCC are impacting the Authority’s utility of the spectrum. Long‐term functionality and reliability of the PTC system could be at risk. If sufficient and reliable bandwidth is not exclusively assigned for the Authority and its tenants in the LA basin, the PTC system capability will be severely degraded. On‐going delays to the resolution of this issue results in mounting legal costs and engineering efforts, straining the project budget.

HANDLING APPROACH: This issue was largely addressed with the completion of the spectrum acquisition in December 2016, though on‐going regulatory challenges continue to prevent the Authority from utilizing the spectrum in service. An existing workaround remains to mitigate the issue until full resolution is achieved. The Authority has entered into a five‐year lease agreement with PTC 220 LLC to lease the necessary spectrum for near‐term needs. Forecasted long term spectrum needs may increase significantly and exceed the bandwidth currently available through PTC 220 LLC. The Authority staff and outside Counsel successfully completed all legal and technical remedies to finalize the spectrum acquisition by the end of 2016, and staff is working on putting the spectrum in use.

5.

Development of a Configuration Management

System.

DESCRIPTION: A comprehensive configuration management (CM) system is required by the Authority with universal buy‐in and compliance from staff, in order to successfully and reliable operate and maintain the PTC system. PTC relies on an extremely accurate and reliable database of physical features and operations and compatible software and hardware subsystems. Any changes that are not well documented and approved through the CM system could lead to disruptive unintended braking events, or system failures.

HANDLING APPROACH: The V/I contract has clearly defined version control and documentcontrol requirements that identify the necessity for revising PTC data both during the development phase and in the system that is operational. The Authority has established its own CM system and processes to with the help of the V/I contractor to ensure on‐going compatibility throughout the PTC system. The Authority’s staff is managing changes to both the physical plant or to the operating environment (such as operating rules, working conditions, site access issues, etc.) so that if changes to the PTC system are needed they can be incorporated without impacts. If necessary a determination may need to be made by the Authority management on the timing for release of PTC data changes in order to prevent or minimize impacts to PTC.

6.

CAD/BOS Software development and implementation for

PTC

DESCRIPTION: The inability of the V/I contractor team to efficiently and effectively develop and then integrate the CAD and BOS software has impacted the implementation schedule and system certification. PTC CAD and “Core” BOS are critical elements of the schedule dependent on vendors and the industry. The vendors’ resource limitations and process controls contributed to this delay.

HANDLING APPROACH: ‐ CLOSED ‐ Notice of Potential Default was issued to Parsons related to the CAD scope in late 2013 and an agreement was reached in January 2014 for the Authority to proceed with an alternate vendor for the CAD and BOS subsystems without additional cost to the Authority. The Authority closely managed the delivery of the new Wabtec TMDS CAD and BOS systems, which went in service in accordance with the schedule. The Authority has effectively mitigated this risk.

258

24


SCHEDULE

Overview

The key project milestone of ‘System‐wide’ PTC in‐service was successfully achieved in June 2015, followed by

submittal of the PTC Safety Plan to the FRA in December 2015. As a result, the major milestones remaining are to

achieve interoperable revenue service with the Authority’s rail partners and to achieve full PTC system

certification from the FRA. Both activities include significant dependencies on third parties. In October 2017, a

major milestone was achieved with the commencement of interoperable PTC revenue service with BNSF, followed

by the commencement of interoperable PTC revenue service with UPRR in March 2018. Staff maintains detailed

schedules for achieving interoperable PTC with each of its remaining railroad partners, Amtrak and NCTD, which

are updated weekly in conjunction with weekly coordination meetings held with each railroad. The schedules

reflect lab‐to‐lab testing occurring in May, followed by field testing and commencement of revenue service

operations in June/July 2018. Due to a risk related to the quality and/or completeness of Amtrak onboard

installations, the full fleet may not be ready for PTC operations until August 2018 or beyond. Staff is closely

monitoring and inspecting the readiness of the Amtrak fleet.

In September 2016, the Authority achieved Conditional Certification from the FRA, which the Authority responded

to in December 2016, addressing the conditions. Additional analysis was performed to address human factors

issues with the I‐ETMS PTC platform and submitted to the FRA in April 2016. The Authority is awaiting response

from the FRA regarding its PTCSP and any changes to its Conditional Certification status.

Concurrent with the efforts underway to achieve these milestones, the PTC project team is working with its

contractors to issue PTC System Final Acceptance and closing‐out the contracts. On‐going efforts with third‐party

dependencies will be largely performed by the Authority’s staff and technical consultants, which have successfully

assumed all responsibilities of the PTC program from the V/I contractor. Given the evolving nature of the PTC

technology, future upgrades required to increase security, maintain interoperability or achieve “vital” system

status will be considered new phases of PTC (i.e. PTC Rung 2 or “PTC 2.0”). The Authority is targeting close‐out of

the current phase of PTC (i.e. “PTC 1.0”), to be complete by late‐2018.

Due to the extension of the federal PTC mandate to 2018 with further extensions to 2020 anticipated for many

railroads, the Authority will likely not be subject to any PTC‐related violations or fines until well after 2018 or

2020.

Critical Path

Through mid‐2015, the critical path of the schedule had been consumed by the progression of functional testing

and RSD across each of the Authority‐owned subdivisions leading to the major milestone of ‘System‐wide’ RSD.

With that milestone complete and all the Authority trains operating with PTC in‐service over its host territory and

most of the BNSF and UPRR lines, the next major milestones are the commencement of interoperable PTC with its

remaining railroad partners and achievement of full FRA certification.

The milestone of interoperability with BNSF was achieved in October 2017, followed by interoperability with UPRR

in March 2018, leaving Amtrak and NCTD as key remaining milestones. Each of these milestones has a work

stream of predecessor activities that includes establishing communication tunnels, ensuring compatible software

versions, potential component upgrades to the I‐ETMS onboard software and deploying other subcomponents,

such as Key Exchange Services (KES), lab‐to‐lab testing, field testing, regulatory approvals and inter‐agency

agreements. These work streams are well underway between the Authority, Amtrak and NCTD with

259

25


commencement of initial PTC revenue service anticipated in June/July 2018. The Authority is participating in

regular coordination meetings with each railroad.

The timeline for achieving full certification is unclear at this point and largely dependent on the FRA’s acceptance

of the Authority’s responses and potentially on advancement of components, testing and documentation by

industry vendors. Certainly, it will be an on‐going effort while the Authority utilizes the safety benefits of its fully‐

deployed PTC system. Full certification is expected first as an I‐ETMS, non‐vital overlay PTC system, followed by

later phases to advance to a “vital” overlay system.

Schedule Risks

Based on the achievement of the key project milestone of “PTC System‐wide RSD”, most of the schedule risks

related to development and deployment of the core PTC system have been mitigated or overcome. Remaining

schedule risks relate to the achievement of interoperable PTC revenue service with multiple railroad partners and

the ability to sustain on‐going PTC operations, maintenance and upgrades. Delays to the achievement of

interoperable PTC operations results in a reduction to the full safety benefits of PTC until it can be achieved. Staff

is monitoring the quality and completeness of Amtrak’s PTC onboard installations in order to ensure that they will

be ready to operate reliably with all trains under PTC protection by August 2018. If not achieved, the Authority

will have to consider its policies for handling of trains on its territory that are not equipped with PTC. A schedule

risk unique to interoperability with NCTD is that FRA guidelines seem to indicate that conditional certification of

the host railroad is required before interoperable testing can commence. Since NCTD is the host railroad for a

segment of track that the Authority operates on, testing is on hold, awaiting resolution of that dependency. NCTD

has submitted its PTC Safety Plan and is hoping to achieve conditional certification by June 2018.

Other risks and delays primarily impact the budget for on‐going PTC technical support staff as the V/I contractor is

now largely demobilized. Dependence on NCTD and Amtrak to develop their systems and reach point where joint

interoperable testing with the Authority can be performed presents a risk to the timely completion of the project

scope and project close‐out. For example, the Authority cannot decommission and remove the legacy Automatic

Train Stop (ATS) System until both NCTD and Amtrak have fully deployed their PTC systems. The Authority cannot

maintain costly contractor and consultant staff indefinitely to perform this joint testing, documentation and

support with NCTD and Amtrak. At this point, most functions of the PTC program have successfully transitioned to

the Authority’s agency staff, enabling the V/I contractor to proceed with contract close‐out.

As other railroads in the LA basin increase their PTC operations, the risk remains that the communication network

and other subsystems could become overloaded handling the dense radio message traffic required near Union

Station and other areas. On‐going upgrades to software and hardware components are expected, but in order to

close out the project those upgrades need to come at a frequency and scale that is manageable for the Authority’s

PTC operations staff. If changes to one subsystem are required, updates to a number of other components may

be needed in order to maintain compatibility across the ‘technology stack’.

As a front‐runner in PTC implementation across the nation, the Authority has often faced third‐party and

regulatory schedule dependencies. The timeline and process for full certification with FRA remains a schedule

and budget risk.

Finally, with approximately 40 separate grant allocations to manage and the remaining budget extremely tight,

the program funding is a risk to successful project completion. Staff is closely managing scopes, matching

requirements, expiration dates and other funding restrictions to ensure compliance.

260

26


Below is a “Chronology of Events” which highlights the top‐level milestones achieved on the project to date, as well as a Gantt chart summary schedule.

Chronology of Events

September 2008

The Authority Board of Directors directs the Chief Executive Officer to pursue funding for safety enhancements from the "North American Joint Positive Train Control Program" funded by the FRA and any other sources of funding eligible for developing, implementing, or operating a PTC system for the Authority.

October 2008 The Rail Safety and Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA2008) was signed into law, requiring installation of Positive Train Control Systems.

February 2009 The Authority establishes organization to proactively develop and deliver PTC by December 2012.

December 2009 The Authority Board Approval of Competitive Negotiation Process and Evaluation Criteria.

January 2010 The Federal Railroad Administration issues its final rule requiring railroads to install Positive Train Control technology.

March 2010 The Authority issues Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Vendor/Integrator component of the project.

April 2010 The Authority submits PTC Implementation Plan (PTCIP) to the Federal Railroad Administration, conducts Pre‐Proposal Meeting, and issues Addenda to bidders.

May 2010 Federal Railroad Administration conditionally approves PTC Implementation Plan.

June 2010 Vendor/Integrator contractor(s) submit proposals; the Authority’s evaluation begins.

July 2010 Peer Review Session held. Negotiations with V/I proposer begin.

October 2010 NTP issued to Vendor/Integrator.

February 2011 PTC Development Plan (PTCDP) Variance Type Approval submitted to FRA.

July 2011 Began On‐Board Pilot Installations.

August 2011 Draft PTC Safety Plan submitted to the FRA for informal review.

October 2011 Issue NTP to Communications Backhaul contractor.

February 2012 ETMS VII brake testing conducted on the BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision.

July 2012 The Authority’s Board approval of program budget increase to $210.9M and reset schedule, reflecting Revenue Service in September 2013. TCOSF design/build construction contract DB100R‐12 awarded to USS Cal Builders.

October 2012 Change Order 020 executed, extending V/I contractor staff and facilities; contractual Revenue Service milestone to September 2013

November 2012 The Authority BOS is developed and released for testing (BOS 3.2M2). FRA witnessed SUBDIV file validation is completed on the first subdivision (San Gabriel Sub).

December 2012 PTC‐CAD Part 1 is released. Integrated system testing (BOS to Onboard) begins in the lab.

January 2013 Construction of San Gabriel Base Stations Completed. Began Signal Validation pre‐testing on San Gabriel Sub.

February 2013 Construction of Valley Base Stations Completed. FRA‐witnessed SUBDIV file validation complete on Ventura and Orange Subs.

261

27


May 2013 FRA‐witnessed Signal Validation complete on San Gabriel Sub. LINN testing of PTC‐CAD ‐ BOS started using BTB.

August 2013 Completed Brake Testing on San Gabriel Subdivision, ETMS7 End‐to‐End Testing with BNSF

September 2013 Joint PTC Safety Plan with BNSF developed, began onboard installs at CMF

October 2013 Began end‐to‐end testing with BNSF on 91‐Line. Issued Partial Notice of Default to V/I contractor related to CAD.

January 2014 Agreement signed with Parsons to de‐scope CAD and BOS; Contract executed directly with Wabtec for provision of TMDS CAD and BOS

February 2014 Began Revenue Service Demonstration (RSD) on BNSF 91‐Line. Most hardware delivered on‐site for the TMDS CAD and BOS systems.

May 2014 New TMDS CAD system went in‐service, replacing the unsupported legacy system

July 2014 The TMDS CAD system completed 60‐day reliability period. Integrated testing performed in the lab and started in the field (CMF Train Yard)

August 2014 Defect discovered in the industry‐wide I‐ETMS onboard software. Testing postponed to upgrade to latest software version. Full integrated field testing commenced late‐August.

September 2014 PTC Functional Testing is complete on the San Gabriel Subdivision and end‐to‐end runscommence.

December 2014 Formal application to begin RSD on San Gabriel Subdivision is submitted to the FRA.

February 2015 FRA approval granted to begin RSD on Sab Gabriel Subdivision

March 2015 RSD begins on San Gabriel Subdivision, Upgrade Shared Regional Communications Slot Plan, I‐ETMS V6.3.10

April 2015 RSD begins on Ventura and Valley Subdivisions

June 2015 ‘System‐wide’ RSD Commences (All Authority‐owned lines in‐service); PTC Safety Plan submitted to the FRA

July 2015 All Authority revenue service runs commence with PTC in‐service

August 2015 FRA approval for the Authority to commence Extended Revenue Service (ERSD)

October 2015 Interoperable Testing with UPRR and BNSF performed

November 2015 PTC physical installation commences on Perris Valley Line (PVL) Extension Project

December 2015 PTC Safety Plan Version 2.0 submitted to FRA; Approximately 20,000 successful PTC revenue service runs to‐date

January 2016 Revised PTC Implementation Plan (PTCIP) submitted to the FRA

April 2016 V/I contractor completes 120‐Day Availability Test Period (results under review)

May 2016 Authorization from the FRA to commence Provisional Revenue Service Operations

June 2016 Perris Valley Line (PVL) Extension commences revenue service with PTC

September 2016 FRA issues letter of Conditional PTC System Certification; FCC approves 220 MHz spectrum license transfer

262

28


December 2016 Authority submits response to address conditions in FRA letter of Conditional PTC System Certification; Authority completes acquisition of 220 MHz spectrum license

May/June 2017 Notice of funding award ($3.2M) from FRA for reliability, security and vital upgrades; Approximately 100,000 successful PTC revenue service runs to‐date

October 2017 Commencement of Interoperable PTC revenue service operations with BNSF

March 2018 Commencement of Interoperable PTC revenue service operations with UPRR (limited units & lines)

263

29


Summary Schedule

ACTIVITY START FINISH 2015 2016 2017 2018

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

On‐Board Production Installs 2/8/12 1/31/15

Initial Revenue Service Demo.

on BNSF San Bernardino Sub 2/18/14 2/18/14

Wabtec TMDS CAD Develop &

Deploy 10/1/13 5/19/14

FRA Review and Approval of RSD

Application (San Gabriel Sub.) 12/19/14 2/13/15

PTC In‐Service on San Gabriel

Sub (RSD) 3/2/15 3/2/15

Integrated System Testing

(FIT/FQT) – Remaining Subs 3/2/15 6/14/15

Revenue Service Demonstration

(RSD) – All Subdivisions 6/14/15 6/14/15

Reliability Demonstration Period 6/15/15 4/30/16

I‐ETMS Onboard Version

Upgrades On‐going On‐going

PTC Safety Plan ‐ Internal

Review & Submittal 5/1/15 12/30/15

PTC Safety Plan ‐ FRA Review &

Conditional Certification 7/1/15 9/7/16

PTC Installation & Testing on

Perris Valley Line Extension 11/23/15 6/6/16

Interoperable Testing

(BNSF, UPRR, NCTD, Amtrak) 2/18/14 8/31/18

Commence Interoperable PTC

RSO with BNSF 10/9/17 10/9/17

Commence Interoperable PTC

RSO with UPRR 3/6/18 3/6/18

Interoperable testing & revenue

service w/ Amtrak, NCTD 4/1/18 8/31/18

PTC 1.0 Contract Close‐outs &

Transition Support 7/1/15 8/31/18

264

30


COST STATUS

Despite the numerous and on‐going challenges encountered throughout the PTC implementation program, the

Authority is on track to close‐out the core PTC “Phase I” scope within the current budget which includes $216.6

million in existing grant funding, plus a $5 million payment from Parsons for provision of the CAD/BOS system

under an alternative vendor. In addition, two FRA/FTA grants of $2.4 million and $3.2 million in new scope were

recently added for a total program budget of $227.2 million. A detailed set of previously unfunded sub‐system

upgrades, testing and efficiency improvements will be completed under these grant scopes.

The project will successfully complete on budget by closely controlling contractor costs and appropriately

allocating Authority staff charges and PTC operating costs to the PTC Operating and annual rehabilitation budgets

and other applicable third party expansion sources outside of the PTC capital program budget. Remaining

challenges, such as additional software updates, delays to interoperable testing, new FRA requirements, and

extended FRA review are largely handled by PTC operating staff or under the FRA funding for interoperability as

applicable.

The Authority has established a PTC Operations and Maintenance (O&M) budget to support the on‐going cost of

supporting the PTC system operations. As equipment and components get placed into service, the Authority is

transitioning the O&M costs to the Authority’s corresponding operating budgets. The PTC and PTC C&S plus back

office O&M annual operating budget is approximately $10 million per year.

Expenditures

Through April 2018, expenditures to date on the program total $220.3 million or 97% of the current authorized

program budget of $227.2 million. Expenditures for the six‐month period (Nov. 2017 – Apr. 2018) total slightly

under $1 million, with the largest expenditures for technical consultants and program management split between

the core program and the interoperability scope of the FRA Rail Technology grant.

Commitments

Through April 2018, cumulative commitments on the project increased slightly to $222.8 million, or approximately

98% of the current program budget.

Cash Flow

Having previously completed most of the major contractor milestone payments of the core program,

expenditures have reduced over the six‐month period. Additional significant milestone payments are anticipated

in the second half of 2018 associated with the completion of vendor component upgrades that are being procured

under the new grant scopes. The PTC project management team is closely monitoring and controlling

expenditures and commitments to ensure they are consistent with the available funding constraints and potential

impacts to that plan are reported. The Authority is managing project costs in accordance with approved project

control procedures. This includes evaluation and preparation of cost trends (forecasts) that provide the

information necessary to control contingency and budget impacts.

The current budget, expenditures and commitments are provided in the Cost Detail Table below, broken out by

elements of the project. Note that the budget and funding for the Customer Information System (CIS) and some

265

31


other components mentioned in this report are outside of the PTC program and not included in the table below.

Cost Detail

Project Element / Task Budget CommittedPeriod

ExpendedExpend to Date Est. at Comp

Project Devel/Engineering/PM/CM 64,796,693 65,599,886 352,409 65,057,492 65,589,264

PM/CM 29,868,156 30,264,930 354,893 29,698,084 30,229,855

SCRRA Staff Labor 11,762,763 11,347,656 (2,483) 12,235,707 12,235,707

Legal Support 1,549,147 1,681,059 ‐ 1,672,728 1,672,728

Other‐ Materia ls , Fees , Prof. Services 395,520 440,832 ‐ 370,307 370,307

Project Development/Des ign 6,474,708 6,417,332 ‐ 6,454,024 6,454,024

Map & Val idate Track Assets 6,913,154 6,915,507 ‐ 6,913,135 6,913,135

Map & Val idate Signal Assets 4,113,586 4,113,586 ‐ 4,113,586 4,113,586

Flagging 1,066,154 1,066,154 ‐ 1,066,154 1,066,154

Comm & Signa l/Track Maintenance 2,359,361 2,337,085 ‐ 2,355,196 2,355,196

Tra ining/Test Tra in 294,144 1,015,745 ‐ 178,572 178,572

Relocate/Reconfigure Signals 1,181,740 1,082,435 ‐ 1,058,747 1,058,747

Relocate/Reconfigure Signa ls 1,181,740 1,082,435 ‐ 1,058,747 1,058,747

WIUs, C&S, Track Modification 1,517,628 1,523,461 ‐ 1,520,293 1,520,293

WIU Modules for PTC 1,517,628 1,523,461 ‐ 1,520,293 1,520,293

PTC Communications, Wireless & Backhaul 11,484,960 11,248,706 ‐ 11,058,361 11,058,361

Acquire PTC 220 Radio Spectrum 6,977,293 6,460,585 ‐ 6,460,585 6,460,585

Communication Back‐bone & Back‐haul 4,507,668 4,788,122 ‐ 4,597,777 4,597,776

RR Work Orders/Coordination 10,000 4,947 ‐ 4,947 4,947

SCRRA Staff Labor 851 851 ‐ 851 851

Flaggings 9,149 4,096 ‐ 4,096 4,096

Pomona TCOSF/MOC 14,730,609 14,915,872 ‐ 14,911,256 14,905,669

Design and Des ign Support 1,656,169 1,641,542 ‐ 1,641,542 1,641,542

Construction 12,389,289 12,566,072 ‐ 12,561,456 12,552,176

Maintenance 2,713 613 ‐ 613 1,967

Prof. Services (CM, PM, Other) 211,215 191,236 ‐ 191,236 193,574

SCRRA Staff Labor 471,223 516,410 ‐ 516,410 516,410

Vendor/Integrator 107,507,654 107,507,654 ‐ 107,271,380 107,507,654

On Board Component 21,093,083 21,093,083 ‐ 21,093,083 21,093,083

Communications Component 13,556,343 13,556,343 ‐ 13,556,343 13,556,343

Ways ide Communications Component 19,162,984 19,162,984 ‐ 19,162,984 19,162,984

Back Office Component 4,913,360 4,913,360 ‐ 4,913,360 4,913,360

Dispatch System 5,290,532 5,290,532 ‐ 5,290,532 5,290,532

Integrated System 9,390,991 9,390,991 ‐ 9,251,655 9,390,991

Contract Documentation 5,577,722 5,577,722 ‐ 5,480,785 5,577,722

Hi ‐Rai l Test Vehicles 462,336 462,336 ‐ 462,336 462,336

Project Eng., PM, Suppt Faci l i ties 24,680,444 24,680,444 ‐ 24,680,444 24,680,444

Commercia l Terms (Bonds , Insurance) 3,250,496 3,250,496 ‐ 3,250,496 3,250,496

Signa l 129,363 129,363 ‐ 129,363 129,363

266

32


(Table continued on next page)

(Table continued from prior page)

Project Element / Task Budget CommittedPeriod

ExpendedExpend to Date Est. at Comp

V/I Margins & Adjustments 12,507,696 11,759,892 ‐ 11,759,892 12,091,992

V/I Sa les and Use Tax 1,396,022 1,396,022 ‐ 1,396,022 1,396,022

V/I Contingency 11,111,673 10,363,870 ‐ 10,363,870 10,695,970

Wabtec 7,275,139 7,155,447 ‐ 6,549,825 7,275,192

CAD & BOS for PTC System 7,166,998 7,048,330 ‐ 6,442,708 7,168,076

SCRRA Staff Labor 108,142 107,117 ‐ 107,117 107,117

FRA Rail Technology Interoperability 3,000,000 2,012,910 619,417 1,156,480 3,000,000

PTC Phase II (FRA FY17 Grant) 3,200,000 ‐ ‐ 3,200,000

Project Totals 227,212,120 222,811,212 971,826 220,348,675 227,212,120

267

33


CONTRACT CHANGES

Below is a list of executed, pending and potential contract changes to date against the Parsons V/I contract

H1636‐10 and Wabtec Contract H1655‐14. All of the change orders are PTC‐related, but many utilize funding

sources outside of the original core PTC project budget and therefore do not impact the contract contingency

within the PTC program budget. In particular, significant change orders have been issued outside of the PTC

budget for a contract option for of the Customer Information System, support for third party projects, such as PTC

installation on the Perris Valley Line Extension, and changes to support on‐going operations. The list of contract

changes is also reported to the Board through quarterly updates.

Changes to Parsons V/I Contract H1636‐10

Approved Contract Changes PTC Budget Other Budget

Previously Reported Change Orders 1 – 128 (Incl. CIS & 3rd Party Projects) $3,877,014 $8,569,416

CO 129 ‐ ITCM Upgrade for Interoperability $9,933 $0

TOTAL Approved Contract Changes $3,886,947 $8,569,416

Pending Contract Changes

‐ $0 $0

TOTAL Pending Contract Changes $0 $0

Forecasted Potential Contract Changes

Final Contract Close‐out Adjustments TBD TBD

TOTAL Forecasted Potential Contract Changes TBD TBD

268

34


Changes to Wabtec Contract H1655‐14

Approved Contract Changes PTC Budget Other Budget

CO 001 ‐ Additional SAN Hardware $79,301 $0

CO 002 ‐ Elimination of Allowances for Optional CDRL Docs ($500,000) $0

CO 003 ‐ Customer Information System (CIS) $0 $200,000

CO 004 ‐ DOC Monitor Stands $760 $0

CO 005 ‐ Individual and Composite CRC Calculator (IC3) ‐ Planning Phase $120,000 $0

CO 006 ‐ CIS Hardware and Software Configuration $0 $84,960

CO 007 ‐ Full NTP of CIS Scope $0 $300,000

CO 008 ‐ Full NTP of IC3 Scope $500,000 $280,000

CO 009 ‐ Equip & Commission PTC Test Lab at MOC $0 $521,000

CO 010 ‐ Wayside Status Relay Services (WSRS) $0 $350,000

CO 011 ‐ Monitors and Video Cards for PVL $0 $2,966

CO 012 ‐ Key Exchange Server Upgrade Ph. I $0 $121,600

CO 013 ‐ Additional Work Station $12,365 $0

CO 014 ‐ Time Extension for On‐Site Support for Lab and Back Office $0 $138,750

CO 015 ‐ Time Extension for On‐Site Support for Lab and Back Office $185,000

CO 016 ‐ Travel Expenses for Demo of Ph.2 to Project Team, ELT and Board $0 $8,742

CO 017 ‐ Time Extension for On‐Site Support for Lab and Back Office $0 $77,083

CO 018 ‐ Changes to CIS, Shipping Allowance & Time Extension ($29,437) $0

TOTAL Approved Changes $182,989 $2,270,101

Pending Contract Changes

‐ ‐ ‐

TOTAL Pending Changes $0 $0

Forecasted Potential Contract Changes

Contract Close‐out Adjustments TBD TBD

TOTAL Forecasted Potential Contract Changes TBD TBD

269

35


FUNDING

In March 2018, formal allocation of $3.2 million in new funding was received from the FTA/FRA to support the

Authority’s continued advancement of PTC beyond the initial build‐out and deployment of the core system.

Specifically, the funds will be used to improve the reliability, efficiency and security of PTC by developing tools to

monitor and troubleshoot PTC issues, increase the security of PTC communications and deploy new fail‐safe

components which are necessary for achieving certification as a “vital” system. The full scope of achieving

certification as a “vital” overlay system is not fully‐defined and will likely be pursued within the railroad industry

as a future phase of PTC.

Previously, in late‐2016 the Authority’s funding status for the PTC program increased by $2.4 million as a result of

a grant award from the FRA Railroad Technology program. Formal grant award was not received until October

2017, but the Authority was granted pre‐spend authority while the FRA went through the final approval process

for the detailed scope of work. The scope for the $2.4 million grant is for upgrades needed to achieve and sustain

interoperable PTC operations. The Authority is providing $600,000 in existing PTC local funds as the match to the

FRA’s $2.4 million.

As a result of the two awards, PTC Program grant funding now totals $222.2 million. Omitted from this list of grant

funding is the $5 million received from a settlement agreement with Parsons in March 2014 to pay for a

replacement CAD/BOS vendor.

Efficient management and utilization of the PTC capital project funding is required due to the extended project

schedule and additional costs that the Authority has encountered from being at the forefront of PTC

implementation across the nation. To date, extensive effort has been put into securing and managing the long list

of grants that were compiled to make the Authority one of the first commuter rail agencies in the nation with a

fully funded PTC program.

The Authority continues to pursue additional grant funding opportunities to support PTC system upgrades that

will be required to remain interoperable with industry partners and enhance the operations and maintenance of

the system.

Grants‐related efforts during the period include oversight of grant restrictions, participation in audits, reviews and

on‐going billing and reporting duties. Full draw‐down and close‐out of the core Phase I grant funding is expected

to be complete by late‐2018.

Secured and Programmed Funds

PTC Amount Expiration Notes

Secured Funding

Local (MTA funds) 3,310,587 6/30/2011 $1.2M for mapping, balance for dispatch.

Federal formula Funds/Local Match 789,120 NA FTA funds for RCTC, OCTA and SANBAG.

State STIP 125,293 9/25/2011 VCTC State funds.

ARRA Formula 17,825,530 9/30/2015 $2.5M for engineering, $15.3M for const.

Prop 1B TSGP (Safety/Security) (SCRRA) 7,065,024 12/31/13 $982,070 for signal relocation

Prop 1B PTMISEA (SCRRA) 199,668 3/31/2012 For signal relocation.

OCTA Prop 116 programming approved 12/09 15,215,778 6/30/15 Allocated 5/19/10

OCTA Prop 116 allocated at 5/10 CTC meeting 17,500,000 6/30/15 Allocated 5/19/10

FY 09‐10 Prop 1B TSGP (VCTC) 709,972 3/31/2013 LONP 7/1/10

270

36


Prior Year VCTC Prop 1B TSGP 21,366 3/31/2012 Amendments approved 6/21/10.

Prop 1B PTMISEA pending SANBAG MOU 3,309,525 3/31/2013 MOU approved 10/7.

OCTA Sec 5307 4,147,427 NA Approved by the OCTA Board 7/12/10

FY 09‐10 Prop 1B TSGP (SCRRA) 3,356,923 3/31/14

Prop 1A Intercity to SCRRA 46,550,000 6/30/16 Program adopted 5/19/10

Prop 1A SCRRA 12,200,000 6/30/18 Funds allocated 1/2011.

FY 10/11 Prop 1B SLPP+ $10M MTA Measure R 20,000,000 6/30/15 Funds allocated 1/2011

FY 11/12 Prop 1B SLPP+ $10M MTA Measure R 20,000,000 6/30/15 LONP approved 9/23/10

FY 09‐10 Prop 1B TSGP (SCRRA from Caltrans DOR) 1,800,000 12/31/14 Caltrans DOR. LONP granted 7/30/10

FY 09‐10 Prop 1B PTMISEA (SCRRA) 4,362,126 2/1/2014

Federal Rail Research and Develop. Funds (SCRRA) 487,000 9/30/11 FY2010 earmark. Approved 9/27/10

FRA Rail Technology Grant 6,605,446 3/31/14 For Shared LA PTC Comm. Infrastructure

Prop 1A SCRRA 12,711,063 6/30/18 Allocated August 2011.

FRA High Speed Intercity Pass. Rail via Caltrans 3,411,064 6/30/15 Announced 10/25/10.

National Railroad/State 9,855 n/a

PTMISEA FY10/11 9,301,415 6/30/16

MTA Measure R 4,096,120

FY14‐FY15 PTMISEA 553,967

FY15‐FY17 PTMISEA pending SANBAG 785,847

CTSGP 6261‐0001 ‐ Interest 17,890

PBRs 144,114

FRA Rail Technology program 2,400,000 12/31/18

FRA FY17 Funding 3,200,000

Grand Total 222,212,120 *

* funding table does not reflect $5M payment from V/I Contractor related to CAD settlement

Communication System Improvements for PTC Amount Expiration Notes

Prop 1A SCRRA 10,088,937 6/30/18

FRA High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail via Caltrans

10,088,937 6/30/13

PTC‐related Communications Network Funding 20,177,873

Funding Next Steps

Authority staff will continue to monitor funding needs and grant expirations to ensure funding is fully‐utilized or

amendments are sought as needed, as well as apply for funding opportunities to support future project needs.

271

37


Funding Acronyms – The following acronyms may be found in the tables above.

Acronym – Definition

ARRA – American Recovery and Reinvestment ActCTC – California Transportation Commission DOR – Division of Rail FRA – Federal Railroad Administration FY – Fiscal Year LONP – Letter of No Prejudice

MOU – Memorandum of Understanding PTMISEA – Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account STIP – State Transportation Improvement Program TIP – Transportation Improvement Program TSGP – Transit Security Grant Program

Member Agencies

Support for this project comes from the Authority’s member agencies.

Member Agencies

Metro – Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) OCTA – Orange County Transportation Authority

RCTC – Riverside County Transportation CommissionSANBAG – San Bernardino Association of Governments VCTC – Ventura County Transportation Commission

272

38


APPENDIX A: ABREVIATIONSAALA AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LABORATORY ACCREDITATION AAR ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS ABS AUTOMATIC BLOCK SIGNALS ACGIH AMERICAN CONFERENCE OF GOVERNMENTAL INDUSTRIAL HYGIENIST ACL ACCESS CONTROL LIST AES ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD AF AUDIO FREQUENCY AISI AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE AMQP ADVANCED MESSAGE QUEUING PROTOCOL ANSI AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE APTA AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION AREMA AMERICAN RAILWAY ENGINEERING AND MAINT. OF WAY ASSOCIATION ASIC APPLICATION SPECIFIC INTEGRATED CIRCUIT ASME AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS ASTM AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS ATCS ADVANCED TRAIN CONTROL SYSTEM ATIS ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEM ATS AUTOMATIC TRAIN STOP AWG AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE AWS AMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY BER BIT ERROR RATE BNSF BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE BOS BACK OFFICE SYSTEM BOSMR BOS MESSAGE ROUTER BS BASE STATION BSS BOEING SPECIFICATION SUPPORT STANDARD BTE BENCH TEST EQUIPMENT CAC CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CAD COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH CADD COMPUTER‐AIDED DRAFTING AND DESIGN CASE COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING CCP CONFIGURATION CONTROL PLAN CCTV CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CDR CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW CDRL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS REQUIREMENTS LIST CDU CAB DISPLAY UNIT CFC CHLOROFLUOROCARBON CFR THE UNITED STATES CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS CIR CIRCUIT CIS CUSTOMER INFORMATION SYSTEM CMF CENTRAL MAINTENANCE FACILITY CMM CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL CMMI CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL INTEGRATION CNC COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK COMPONENT CONOPS CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS COP COMMON OPERATING PICTURE COTS COMMERCIAL OFF THE SHELF CP CONTROL POINT CPLD COMPLEX PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC DEVICE CPM CRITICAL PATH METHOD CPUC CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CRC CYCLIC REDUNDANCY CHECK CSMA/CA CARRIER SENSE MULTIPLE ACCESS/COLLISION AVOIDANCE CSX CORPORATION CTC CENTRALIZED TRAFFIC CONTROL DB DECIBEL DBM DECIBEL REFERENCED TO A MILLIWATT DBUV DECIBEL REFERENCED TO A MICRO‐VOLT DOT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DS SPECIFIC OPTICAL DENSITY DS0 DIGITAL SIGNAL 0 (64KBPS) EDI ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE EEPROM ELECTRICAL ERASABLE PROGRAMMABLE READ ONLY MEMORY

EIC EMPLOYEE IN CHARGE EMC(P) ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY (PLAN) EMF EASTERN MAINTENANCE FACILITY EMI ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE EMP EDGE MESSAGING PROTOCOL EPA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPROM ERASABLE PROGRAMMABLE READ ONLY MEMORY ESD ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGES ESNA ELASTIC STOP NUT CORPORATION OF AMERICA ESS ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS SCREENING ETB ELECTROLYTIC TOUGH PITCH ETFA ETHYLENE/TETRAFLUOROETHYLENE COPOLYMER ETMS ELECTRONIC TRAIN MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FAA FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FAT FACTORY ACCEPTANCE TESTS FCC FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FDR FINAL DESIGN REVIEW FEC FORWARD ERROR CORRECTION FMECA FAILURE MODE EFFECTS AND CRITICALITY ANALYSES FPGA FIELD PROGRAMMABLE GATE ARRAY FRA FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION FRACAS FAILURE REPORTING AND CORRECTIVE ACTION SYSTEM FTA FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION GCOR‐ GENERAL CODE OF OPERATING RULES (GOVERNS SCRRA OPERATIONS) GETS‐ GENERAL ELECTRIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS GPS GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM GUI GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE HA‐NDGPS‐ HIGH ACCURACY NATIONAL DIFFERENTIAL GLOBAL POSITIONING SYS HAZ HEAT AFFECTED ZONE HCFC HYDROCHLOROFLUOROCARBON HMAC HASH MESSAGE AUTHENTICATION CODE HMI HUMAN MACHINE INTERFACE H‐R HYUNDAI‐ROTEM I‐SPI™ INTELLIGENT SERIAL PREEMPTION INTERCONNECTION IC INTEGRATED CIRCUITS ICD INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTS ICEA INSULATED CABLE ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION ICS INDEPENDENTLY CONTROLLED SWITCHES IEEE INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS IEOC INLAND EMPIRE‐ORANGE COUNTY IC3 INTERMEDIATE AND COMPOSITE CYCLIC REDUNDANCY CALCULATOR IFC ISSUE FOR CONSTRUCTION IFI INDUSTRIAL FASTENERS INSTITUTE IPC INSTITUTE OF PRINTED CIRCUITS ISO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION ITC INTEROPERABLE TRAIN CONTROL COMMITTEE ITS INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS KHZ KILOHERTZ KV KILOVOLT KVAC KILOVOLT AMPERE CYCLES KVM KEYBOARD – VIDEO – MOUSE JPA JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY LACMTA LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY LBF POUNDS FORCE LAHT LOW ALLOY HIGH TENSILE LAN LOCAL AREA NETWORK LAUS LOS ANGELES UNION STATION LLRU LOWEST LEVEL REMOVAL UNIT LRU LOWEST REMOVAL UNIT LVPS LOW VOLTAGE POWER SUPPLY LVS LOW VOLTAGE SYSTEM MHZ MEGAHERTZ MIB MANAGEMENT INFORMATION BASE

273

39


MIL MILITARY SPECIFICATION MMC MICROSOFT MANAGEMENT CONSOLE MOC METROLINK OPERATIONS CENTER MOW MAINTENANCE OF WAY MPLS MULTIPROTOCOL LABEL SWITCHING MTBF MEAN TIME BETWEEN FAILURES MTEA MAIN TRACK EXCLUSION ADDENDUM MTTHE MEAN TIME TO HAZARDOUS EVENT MTTR MEAN TIME TO REPAIR NBS NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS (NOW NIST) NCTD NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT NDGPS NATIONAL DIFFERENTIAL GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM NEC NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE NEMA NATIONAL ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION NFPA NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION NIST NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY NMS NETWORK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM NP‐CSMA NON PERSISTENT CARRIER SENSE MULTIPLE ACCESS NPI NOTICE OF PRODUCT INTENT NS NORFOLK SOUTHERN NTP NOTICE TO PROCEED O&M OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE OBC ON‐BOARD COMPUTERS OCC OPERATIONS CONTROL CENTER OCG OFFICE COMMUNICATIONS GATEWAY OCTA ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ODBC OPEN DATABASE CONNECTIVITY OEM ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS OFE OXYGEN FREE ELECTRONIC OSHA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION OTAP OVER THE AIR PROGRAMMING PA PUBLIC ADDRESS PADS PREDICTIVE ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE SYSTEM PC PRINTED CIRCUITS PCBS POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS PDR PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW PIV PEAK INVERSE VOLTAGE PIH POISON INHALATION HAZARD PIU PORTABLE INTERFACE UNIT PLD PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC DEVICE PPM PARTS PER MILLION PQR PROCEDURE QUALIFICATION RECORDS PROM PROGRAMMABLE READ ONLY MEMORY PTC POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL PTCDP PTC DEVELOPMENT PLAN PTCIP PTC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PTCSP PTC SAFETY PLAN PTFE POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE PTU PORTABLE TEST UNIT PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE QA QUALITY ASSURANCE QOS QUALITY OF SOFTWARE RAM RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY RAT REMOTE AUTHORITY TERMINAL R‐C RESISTIVE‐CAPACITIVE RCTC RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RDBMS RELATIONAL DATABASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM RF RADIO FREQUENCY RMS ROOT‐MEAN‐SQUARE ROW RIGHT OF WAY RSIA RAIL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT ACT RTM REQUIREMENTS TRACEABILITY MATRIX RTU REMOTE TERMINAL UNITS RX RECEIVE SAE SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS SANBAG SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS

SCADA SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION SCAMPI STANDARD CMMI APPRAISAL METHOD FOR PROCESS IMPROVEMENT SCE SOFTWARE CAPABILITY EVALUATION SCI SOFTWARE CONFIGURATION ITEM SCMP SOFTWARE CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT PLAN SCRRA‐ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY SDD SOFTWARE DESIGN DESCRIPTION SEI SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE SFD SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTIONS SI SYSTEM INTEGRATOR SIP SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN SMCP SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT CONTROL PLAN SNMP SIMPLE NETWORK MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL SONET SYNCHRONOUS OPTICAL NETWORK SPI SERIAL PERIPHERAL INTERFACE SPMP SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN SPR SYSTEM PROBLEM REPORTS SQAP SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN SQL STANDARD QUERY LOGIC SRS SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION SRTM SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS TRACEABILITY MATRIX SSFD SOFTWARE SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION SSPC SOCIETY OF PROTECTIVE COATINGS SPECIFICATION STP SOFTWARE TEST PLAN STPR SOFTWARE TEST PROCEDURE STR SOFTWARE TEST REPORT SUM SOFTWARE USERS MANUALS SVD SOFTWARE VERSION DESCRIPTION SVP SHOCK AND VIBRATION PLAN SVTP SOFTWARE VALIDATION TEST PROCEDURES SVTR SOFTWARE VALIDATION TEST REPORT SVVP SOFTWARE VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION PLAN SVVR SOFTWARE VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION REPORT (T) MATERIAL THICKNESS TCOSF‐ TRAIN CONTROL AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITY (METROLINK’S

NEW REDUNDANT OPERATIONS CENTER) TCP/IP TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL/INTERNET PROTOCOL TDMA‐ TIME DIVISION MULTIPLE ACCESS TIH TOXIC INHALATION HAZARD TMC TRAIN MANAGEMENT COMPUTER TMDS‐ WABTEC REGISTERED TRAIN MANAGEMENT AND DISPATCH SYSTEM TOL TRACK OCCUPANCY LIGHT TVM TICKET VENDING MACHINE TWC TRACK WARRANT CONTROL TX TRANSMITTER UHF ULTRA HIGH FREQUENCY UPRR UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD USDOT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION V VOLTS VCTC VENTURA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION VDC VOLTS DIRECT CURRENT VECP VALUE ENGINEERING CHANGE PROPOSALS VHF VERY HIGH FREQUENCY VHLC VITAL HARMON LOGIC CONTROLLER V/I VENDOR/INTEGRATOR VMS VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGN VOC VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND VPN VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORK VSS VITAL SAFETY SERVER VTMS VITAL TRAIN MANAGEMENT SYSTEM W WATT WAAS WIDE AREA AUGMENTATION SYSTEM WBS WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE WHMA WIRE HARNESS MANUFACTURING ASSOCIATION WIU WAYSIDE INTERFACE UNITS WLAN WIRELESS LOCAL AREA NETWORK

274

40


WMDS WAYSIDE MONITORING AND DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM WP WORK PLAN WPA WI‐FI PROTECTED ACCESS WPS WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATIONS WSRS WAYSIDE STATUS RELAY SERVICE WSSWP WEEKLY SITE SPECIFIC WORK PLAN

275


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Service Improvements to Burbank - Glendale - Los

Angeles Corridor Issue Staff is providing a report on various efforts and plans underway for improving service on the Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles corridor. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to increase regional mobility and retain and grow ridership. Background The Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles corridor is a major Metrolink trunk line between Burbank Junction and Los Angeles Union Station. Entirely double-tracked, this segment carries both the Ventura County and Antelope Valley Lines, as well as Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner and includes three stations: Burbank – Downtown, Glendale, and Los Angeles Union Station. Just to the north of this trunk line is Hollywood Burbank Airport, with stations on both branch lines. This corridor is critical to the regional passenger rail system north of Los Angeles. Since 1992, when Metrolink commuter rail service was introduced in the corridor, there has been interest in improving service in the corridor with more regular passenger service. In 1994, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (predecessor agency to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or Metro) completed environmental review documents for a 13-mile light rail transit line in the corridor between

276

Service Improvements to Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles Corridor Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Burbank Airport and Los Angeles Union Station. Since then, commuter rail service has gradually grown on the corridor’s two lines as well as supplemental “bounce back” 900 series trains between Los Angeles Union Station and Hollywood Burbank Airport. Three initiatives have the potential to transform regional rail service in the corridor:

Development of the Burbank Airport – North Station

In June 2016, the Metro Board approved the budget to fully fund the construction of a new station along the Antelope Valley Line to serve the Hollywood Burbank Airport. Construction began in March 2017 and the station is set to open in May 2018. With this station, both the Ventura County and the Antelope Valley Lines will have a station that serves Hollywood – Burbank Airport.

Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles Corridor Study

In October 2016, the Metro Board authorized and funded a study to examine increased rail connectivity in the corridor. Metro staff have initiated the study and are examining increasing Metrolink service, introducing service with lighter vehicles called Multiple Units (MU, either DMU [diesel] or EMU [electric]), and light rail service. The study is also exploring potential sites for new infill stations (up to two in Los Angeles and up to two in Glendale) and the impacts to service. These additional stations could be served with minimal impact to the schedule with lighter vehicles that accelerate and decelerate faster.

Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE)

The SCORE program, recently defined through a partnership between passenger and freight railroads, aims to revolutionize regional travel in Southern California by providing more frequent and more reliable passenger rail service throughout the day and throughout the system. In the Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles corridor, this includes plans for up to eight “local” Metrolink trains per hour, per direction – the result of 15-minute service on both the Ventura County Line and the Antelope Valley Line. The potential for electrification along sections of the regional rail system may also be explored if grants are awarded to support studies. Electric trains, which might be accomplished through a combination of overhead catenary and battery systems, allow trains to run quieter, reduce or eliminate exhaust, and accelerate and decelerate faster than purely diesel engine-powered trains.

The SCORE program is in line with the strategies espoused in the 2018 California State Rail Plan, including the adoption of frequent, reliable, all-day rail service operating on a regular schedule and forming a “pulse” network. In that vision, services would occur at consistent intervals (e.g. every 30 minutes) and would arrive and depart at important transfer stations around the same time on different lines (i.e. on the “pulse”) to facilitate everywhere-to-everywhere transfers.

Overall, the initiatives support: improved access to Hollywood Burbank Airport; more frequent and regular trains throughout the day; and the potential for lighter, cleaner trains.

277


Phased Improvements in the Corridor Improvements in service to the corridor are likely to take place in three phases. Phase 1 – Schedule Refinement Since the corridor is already fully double-tracked, the first phase involves bringing both lines to regular hourly service for a combined frequency of up to two trains per hour, per direction. With current infrastructure and fleet, schedule reforms can be adopted that make existing service more regular and that improve service frequency in the off-peak. For instance, in the midday on weekdays, Metrolink offers nearly hourly service in the Burbank – Glendale - Los Angeles corridor. However, the spacing of these trains is uneven: one hour may see two trains and the next see none. If the midday schedule could be regularized such that trains ran every hour at approximately the same time every hour, it would make it easier for prospective passengers to access the system. Staff is working on a coordinated planning effort with the Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor (LOSSAN) which manages the Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service in the corridor. A potential schedule proposal for a first step – with slots for regular hourly trains – is anticipated to be developed by Fall 2018 with targeted implementation in a 2019 schedule change. Any such change will require changes to scheduled times by other rail operators in the corridor. Phase 2 – SCORE Medium-Term Improvements Initial funding for double tracking along the Antelope Valley and Ventura County lines is possible with the recommended award of Transit and Intercity Rail Capital (TIRCP) funds supported by SB1 recently announced by the State of California. Furthermore, additional grant pursuits at the local, state, and federal levels are active. As early SCORE capital improvements come online, a step up to 30-minute service on both the Ventura County Line (to Moorpark) and Antelope Valley Line (to Santa Clarita) becomes possible – combining for up to four local trains per hour in the Burbank – Glendale - Los Angeles corridor (not counting the Antelope Valley express). These frequencies would also benefit from the development of the Link US (Union Station) run-through tracks, a separate capital project sponsored by Metro. Phase 3 – SCORE Long-Term Improvements Later SCORE improvements can extend more frequent service both within and beyond the corridor. Targeting an implementation by 2028, an additional step up to 15-minute local service (to Moorpark and Santa Clarita) is possible. This would require an expansion of Metrolink’s fleet and the construction of additional overnight maintenance facilities outside of the corridor. With the Link US run-through tracks and the Los Angeles to Fullerton fourth track, an every 15-minute one-seat ride from Burbank to Orange County is also enabled. Concurrent with growth in service in the long-term, other improvements

278


identified in the Burbank – Glendale – Los Angeles Corridor may also be pursued, such as additional infill stations and fleet expansion. These three phases define the path for improvement of service in the corridor being pursued by the Authority. It begins with optimizing the service the Authority already operates utilizing the current fleet. New double tracking, fleet, and maintenance facilities will enable more frequent and regular service resembling the level of service operated on Metro’s heavy and light rail lines while remaining compatible with the existing Metrolink regional system throughout Southern California. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Rory Vaughn, Manager, Research and Planning Roderick Diaz, Director, Planning and Development


279


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station Opening Issue Staff is providing an update on the Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station including station information, grand opening press event information and a marketing outline for introducing the station. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to retain and grow ridership. Background The new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) station is opening for revenue service on Monday, May 14, 2018. The station, located on the Metrolink Antelope Valley Line between the Sun Valley and Burbank – Downtown stations is at the northwest corner of Hollywood Way and San Fernando Road, will expand Metrolink’s train-to-plane connectivity by providing daily access directly to the Hollywood Burbank Airport. The other Metrolink station that directly serves the Hollywood Burbank Airport is located on the Ventura County Line which doesn’t have Metrolink service on the weekend. The Airport will run regular shuttle service to connect passengers to and from the station. The new station is located within a half mile from the airport’s planned replacement terminal and associated development. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), along with the Authority, Hollywood Burbank Airport Authority, City of Los Angeles and City of Burbank, will hold a station grand opening press event on Thursday, May 10, 2018.

280

Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station Opening Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Station Information Station location The station address is 3600 N. San Fernando Blvd., Burbank, CA. It serves the Antelope Valley, Santa Clarita Valley, San Fernando Valley and other Southern California communities.

Station cost The station budget was $15 million. Metro funded $12.3 million and the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority funded $2.7 million. Station owner Metro is the station owner and the cities of Burbank and Los Angeles are responsible for the operations and maintenance of the station. Station amenities The station amenities include two canopies, ticket vending machines, and light-emitted diode (LED) display screens with the train and bus schedules, benches, trash receptacles, bike racks, and bike lockers. Parking There is no parking at the station at this time. Future parking has been identified.

281


Connections Metro, Hollywood Burbank Airport and Burbank Bus will have bus connections as follows: Metro Buses making stops at the Burbank Airport – North Station Metro Rapid 794 runs from Sylmar to Downtown Los Angeles Metro 94 runs from Sun Valley to Downtown Los Angeles Metro 222 runs from Sunland to Hollywood Metro 169 runs from Warner Center to the Hollywood/Burbank Airport terminal Airport shuttle

The airport shuttle schedule is in progress, but will essentially meet every train stopping at the Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station.

Burbank Bus The City of Burbank approved a new service route: The Golden State Circulator. This service would run every 15 minutes and provide a one-way loop beginning at the Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Metrolink Station to connect to destinations including business and residential areas of the Golden State area and the Empire Center.

Construction Construction took place from March 2017 to April 2018. The final inspection was on April 23, 2018.

282


Community Outreach Staff is visiting the residential community near the station to inform them of the new service and provide a complimentary pass. Additionally, the Authority will be hosting a community event to introduce the new Burbank-Airport North (AV Line) station on the first day of service. Local residents, businesses, AV line riders, airport patrons and city contacts will be invited to view the station, speak to staff about the service and connections. Visitors will be encouraged to grab coffee and a donut on their way into work. The opening event will take place on May 14, 2018 from 7:00 a.m. until 10:00 a.m. Marketing In support of the new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) station opening, Metro is funding a marketing campaign to build ridership and promote the new station. The Authority is collaborating with Metro and the Hollywood Burbank Airport Authority to pool resources to maximize potential reach for the campaign. Campaign Objectives

Drive station boardings at the new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) station. Increase ridership on the AV Line. Build awareness about the new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) station with

current riders and potential new riders. Increase corporate partners accounts surrounding the station and through the

Antelope Valley Line corridor. Engage community members around the new station letting them know of

Metrolink’s new station. Key Messages

New Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) station. Take the train to the Hollywood Burbank Airport to save time and money. You can finally take a Metrolink train 7 days a week to the Hollywood Burbank

Airport. Target Region

Antelope Valley Line cities including Burbank, Glendale and Santa Clarita. Employment centers in Burbank especially along bus routes providing service to

the new station Tactics Broad reach messaging will be leveraged in this campaign in order to reach a large segment of the targeted population. These tactics include the following:

283


1. Paid Media: Out of Home: Billboard positions along I5 and Antelope Valley Freeway Advertising at Hollywood Burbank Airport:

Large wall diorama located near ticketing, concourse, and baggage claim. Backlit signs located throughout ticketing, concourse and baggage claim in the airport.

Baggage Claim Arrivals digital wall: :30 second spot rotation in a 3-minute loop

Transit Posters – located at shelters in front of the Terminal targeting parking shuttle buses, taxi, ride share and hotel shuttles

Transit Advertising: Targeting daily commuters on Metro bus lines servicing access to the new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station.

Paid Search: Campaign to target people flying out of Hollywood Burbank Airport looking for parking options.

Facebook Ads: Targeting daily commuters on Metro bus lines servicing access to the new Burbank Airport – North (AV Line) Station

Pandora: Internet radio display advertising geo-targeted to the Antelope Valley Line corridor. Will include free ride offer to incent trial.

Gold Line: On-train display advertising targeting daily business commuters within LA County

Union Station: East Portal Tower Ad (digital) Street Teams: 26 hours (4 events) of street team promoters on the Antelope

Valley Line

2. Authority-Owned Channels: Metrolink Train: On board rack card style flyers Metrolink website homepage feature tile Metrolink website dedicated station page promoting Hollywood Burbank

Airport access Metrolink Social media outreach including Facebook, Twitter and Instagram Metrolink Matters Blog Metrolink Matters feature (bi-monthly onboard trains 25,000 copies) Metrolink e-blast (49,000 subscribers) Metrolink website free ticket offer on Conductor Announcements CEO Weekly Brief Seat Drop on the Antelope Valley Line

3. Partnerships

Hollywood Burbank Airport E-blast Hollywood Burbank Airport Social Media outreach including Facebook,

Twitter, and Instagram

284


Hollywood Burbank Airport: Partner with Southwest Airlines and Alaska Airlines to cross-promote to frequent fliers commuters who may consider taking Metrolink to the Airport.

4. Traditional Media Media Advisory (Metro) Press Release (joint with partners) Community outreach to station cities

5. Corporate Partnership Programs: Identify surrounding City of Burbank employers Communicate with the City of Burbank to rejuvenate the previously active

CPP account Network with current CPPs in the area for potential new clients

Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Sabrina Davis, Senior Manager, Marketing & Digital Programs

Margaret Meadows, Marketing Coordinator


285


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Updates to Human Resources Policies and Procedures

Issue Staff is providing an update on changes to three (3) other Human Resources policies that were authorized by the Chief Executive Officer under his delegated authority. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request: 1) Other revisions be made to the policies;

2) No revisions be made to the policies Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to improve organizational efficiency and invest in people and assets. Background At the April 8, 2011 Board meeting, the Chief Executive Officer was authorized to review and approve future changes to Human Resources Policies and Procedures, with the exception of policies with significant legal, contractual and/or financial implications, which would be submitted to the Board of Directors for approval. Additionally, the Board approved the Executive Management and Audit Committee’s request that a quarterly update be provided on any changes to Human Resources Policies and Procedures made by the Chief Executive Officer under his delegated authority.

286

Updates to Human Resources Policies and Procedures Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Changes to three (3) policies were made under the delegated authority of the Chief Executive Officer. No Board action is required on these policy updates because there are no significant legal, contractual or financial implications. Descriptions of the changes are shown below: HR Policy No. 4.3, Other Benefits – Agency-provided Leaves of Absence

Added spouse’s grandparent to definition of immediate family member. HR Policy No. 4.6, Other Benefits – Other Statutory Leaves

Clarified the language to indicate that employees who have an employment status of Regular Employee or At-Will Employee, as defined in Human Resources Policy No. 1.1, are eligible for jury duty pay;

Removed the language stating that employees working an alternate work schedule should adjust their schedule to a standard eight (8) hours per day for the duration of their jury service;

Added language to clarify that an employee will not be paid for a regularly scheduled day off.

HR Policy No. 4.7, Other Benefits – Employee Transportation Assistance

Added language regarding the fees for lost/stolen and unreturned transit passes. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Roxanne Randolph, Senior Human Resources Analyst Aggie Nesh, Senior Manager, Human Resources

Patricia Francisco, Director, Human Resources


287


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Compensation Report – FY2017-18 – 3rd Quarter (January

1, 2018 through March 31, 2018) Issue

At its April 11, 2014 meeting, the Board amended Human Resources Policy 2.1 to require staff to make quarterly and annual reports to the Board on compensation matters. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives

The Board may direct staff to make changes to various transactions in the report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to improve organizational efficiencies. As required by the Human Resources Policy 2.1 Wage and Salary Administration – Salary Program Administration, this report transmits the required quarterly report. Background In accordance with amended Human Resources Policy 2.1, the Board requires the Director of Human Resources to report all salary placements for new hires, promotions, demotions, reclassifications and other changes in employee compensation to the Board on a quarterly basis. Attachment A is a summary of the transactions that occurred during the 3rd quarter FY2017-18, January 1, 2018 through March 31, 2018. There were 24 compensation transactions during this period, as described below:

288

Compensation Report–FY2017-18 – 3rd Quarter (January 1, 2018 through March 31, 2018) Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

16 New Hires 3 Promotions 2 Acting Pay Assignments 2 Additional Pay - Temporary 1 Return from Acting Pay Assignment

Attachment B is a detailed report for the transactions. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. The FY2017-18 Budget provides the amount for these changes in compensation. Prepared by: Patricia Francisco, Director, Human Resources


289

ATTACHMENT A

COMPENSATION REPORT SUMMARY - THIRD QUARTER FY18 - 1/1/2018 THROUGH 3/31/2018

Category based on H.R. Policy 2.1 Requirements Total Number

16Salary Placement for New Hire

3Salary Placement for Promotion

Other Changes In Compensation

Acting Pay 2

Additional Pay - Temporary 2

Return from Acting Pay 1

24TOTAL TRANSACTIONS

290

ATTACHMENT B - COMPENSATION REPORTTHIRD QUARTER FY 18

POSITION/CLASSIFICATION EFFECTIVE DATE

TYPE OF SALARY PLACEMENT

SALARY RATE

(Bi-Weekly/ Hourly Rate)

PERCENT ADJUSTMENT

A.New Hire

01/10/2018 $27.00 Initial Compensation 1 Finance Specialist II N/A

01/11/2018 $4,538.46 Initial Compensation 2 Principal Contract & Compliance Administrator N/A

01/22/2018 $43.27 Initial Compensation 3 Train Dispatcher N/A

01/29/2018 $4,690.96 Initial Compensation 4 Manager, Information Technology N/A

02/05/2018 $5,576.92 Initial Compensation 5 Senior Manager, Train Control Systems N/A

02/05/2018 $4,365.38 Initial Compensation 6 Web Services Manager N/A

02/16/2018 $3,269.23 Initial Compensation 7 Human Resources Analyst I N/A

02/20/2018 $4,423.07 Initial Compensation 8 Senior Contract & Compliance Administrator N/A

02/20/2018 $5,192.30 Initial Compensation 9 Senior Manager, Dispatching N/A

02/26/2018 $3,653.84 Initial Compensation 10 Human Resources Analyst I N/A

03/05/2018 $5,576.92 Initial Compensation 11 Senior Manager - Various N/A

03/05/2018 $4,769.23 Initial Compensation 12 Senior Manager, Finance N/A

03/12/2018 $24.04 Initial Compensation 13 Administrative Assistant II N/A

03/12/2018 $4,538.46 Initial Compensation 14 Security Manager N/A

03/19/2018 $18.27 Initial Compensation 15 Customer Engagement Representative I N/A

03/26/2018 $18.27 Initial Compensation 16 Customer Engagement Representative I N/A

B.Promotion

01/01/2018 $4,807.70 Promotion 1 Senior Manager - Various 35.26%

02/20/2018 $23.56 Promotion 2 Senior Customer Engagement Representative 25.78%

02/26/2018 $28.85 Promotion 3 Senior Administrative Assistant 26.21%

C.Other Changes In Compensation

01/15/2018 $4,200.42 Acting Pay 1 Senior Contract & Compliance Administrator 5%

01/15/2018 $3,866.50 Acting Pay 2 Senior Contract & Compliance Administrator 5%

01/15/2018 $4,253.15 Additional Pay - Temporary 3 Senior Contract & Compliance Administrator 10%

01/29/2018 $4,623.89 Additional Pay - Temporary 4 Senior Accountant 10%

02/26/2018 $22.85 Return from Acting Pay 5 Senior Administrative Assistant -13.04%

RB-HR-100.1

Page 1 of 1291


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Update on Vacant Information Technology Positions Issue At the board meeting on Jan 26, 2018, the Board approved increased contract funding authorization for Contract No. SP445-16 - IT Technical Support Services to temporarily fill vacant positions in the Information Technology (IT) department. Upon approval, the Board requested an update on the open IT position within the next three months. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability. By staying within the budget despite higher than expected attrition, staff is containing costs without lowering levels of service to departments served by IT. Background Contract No. SP445-16, IT Technical Support Services, was created to augment the Information Technology (IT) staffing with contractor resources. This contract has been used for positions such as Help Desk Technicians, Database Administrators and Oracle Developers. The Board awarded Contract SP445-16 in June 2016, for a base period of three (3) years with two one-year options, to a bench of four firms: Argus Associates Inc., Auriga Corporation, Intratek Computer Inc. and Jade Global. The contract funding authorization amount was for $1,400,000 distributed between the four firms. At the June 9, 2017 meeting, the Board authorized the amount of $1,440,000 for the bench. The IT department had three open positions due to staff leaving the Authority. The status of these positions are as follows:

292

Update on Vacant Information Technology Positions Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

IT Manager – Position was filled on January 29, 2018.

Web Services Manager – Position was filled on February 5, 2018.

Salesforce Developer/Administrator – Position was filled by the incumbent contractor who continues to serve in the position. The available employee position was transferred to a Network Engineer–I position that would convert from a contractor to an employee position. The Network Engineer-I employee position was advertised and over 70 applications have been received. Reviews of candidates began April 25, 2018, and interviews of shortlisted candidates began April 30, 2018.

Next Steps It is anticipated that staff will complete interviews of shortlisted candidates for Network Engineer-I position, and fill the vacancy by June 2018. Budget Impact The increase in contract funding for IT Support Services is included in the Adopted Operations Budget for FY2017-18. Funding for subsequent years will be requested through the annual budget or equivalent process. Prepared by: Arun Chakladar, Senior Director, Information Technology Belinda Varela, Recruitment Manager, Human Resources



293


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Update on Tierra Del Sol Internship Program Issue Staff is providing an update on its internship program with Tierra Del Sol. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives The Board may direct staff to make changes to the Tierra Del Sol Internship Program. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to invest in people and assets. Background The Authority has partnered with Tierra Del Sol’s Workforce Development Program to provide internships for young adults with developmental disabilities, in an effort to provide inclusive opportunities and a pathway to competitive and integrated employment for these young adults. The Tierra Del Sol Foundation, founded in Sunland, CA, in 1971, was originally conceived by parents as an alternative to institutional care. In the 1990’s, Tierra Del Sol shifted its model of service to integrated workforce development. Tierra Del Sol identified volunteerism and paid employment as a way of expanding their clients’ potential to obtain meaningful employment. More than 25 years later, different industries and businesses have recognized the value of Tierra Del Sol workers in many areas, such as clerical, retail, janitorial and assembly work, and Tierra Del Sol remains a leader in advancing productive community citizenship.

294

Update on Tierra Del Sol Internship Program Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Tierra Del Sol’s Workforce Development program offers individuals a variety of opportunities for career exploration and skill development. Based on the individual’s identified career path, Tierra Del Sol, in partnership with employers, develops internship opportunities for viable candidates. The goal of these experiences is for participants to learn transferable employment skills that will assist them in becoming productive employees, who are accepted, included and valued for the contributions they make to the economic, civic, and cultural vitality of the community. The Authority hired its first four (4) Tierra Del Sol Interns on March 19, 2018: Two (2) Interns work in Customer Relations, providing assistance to customers at

Union Station; One (1) Intern works in Finance; and One (1) Intern works in Human Resources, performing administrative tasks,

including scanning documents and data entry. The four Interns have a Tierra Del Sol coach, who is onsite each day providing guidance, including creating job aids to assist them in completing their assignments. The Interns work part-time, limited to less than 1,000 hours in a fiscal year in accordance with CalPERS requirements, earning $12.00 per hour. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Belinda Varela, Recruitment Manager

Aggie Nesh, Senior Manager, Human Resources Patricia Francisco, Director, Human Resources


295


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Internship Program Update Issue

At the December 8, 2017 Board meeting, Chair Kotyuk requested an update on the Internship Program. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives

The Board may direct staff to make changes to the Internship Program Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to invest in people and assets. Background The Authority’s Internship Program, which began around 1999, is designed to give college students real world experience where they can exercise practical application of academic studies. Internship candidates must be at least 16 years old and currently enrolled in a college or an educational institution. Human Resources looks for college students who are willing to: commit to working at least six months, contribute to department success, build working relationships with both internal and external stakeholders, and give recommendations for innovative and cutting-edge solutions

296

Internship Program Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

The focus is on placements that provide meaningful projects, oversight, feedback and learning opportunities. Additionally, if students express an interest in a particular area, we make every attempt to coordinate a placement, beneficial to both the individual and organizational needs. Advertisements are made at local colleges and universities, including: University of Southern California; University of California, Los Angeles; California State University, Northridge/Fullerton/Long Beach; and California State Polytechnic University, Pomona.

Between 2015 and 2017, the Authority has hired an average of fifteen (15) interns per year. Interns work part-time, limited to less than 1,000 hours in a fiscal year in accordance with CalPERS requirements. The current intern pay rates are: Undergraduate Students: $12.00 - $15.00 per hour Graduate Students: $15.00 - $18.00 per hour

In addition to the internship program, the Authority has the following programs for students and recent college graduates: Grads on Career Track – This program is designed for recent college graduates who graduated from an accredited four-year college or university within the last 24 months. Participants work full-time for a minimum of six (6) months (less than 1,000 hours per fiscal year), are paid $20.00 to $25.00 per hour, and provided with medical benefits. Grads on Career Track employees work in various departments. Job Corps – This program is designed for Transportation Communications Union (TCU) students preparing for careers in transportation. We typically have ten (10) Job Corps employees working at any given time providing administrative support in various departments, including Human Resources, Finance and Purchasing, Contracts & Contract Compliance, or working in Customer Relations providing customer support at Union Station. Additionally, the Authority is exploring a partnership with the Krems University of Applied Science in Austria, together with the Chicago School of Professional Psychology (TCSPP) - Los Angeles Branch. The Krems/Metrolink/TCSPP Internship Program would allow students enrolled at Krems, studying International Business, to enroll in a fifteen- (15) week internship program. These students would be assigned to various departments to learn and about business operations in a United States public sector organization.

297

Internship Program Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Roxanne Randolph, Senior Human Resources Analyst

Aggie Nesh, Senior Manager, Human Resources Patricia Francisco, Director, Human Resources


298


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Mobile and Online (Web-Based) Ticketing Project Update Issue Staff is providing an update on the progress to date and key milestones associated with the delivery of the Mobile and Online Ticketing Project. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns primarily with the strategic goal to improve communications to customers and stakeholders. Background At the request of the Board, staff has presented monthly updates of the mobile and online ticketing deployment along with the marketing plan for the project beginning October 2015. The following details include an update of the three key phases of this project since the last status update to the Board on March 9, 2018. Phase 1: Application for Ticket Scanning In July 2015, the Authority initiated fare inspection scanning across all service lines. Currently, Metrolink fare enforcement personnel inspect approximately 42% of all riders in order to enforce the Authority’s fare policy and deter fare evasion. Weekly fare inspection reports are distributed to staff, detailing scanning by individual conductors. Phase 2: Metrolink App The Metrolink App continues to exhibit strong usage. System-wide, the current adoption rate is at 41%. The adoption rate is particularly robust on the Inland Empire – Orange

299

Mobile and Online (Web-Based) Ticketing Project Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

County (IEOC) line which stands at 61%. The high adoption rate on the IEOC line is attributable to the fact that the IEOC line does not connect to the Los Angeles Country Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) light rail and subway system. Staff anticipates further growth in the mobile ticket adoption rate across all lines following the successful launch of the optical reader project on December 30, 2017. Furthermore, staff anticipates the Transit Access Pass (TAP) chip-enabled ticket will be gradually phased out in 2019, as the printed Quick Response (QR) barcode on paper tickets will also enable electronic access through Metro rail gates. The chart below reflects the system-wide percent of ticket sales through the Metrolink App month over month since July 1, 2017. The data is current as of April 29, 2018.

Adoption Rate Based on Ticket Revenue from July 1, 2017 to April 29, 2018

Mobile Adoption System-wide Month over Month

Staff continues to review customer comments and explore future enhancements. Corporate Quick Card users should continue to use paper tickets until this function can be supported in the mobile ticket platform. Mobile ticket users can transfer to all bus operators that currently accept Metrolink paper tickets, including the Metro Bus system. Mobile ticket users simply show the bus operator an activated mobile ticket for visual inspection. Additional feature enhancements such as the print-at-home, apple pay integration and corporate quick card continue to be developed. A mockup of the print-at-home enhancement has been provided by the vendor (Masabi) with a target completion date of the end of August 2018.

300


Phase 3: Metro Gate Integration (Optical Reader Installation) Phase 3 of the mobile ticketing project was successfully completed on December 30, 2017. The optical readers installed in the Metro rail gates enable mobile app users access to the Metro rail system. Cubic, Metro, Masabi, and the Authority will continue to work in close collaboration to support the current system and ensure a high level of customer satisfaction. Cubic is responsible for providing maintenance services under warrantee through June 30, 2018. Staff is currently discussing a maintenance agreement with Cubic to cover maintenance services for the optical readers beginning July 1, 2018. In addition, staff is also discussing a maintenance agreement with Masabi to cover the back office single board computers. Funding for the maintenance agreement is reflected in the FY18-19 Operating budget request. Optical Scanner Usage At the request of the Board during the January 12, 2018 meeting, staff is providing optical scanner usage data. The below chart provides weekly scans throughout the Metro rail system since the launch of the program on December 30, 2017. The data is current as of April 29, 2018.

Weekly Optical Scans from December 31 to April 29, 2018

Attachment A reflects the project schedule timeline.

301


Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Andy Ly, Senior Manager, Fare Collections


302


ATTACHMENT A

MOBILE/ONLINE TICKET PROJECT SCHEDULE

Project Kickoff & Initiation

Notice to Proceed May 4, 2015

Phase 1: Application for Ticket Scanning July, 2015

Phase 2: Metrolink App

IEOC Beta Test November, 2015

Live IEOC Line Rollout March 1, 2016

Full System-Wide Rollout (No Metro Rail Transfer) March 31, 2016

Angels Express Tickets Available March 31, 2016

Fare Change / PV Stations Added June 6, 2016

Email Confirmation Update June 15, 2016

Change Pedley Station to Jurupa Valley / Pedley October 3, 2016

Adding service alerts, schedule and ticket info October 11, 2016

Email Subscription Integration October 11, 2016

Uber / Lyft / Rideshare Integration October 11, 2016

Amtrak Scanning for R2R Passengers December 10, 2016

Self Service Refund December 10, 2016

Adding Rider Tool Enhancements February 24, 2017

Fare Enforcement Enhancements February 24, 2017

Purchase Ticket Online and Display in App September 2017

Print at Home Ticket August 2018

Apple Pay Integration To be determined

Corporate Quick Card To be determined

303


Phase 3: Metro Gate Integration

Masabi Contract Amendment Approved February, 2016

Board Approval Cubic Contract for Optical Readers October 28, 2016

TAP Lab / Station Trial May 22, 2017

Optical Reader / Single Board Computer Installation November 2017

Gate Integration Complete December 2017

304


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Ticket Vending Machine Availability and Performance Issue Staff is providing an update on ticket vending machine (TVM) availability and performance. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives

The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to improve communications to customers and stakeholders. It provides updates related to legacy TVM availability and performance. Background TVM maintenance services have been provided by Conduent Inc. (formerly Xerox Transport Solutions, Inc.) since the installation of the TVM fleet in 2001. The current fleet is programmed to dispense seven channels of ticket stock and is located at each of the 60 Metrolink stations. Overall, the fleet supports dispensing of tickets for over 30 ticketing programs. TVM availability is measured by the total number of TVMs in service, multiplied by the minutes in a month available for dispensing tickets, minus the unavailable minutes due to failures. Work orders that extend over several days are counted for every day the TVM is unavailable. The availability for the period February 2018 to March 2018 was 98%. The average over a 12-month period from April 2017 to March 2018 was 98%.

305

Ticket Vending Machine Availability and Performance Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Figure 1. TVM Monthly Availability

Monthly work orders for February 2018 totaled 390 for an overall device availability of 98.22%. The main types of work orders reported were printer errors (118 work orders / 31% time unavailable), paper not inserted errors (108 work orders / 28% time unavailable), and bill note acceptor errors (40 work orders / 11% time unavailable). Monthly work orders for March 2018 totaled 356 for an overall device availability of 98.78%. The main types of work orders reported were paper not inserted errors (97 work orders / 28% time unavailable), printer errors (95 work orders / 27% time unavailable), and Link errors/Power outages caused by rain and high wind events (94 work orders / 27% time unavailable). A notice-to-proceed (NTP) was given to Conduent to purchase a critical component, the bill note acceptors in December 2017. Approximately 70% of the bill note acceptors have been replaced and staff anticipate the remaining to be completed by the end of August 2018. Next Steps A notice-to-proceed (NTP) was given to direct Conduent to place orders for other critical components such as the light-emitting diode (LED) displays and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) panels. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report.

98.61% 98.60%

98.26% 98.26%

98.48%

98.09%97.40% 98.30%

98.22%

98.20% 98.22%

98.78%

93.00%

94.00%

95.00%

96.00%

97.00%

98.00%

99.00%

100.00%

Apr‐17 May‐17 June‐17 July‐17 Aug‐17 Sept‐17 Oct ‐ 17 Nov‐17 Dec‐17 Jan‐18 Feb‐18 Mar‐18

System Availability Goal 95%

306

Ticket Vending Machine Availability and Performance Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

Prepared by: Andy Ly, Senior Manager, Fare Collections


307

TRANSMITTAL: May 4, 2018 MEETING: May 11, 2018 ITEM 31 TO: Board of Directors

FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Tier 4 Locomotive Update and Delivery Status Issue This report is a monthly update to the Board on the status of the Tier 4 Locomotive Program and information during revenue service. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative The Board may request additional information and detail. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to ensure a safe operating environment and retain and grow ridership. The Tier 4 locomotives will greatly enhance Metrolink train service by providing safe and reliable service to its passengers. Background As of May 2, 2018, the Authority has received 16 Tier 4 locomotives (see table below).

Authority LaGrange/ Pueblo

Muncie

Conditionally Accepted

Simulation Testing

Post-Production

Testing Production Pre-Production

3 2 10 2 21 2

308

Tier 4 Locomotive Update and Delivery Status Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

A summary of Conditionally Accepted locomotives and locomotives in Simulation Testing is referenced in the table below: In-Service Reliability for 908, 907, 905, 910, 909

As of Wednesday, May 2, 2018 Unit 908 907 905 910 909 Revenue Service Start Date

10/12/2017 10/17/2017 2/8/2018 3/15/2018 4/9/2018

Failure Free Since

4/18/2018 2/4/2018 4/30/2018 3/14/2018 4/30/2018

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

90810/12/2017

90710/17/2017

9052/8/2018

9103/15/2018

9094/9/2018

Days

F125 Locomotive & Revenue Service Start Date

In‐Service Reliability for 908, 907, 905, 910, 909March 1 ‐May 2, 2018

Days inService and Available

Days inTechnical Analysis

Days inUnscheduled Maintenance

Days inPlanned Maintenance (PM)**

309


Delivery Overview 15 units are presently on property; five are in-service, three have been conditionally

accepted, 10 are signed off as delivered and undergoing final preparation for Simulation Testing.

21 units are in the production facility Two stored car-bodies await entry into production. Two units ready for shipment from Muncie Update on First Seven Months of Revenue Operation On October 12, 2017, locomotives 907 and 908 entered revenue operation coupled with existing locomotives as part of a 1,000-mile “shakedown” program. During the first 1,000 miles, these two units experienced several failures which prompted staff to raise the required shakedown mileage to 2,500 miles. Reliability continues to improve. Three of the five locomotives in service have met the 2,500-mile failure free milestone (907, 908 and 910). Staff have been working with Progress Rail to obtain necessary parts and other components required to complete mandated preventative maintenance (PM) service. Progress Rail has fulfilled 92-day and 184-day preventative maintenance kits. Staff are waiting on fulfillment of the a 368-day kit. Gary Eelman of Progress Rail will attend the May 11, 2018 Board meeting. April 5, 2018 Service Delay On April 5, 2018, Metrolink train 401 (Tier 4 locomotive 907) operating cab car lead between Riverside and L.A. Union Station experienced a no-load issue, which resulted in lengthy delays on the Riverside 400 line. After an exhaustive review of Intellitrain and event recorder software, it was determined that the no load issue was not a failure of locomotive 907 but rather a communication failure with the voltage meter on the Rotem cab car. After repeated attempts, staff has been unable to duplicate the failure under simulated conditions. Locomotive 907 will be put back in service with status of “no fault found”. Next Steps Staff will continue to work with Progress Rail to bring additional Tier 4 locomotives into service. Staff will provide a status update at the June 8, 2018 Board meeting.

310


Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact because of this report. Prepared by: Greg Harrington, Director, Maintenance of Equipment

Rod Bailey Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Dispatch & Operator Services)


311


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Performance Update on Contract No. OP136-10 Operator

Services – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Issue Staff is providing an update on Contract No. Op136-10 Operator Services with the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak). Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternative

The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to maintain fiscal sustainability and improve communications to customers and stakeholders. Fare enforcement efforts reduce fare evasion and loss of revenue. Background On June 24, 2016, the Board authorized the Chief Executive Officer to exercise the second and final three-year option under Contract No. OP136-10 with Amtrak and extend the period of performance to June 30, 2020. During the discussion, Director Solis requested that staff return on a quarterly basis to provide an update on the contractor's performance. This report highlights Amtrak’s performance based on their compliance with Metrolink's operational Supplemental Instructions, specifically regarding Conductors' onboard ticket scanning and providing proper/accurate announcements to customers. This report will discuss fare compliance, inspection policy, and train and engine crew responsibilities.

312

Performance Update on Contract No. OP136-10 Operator Services – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

The current supplemental instructions provide guidelines in 11 areas for train and engine (T&E) crews (Conductors and Engineers) operating on the Metrolink system. Adherence to supplemental instructions is monitored by the Operations and Compliance Departments. "Spot-checking" and observation of crew members is performed by riding trains and observing crews that arrive and depart from stations throughout the Metrolink system. Onboard Ticket Scanning Scanning devices are used by Conductors to validate paper tickets issued by ticket vending machines (TVMs) and mobile tickets purchased through the Metrolink smartphone application, or app. Prior to the deployment of the ticket scanning device, all conductors verified tickets by visual inspection. The table below represents inspection rates for the previous quarter. The Authority’s goal is to achieve an average inspection rate of 25% for the month; the average for the previous quarter ending December 31, 2017, was at 31.98%. This quarter staff saw a slight increase of 0.17% with an average this quarter of 32.15%. Table 1. Scan Counts - Summary by Month Ridership -

Conductor Count

Scan Rate (%)

Month Weekday Weekend Total Jan-18 248,027 24,841 272,868 885,247 30.82% Feb-18 236,734 26,590 263,324 828,767 31.77% Mar-18 266,734 27,570 294,604 868,902 33.87%

Staff continues to host monthly meeting with Amtrak to discuss contract-related matters such as ticket scanning requirements and other areas of performance. Amtrak is provided monthly comprehensive reports indicating low performers with the expectation that corrective actions will be implemented. The Operations Administrator continues to partner with Amtrak’s management team to resolve T&E matters, in addition to providing support and oversight of the contract. Citations and Fare Evasion The Authority acknowledges that effective fare compliance and enforcement lead to lower fare evasion rates and the subsequent increase in fare revenue. The table below indicates the number of citations issued by Conductors for the quarter. Operations continues to closely monitor Conductor compliance as it relates to the inspection policy.

313


Table 2. Third Quarter FY18 - Citations by Line.

T&E Crew Responsibilities It is important that Authority representatives project a professional image. As part of Metrolink’s frontline, Conductors are passengers’ first point of contact and expected to perform their duties in a courteous, efficient and safe manner as outlined in the Supplemental Instructions. Customer complaints and commendations related to Conductor performance are documented in the Metrolink customer database for review and action. The figure below reflects the previous quarter’s feedback from Metrolink customers through Metrolink’s website, call center, email and social media platforms. Customer feedback continues to be a priority for the Authority; it provides insight into areas that require improvement. Staff continues to see a steady trend in Conductor commendations and a decrease in Conductor complaints compared to last quarter. The Operations Administrator continues to monitor customer complaints and, in conjunction

4

17

1 15

11

15

1 2 11

18

1 2 13

0

5

10

15

20

25

3rd Qtr Citations by Line ‐ 2018

Jan Feb Mar

314


with Amtrak, thoroughly vet and investigate all customer complaints that are escalated with the expectation that Amtrak will implement any corrective actions necessary. Figure 1. Customer Feedback on Conductors per 100,000 Boardings

T&E Compliance The Authority’s Compliance Department is tasked with monitoring Train and Engine crews on Railroad Rules to ensure Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) compliance and Metrolink Supplemental Instructions adherence. For the Quarter being reported, 501 tests were performed with two exceptions taken for this quarter.

5

7

9

0.21 0.100.52 0.74 0.92

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Jan‐18 Feb‐18 Mar‐18

# of Number of Complaints Sum of Number of Commendations

# of Complaints per 100,000 Boardings Sum of Commendations per 100,000 Boardings

January 2018 Ridership* 969,438

February 2018 Ridership* 939,943

March 2018 Ridership* 978,304

315


Next Steps Staff will continue to provide quarterly performance updates to the Board. The next performance report (for the fourth quarter ending June 30, 2018) will be presented at a July 2018 meeting. Staff will continue its partnership with Amtrak to ensure adherence to the Metrolink operational supplemental instructions. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Arun Chakladar, Senior Director, Information Technology

Toni Moore, Operations Administrator

Rod Bailey Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Dispatch and Operator Services)


159

203

139

23 50

50

100

150

200

250

Jan Feb Mar

3rd Qtr ‐T&E Efficiency Compliance ‐ 2018

Count of Pass Count of Exception Count of Coach

316


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Quarterly Report on Bus Bridge Response for Unplanned

Service Disruptions – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018

Issue Staff is providing an update on alternate bus bridge provider response during the third quarter (January to March 2018) of FY18. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to retain and grow ridership, as providing means to complete trips when service is interrupted is critical. Background Staff continues to improve bus bridge response and communication during service disruptions. The Board requested regular updates on service recovery; this report is for the third quarter of FY2017-18 (FY18) – January through March 2018. Service Disruption and Bus Response Summary During the third quarter of FY18, there were a total of 30 service disruptions necessitating unplanned bus bridge support. There were 104 requests for support made: Twenty-four (23%) of those requests resulted in buses arriving to passengers in an

hour or less Twenty-one (20%) resulted in buses arriving more than an hour after initial call; and The remaining 59 (57%) requests were declined or unavailable

317

Quarterly Report on Bus Bridge Response for Unplanned Service Disruptions – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Sixty-seven of the 104 total requests were to public operators; 31 (46%) were declined or unavailable. The top reasons operators were unable to assist were due to a lack of drivers (20 times) followed by lack of equipment (19 times)

As additional information, 37 of the 104 total requests were made to private operators and 28 (75%) of these were declined or unavailable. Private vendors typically require advanced reservations for bus bridges and are regularly used for planned service disruptions like maintenance work windows. This quarter the best response rates were from the Glendale Bee with no requests declined, Metro with only 6% of the requests declined, followed by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) with 12% of the requests declined. Please see Attachment A, Reasons Operators Unable to Assist, for more details. Most service disruptions occurred on Wednesdays (10 incidents). Sixty-nine percent of the requests were declined on this day. The highest percentage of declined requests occurred on Saturdays (however, only 2 incidents occurred on this day). Please see Attachment B, Declined Requests by Day of the Week, for more details. Lyft services were used a total of 49 times for 87 passengers. Fifty-three of these passengers missed connections due to late trains, and 34 passengers were provided Lyft service instead of a bus during service disruptions due to lack of buses. This represents an increase of 30 requests in comparison to last quarter. Of the 49 requests 34 were made by staff at Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) yielding a savings of $2,515 versus the use of taxis from LAUS. Staff is currently using Lyft to supplement emergency bus bridges for small groups of passengers (25 or less) when all other options have been exhausted or when passengers miss local bus connection as a direct result of a Metrolink delay. The reason for this is that is that during a service interruption the conductor is the only person onboard to group, organize, document (one passenger name/contact is needed per Lyft vehicle), and communicate information to Operations staff. If the conductor requests to be relieved (due to emotional trauma, hours of service expiration, etc.), these tasks must be accomplished by the relief conductor upon arrival in addition to other safety- and time-sensitive functions. Once passenger contact information is received by staff at the Dispatch and Operations Center, individual tickets are created online for each Lyft request. Each request, consisting of one to four riders, takes approximately five to seven minutes to enter in the Lyft database. Additional difficulties can arise if the incident train is stopped between stations and the Lyft driver does not have a distinguishable address or cross-street nearby to locate the passenger.

318


Major Service Disruptions and Recovery Details In January 2018, Metrolink experienced nine service disruptions, with the lengthiest delay occurring on January 27 when Antelope Valley Line train 269 was stopped at Vincent Grade-Acton station at 7:19 p.m. due to a vehicle accident near the tracks. This delay was further extended when the train had to stop again at Palmdale due to the crew’s hours of service limitations. Several attempts were made to find alternate transportation, with negative results due to lack of drivers and equipment. There were approximately 265 passengers onboard and they were delayed for approximately an hour and 50 minutes. In February 2018, Metrolink incurred 14 service disruptions with the most drastic being on February 3 when train 269 stopped at Via Princessa at 6:40 p.m. due to a mechanical problem. There were approximately 288 passengers onboard the train who were delayed approximately two to three hours. Buses were obtained from three agencies, but their arrival was delayed. The first bus arrived one hour and 20 minutes after the original request was made, the last bus arrived approximately 20 minutes later. The arrival of the buses was delayed due to staffing shortages on a Saturday and buses responding from outside of the immediate area. In March 2018, Metrolink experienced seven service disruptions with the most impactful being on March 2, 2018 when train 684 struck a trespasser. Several trains on the Orange County (OC), Inland Empire / Orange County (IEOC) and 91/Perris Valley lines were delayed due to the closed tracks between Buena Park and Fullerton stations. Eight agencies were contacted with only three able to provide a few buses. Additionally, there were delays with the buses’ arrivals due to traffic caused by rain and the Friday rush hour. The longest delay was experienced by passengers aboard train 684. This train had to hold for clearance by authorities for two hours and seven minutes, with approximately 260 passengers onboard the train. Shuttle Services At the February 9, 2018 Board meeting Director Kerkorian asked for information on the availability of shuttles for use during service disruptions. Five shuttle companies were contacted: Xpress Shuttle, Road Runner, Shuttle Wizard, GTS Shuttle and Prime Time. Staff faces a challenge with the use of these types of shuttles when there is a need to make reservations or payment in advance of the day service is requested for. Another potential problem is the need for lifts for electric wheelchairs, which also requires advance reservation. Staff continue to research additional shuttle providers. Next Steps On March 7, 8 and 15, members of the Authority’s Communications Desk staff toured the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (Metro) Bus Operations Center to learn more about operations during bus bridges in an effort to develop a closer working relationship with the agency. Staff will visit the OCTA dispatch center next quarter,

319


and there will also be meetings scheduled with other private and public agencies. Staff will continue to work with operators and vendors to maintain and improve responsiveness. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Sergio Marquez, Director of Dispatching Operations Sandra Martinez, Supervisor, Customer Relations Gina Mack, Supervisor, Customer Relations

Rod Bailey Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Dispatch and Operator Services)


320

ATTACHMENT A

VendorTotal

Requests

Total

Declined

Declined

%Reason(s)

Simi Valley 6 6 100%

No equipment 1 time No Drivers 1 time

No answer 5 times

Foothill Transit 2 2 100% No equipment 1 time No answer 1 time

AVTA 5 3 60%

No equipment (1 time)

No manpower (2 times) No answer

(0 times)

Omnitrans 4 2 50%

No equipment (0 times)


(1 time) Out of area (1 time)

Santa Clarita 6 6 100%



(1 time)

Gold Coast Transit 5 4 80%


No manpower (1 time) No answer

(2 times)

RTA 13 6 46%



(0 times) Out of area (1 time)

Metro 18 1 6%


No manpower (0 times) Out of

the area (1 time)

Glendale Beeline 0 0 0%



(0 times)

OCTA 8 1 12%


No manpower (1 time) No answer

(0 times)

NCTD 1 0 0%



(0 times)

Reasons Operators Unable to Assist

FY18 - Quarter 3

January 1, 2018 - March 31, 2018

PU

BLI

C T

RA

NSI

T A

GEN

CIE

S

321

ATTACHMENT A

VendorTotal

Requests

Total

Declined

Declined

%Reason(s)

Reasons Operators Unable to Assist

FY18 - Quarter 3

January 1, 2018 - March 31, 2018P

UB

LIC

TR

AN

SIT

AG

ENC

IES

H&L Charter 7 7 100%



(2 time)

Inland Empire Stages 12 5 42%



(2 times)

TSU 11 10 91%



(1 time)

Sureride Charter 4 4 100%



(1 time)

US Coachworks 2 2 100%No answer (1 time) No equipment

(1 time)

PR

IVA

TE T

RA

NSI

T A

GEN

CIE

S

322

ATTACHMENT B

Day Number of

IncidentsRequests Declined % Declined

Monday 2 8 5 62

Tuesday 3 7 2 28

Wednesday 10 32 13 40

Thursday 9 36 25 69

Friday 4 17 12 70

Saturday 2 8 6 75

Sunday 0 0 0 0

Declined Requests by Day of the Week

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Declined Requests (%) by Day of the Week

Requests Declined % Declined

323


FROM: Arthur T. Leahy SUBJECT: Federal Railroad Administration Inspections, Exceptions

and Violations Update Issue Staff is providing a quarterly update on violations received from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). This update will summarize the inspections, exceptions, violations and fines received in the first quarter of the calendar year 2018, January through March. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Alternatives

The Board may request additional information. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to ensure a safe operating environment. The FRA reviews practices and records to ensure the Authority is conducting business as required by regulation. Background The FRA applies the general and permanent rules published in the Code of Federal Regulations, Transportation, (49 CFR Part 200-399) to oversee compliance and assess penalties for violations against both freight and commuter railroad agencies. The FRA conducts frequent inspections and audits agencies’ records to monitor and enforce railroad safety regulations specified in 49 CFR. The Authority places paramount importance on safety and compliance and maintains a strong record of compliance with FRA regulations and minimal instances of FRA violations relative to the rest of the industry.

324

Federal Railroad Administration Inspections, Exceptions and Violations Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

FRA Fines Issued In the first quarter of 2018, FRA inspections were conducted during 25 visits to the property. A total of 391 inspections were conducted with 14 exceptions taken, resulting in a 3% exception rate. Exceptions are defined as items noted by the inspector where corrective action is required but no fines are recommended. During this timeframe, the FRA issued a total of three fines to the Authority summarized in Table 1. The fines were issued to the Operations Compliance Department for: 1. Failure to identify the officer responsible for ensuring the program of operational tests

and inspections is implemented. The Authority program manager position was vacant.

2. Multiple Authority dispatchers missing their testing plan requirements as outlined in

testing program by Metrolink. Authority compliance officers failed to identify these managers for not making their plan and did not perform a six-month review of the testing plan for the January - June 2016 period.

3. Program of Operational Tests and Inspections does not specifically include 49 CFR

Part 220 Subpart C regarding the use of electronic devices. Table 1. FRA Violations Issued to the Authority January through March 2018 Violation

Quarter Issued

Railroad Category (Responsible Party)

Penalty Amount

Settlement Amount

1 1st Operating Rules (Authority)

$7,500 $5,625

2 1st Operating Rules (Authority)

$9,500 $7,125

3 1st Railroad Communications(Authority)

$9,500 $6,175

Total $26,500 $18,925

Next Steps Several corrective actions have been put in place in response to the violations paid in the first quarter. Kimberly Yu, Deputy Chief Operating Officer (Planning and Project Delivery), has assumed responsibility for the Operations Compliance Department. The Plan of Operational Testing has been replaced by the Plan of Operational Oversight and Observation, which does not require a Program Administrator.

325

Federal Railroad Administration Inspections, Exceptions and Violations Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 3

1. The Plan of Operational Oversight and Observation requires each contractor to develop and administer their own efficiency testing plan. The responsibility for tests and inspections rests with the testing officers for each contractor.

2. The Compliance Department has modified the six-month review process to ensure that it complies with the FRA requirements.

3. The Compliance Department has verified that the contract plans include testing

limits for the use of 49 CFR Part 220 Subpart C (electronic devices).

Staff will continue to report on FRA inspections, exceptions and violations on a quarterly basis. Budget Impact The fines assessed to the Authority in the amount of $18,925 are included in the Adopted Operational Budget for FY2017-18. Prepared by: Tracy Berge, Assistant Director, System Safety


326

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 35 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Internal Audit Department SUBJECT: Internal Audit Department Update Issue The following status of audit activities of the Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) at the Authority is for informational purposes. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal to maintain fiscal sustainability and improve organizational efficiency. Background

I. Internal Audit Activities:

A. The Internal Audit Charter requires that a quarterly report highlighting the progress of the Annual Audit Plan be prepared for the CEO and EMAC/Board. Attached is the detailed progress status for Internal and Contract Audits as listed in the FY2017-18 Annual Audit Plan Third Quarter Update (Attachment A).

B. Corrective Action Implementation Tracking - At the request of the Board, open audit recommendations and corrective action implementation tracking for the FY2017-18 Third Quarter is presented (see Item 39).

C. Performance Audit: Information Technology General Controls (#2017-07-IA) – Audit was completed and presented to the EMAC at the February 23, 2018 meeting. As requested by the EMAC, a status progress on the corrective action implementation for the audit is provided as follows: out of total 12 corrective action items, (1) four were implemented and verified (2) two was implemented pending Internal Audit’s verification, and (3) six were in progress. Details of the corrective action items are included in Item 39.

327

Internal Audit Department Update Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

D. Internal Audit completed the following performance audits: (1) Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (see Item 37), (2) Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (see Item 38, and (3) Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company – Contract No. MS222-09R (see Item 36).

II. External Audit Activities:

A. FY2016-17 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) Audit and Single

Audit was completed. Internal Audit is tracking the corrective action implementation for the audit findings. The corrective action status is included in the Corrective Action Status Update – Third Quarter.

B. FY2016-17 Compliance Audit under Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No.

940000000P0SCRRA27 and Amendment No. 1 with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is completed. The final report was issued on April 27, 2018 and included a finding with regards to the schedule of unearned revenue account not completed in a timely manner. Prior year finding related to cost allocation formula was closed.

C. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Proposition 1B Audit – The final report was received on January 8, 2018. The final report includes an audit finding of $60,872 questioned costs and a recommendation to repay the amount to Caltrans. The Authority will reimburse the questioned cost amount by June 29, 2018.

D. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Compliance Review – OCTA’s Internal Audit Department completed their compliance review of Agreement No.C-6-1208 between OCTA and the Authority for design and construction of a control point at 4th Street in the City of Santa Ana and a new power turnout to the Union Pacific Railroad spur track. The final report issued on March 6, 2018 included findings related to exercising oversight of contractor procurements for OCTA projects.

Budget Impact There is no immediate budget impact resulting from this status report. Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit

Elisabeth Lazuardi Senior Manager, Audit

328

SCRRA - Internal Audit DepartmentFY 2017-18 Annual Audit Plan Third Quarter Update

(As of 3/31/2018)

ATTACHMENT A

# Audit Activity Auditable Unit Description

Planned

Staff

Hours

Staff

Hours to

Date

Under

(Over) Status

Internal Audits

1Fare Revenue Data Integrity

(2017-13-IA)Fare Revenue

Evaluate completeness and accuracy of data produced by Ticket

Vending Machines and Mobile Ticketing Applications. 312 192 120 In Progress - Fieldwork

2Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes

(2017-14-IA)Finance Evaluate effectiveness of fare revenue reconciliation processes. 135 339 (204)

Completed - Corrective

Action Tracking

3Shared Use Agreements Revenue Process

(2017-04-IA)

Planning & Project Delivery/

Contracts

Evaluate the adequacy of controls over shared-use agreements

revenue process and revenue billing and collections. 40 32 8


Action Tracking

4Grant Accounting & Management of Receivables

(2017-19-IA)Finance

Evaluate the adequacy of internal controls over grant accounting,

billing processes, and collection. 380 285 95 In Progress - Reporting

5 Operating Receivable and Third Party Deposit FinanceIncluded in the FY 2017 Annual Audit Plan - Review of processes of

tracking and collecting operating receivables and third party deposits. 334 - 334

Not Initiated -

Postponed to FY 2019

due to Accounts

Receivable Manager

turnover

6 Project Risk Management Processes Operations

Review compliance to guidelines for identifying, managing, and

reporting risks associated with the planning and implementation of

projects.

*Outsourced/Co-sourced

200 23 177 In Progress - Fieldwork

7

IT General Controls Review (LAUS and Pomona

Data Centers)

(2017-07-IA)

Information Technology &

PTC Network Control Systems

Review the adequacy of IT General Controls in place within the IT

Department. 196 434 (238)


Action Tracking

8 Accounts Payable Review

(2017-18-IA)Finance

Evaluate controls over disbursement process and management of

accounts payable aging. 340 87 253 In Progress - Fieldwork

9Fleet & Equipment Maintenance

(2017-16-IA)Planning & Project Delivery

Evaluate processes over monitoring and tracking processes for fleet

and equipment, maintenance activities and management of

maintenance records.

327 221 106 In Progress - Fieldwork

Total Hours - Internal Audits 2,264 1,613 651

Contract Audits

10

Contract Audit - OP136-10 - Metrolink Operator

Services - National Railroad Passenger

Corporation (Amtrak)

(2017-08-CA)

Amtrak

Operations/Contracts

Incurred cost audit and evaluation of contract administration process.

*Outsourced/Co-sourced 30 22 9 Completed - Corrective

Action Tracking

329

SCRRA - Internal Audit DepartmentFY 2017-18 Annual Audit Plan Third Quarter Update

(As of 3/31/2018)

ATTACHMENT A

# Audit Activity Auditable Unit Description

Planned

Staff

Hours

Staff

Hours to

Date

Under

(Over) Status

11

Contract Audit - MS214-09 - Track and Structures

Maintenance Services - Veolia Transportation

Maintenance and Infrastructure, Inc. (VTMI)

(2017-15-CA)




Action Tracking

12

Contract Audit - H1636-10 - Parsons

Transportation Group, Inc. - Close out Audit

(2017-05-CA)

Parsons Transportation



*Outsourced/Co-sourced 100 - 100 Not Initiated

14

Contract Audit - E740-14 - On-Call Professional

Engineering Design Services

(2017-17-CA)Operations/Contracts



Action Tracking

15 Pre-Award cost analysisVarious architectural &

engineering contractors

Pre-Award Cost Analysis Agreed Upon Procedures (Contracts E740-14

and other contracts as requested by Contracts & Procurement)

*Outsourced/Co-sourced

150 69 81 On going

16

OP120-03 - Equipment Maintenance Services -

Bombardier Transit Corporation

(2018-01-CA)

Bombardier Transit

Corporation



*Outsourced/Co-sourced 200 39 161 In Progress - Fieldwork

17

MS222-09R - Communications & Signals

Maintenance Services - Mass Electric

Construction Company

(2018-02-CA)

Mass Electric Construction

Company



*Outsourced/Co-sourced 200 57 143 In Progess - Reporting

Total Hours - Contract Audits 980 286 695

330

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 36 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Internal Audit Department SUBJECT: Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company –

Contract No. MS222-09R (#2018-02-CA) Issue The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) Contract No. MS222-09R (#2018-02-CA). Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to maintain fiscal sustainability and improve organizational efficiency. Background Contract No. MS222-09R was competitively procured and awarded on December 11, 2009 for a six-year term with one four-year option with the initial base term ending December 31, 2015. Subsequently, the Board approved and exercised a four-year and a half year option which extended the contract end date to June 30, 2020. MEC was contracted to provide inspection and maintenance of the Authority's Communications and Signals (C&S) system, centralized train control, Customer Information System (CIS) and Positive Train Control (PTC) systems and to support the installation, testing, inspection and acceptance of a wide variety of capital, rehabilitation, and third party external projects. Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company Contract No. MS222-09R was conducted according to the FY 2018 Annual Internal Audit Plan as approved by the Board.

331

Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company – Contract No. MS222-09R (#2018-02-CA) Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Objectives The general objectives and scope of our engagement was to: 1) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and 2) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for monitoring contractor cost submissions to contract terms. Conclusion Internal Audit’s evaluation found that internal controls over (1) ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and (2) monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms need improvement. Management Response Management indicated agreement with audit findings and recommendations, and established corrective action plan with target dates to implement recommendations. Internal Audit will continue to follow up on management implementation progress. The audit is included as Attachment A to this report. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit


332

Contract Audit: Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) - Contract No. MS222-09R (2018-02-CA)

i

COnta1

Contract Audit:

Mass Electric Construction Company Contract No. MS222-09R

July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016

Audit Report No. 2018-02-CA April 27, 2018

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) Internal Audit Department

Presented to: Board of Directors and Executive Management and Audit Committee Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, CPA, Senior Manager, Audit Beni Warshawsky, Audit Consultant, BCA Distributed to: Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer Elissa K. Konove, Deputy Chief Executive Officer

Gary Lettengarver, Chief Operating Officer Darrell Maxey, Deputy Chief Operating Officer

Attachment A

333


i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed an audit of Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA or Authority) Contract No. MS222-09R with Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) for the July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016 period. The general objectives and scope of our engagement was to: 1) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and 2) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms. MEC was contracted to provide inspection and maintenance of the Authority's Communications and Signals (C&S) system, centralized train control, Customer Information System (CIS) and Positive Train Control (PTC) systems and sufficient capacity to support the installation, testing, inspection and acceptance of a wide variety of capital, rehabilitation, and third party external projects. Contract No. MS222-09R was competitively procured and awarded on December 11, 2009 for a six-year term with one four-year option with the initial base term ending December 31, 2015. MEC began communications and maintenance responsibilities on January 1, 2010. Subsequently, the Board approved and exercised a four-year and a half year option which extended the contract end date to June 30, 2020. The total contract funding approved by the Board on June 12, 2015 for FY 2015-16 was $16,520,045.

CONCLUSION AND KEY FINDINGS Our evaluation has found that internal controls over (1) ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and (2) monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms need improvement. The key findings are as follows: 1. The provisions in the written contract do not conform to the negotiated agreement. There

was no summary of record of negotiation to act as a control document to ensure that the negotiated contract terms are included in the final contract.

2. Contract Management and Business Administration relied on the Contract Administration oral representation of the contract terms and there is no written document providing evidence that an independent review of the contract invoicing provisions was performed by Contract Management and Business Administration. As a result, the disconnect between Contract Administration’s oral representation and the written contractual document continued for approximately eight years. Organizational checks and balances need enhancement.

Attachment A

334


ii

RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend:

1. Contract Administration establish the requirement that competitively negotiated contracts include summary negotiation documentation modeled after FTA Best Practices.

2. Contract Administration require that important negotiated terms and conditions

be reconciled back to the contract document, modify the contract accordingly, and document the task as completed.

3. Contract Administration should act as the official record holder of the contract

documents and all related files. Contract documents and all related files should be kept current and accessible to Contract Management and Business Administration. If any of the three parties discover or determine a discrepancy, error or omission in the contract documents or files, it should be brought to the attention of all parties for timely resolution.

4. Contract Administration, in conjunction with Operations, determine whether the

institutionalized invoicing practices for the contract, after approximately 8 years of operation, are sufficient or does the contract need modification.

5. Contract Management and Business Administration improve procedures to ensure Contract Management and Business Administration independently review contractual invoicing provisions and document their review in a timely manner. Any resulting questions should be raised in writing with Contract Administration. The raised questions and their resolutions should be filed in the contract documents or files.

Details of findings, recommendations, and management responses are included in Findings, Recommendations, and Management Responses section.

REVIEW OF REPORT

We discussed our findings and recommendations with SCRRA management. The SCRRA management indicated general agreement with audit findings and recommendations. We thank SCRRA management and staff for their assistance and cooperation during our audit. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit at (213) 452-0335 or [email protected].

Attachment A

335

mailto:[email protected]


iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. iii INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 1 AUDIT OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGIES .............................................. 2

Objectives ................................................................................................................. 2

Scope ....................................................................................................................... 2

Methodology ............................................................................................................. 2

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 2

FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES .................... 3

Finding 1. Internal controls over ensuring that all negotiated elements are properly reflected in the contract agreement need improvement. ........................................... 3

Finding 2. Internal controls over monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms need improvement. ................................................. 6

ABBREVIATIONS

CIS Customer Information System C&S Communication and Signals FBLC Fully Burdened Labor Cost Federal Transit Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration G&A General & Administrative Cost GAO U.S. Government Accountability Office MEC Mass Electric Construction Company PTC Positive Train Control SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority

Attachment A

336


1

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed an audit of Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA or Authority) Contract No. MS222-09R with Mass Electric Construction Company (MEC) for the July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. The general objectives and scope of our engagement was to: 1) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and 2) to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness of internal controls for monitoring contractor cost submissions to contract terms. Contract No. MS222-09R was competitively procured and awarded on December 11, 2009 for a six-year term with one four-year option with the initial base term ending December 31, 2015. MEC began communications and maintenance responsibilities on January 1, 2010. Subsequently, the Board approved and exercised a four-year and a half year option which extended the contract end date to June 30, 2020. MEC was contracted to provide inspection and maintenance of the Authority's Communications and Signals (C&S) system, centralized train control, Customer Information System (CIS) and Positive Train Control (PTC) systems and sufficient capacity to support the installation, testing, inspection and acceptance of a wide variety of capital, rehabilitation, and third party external projects. The total contract funding approved by the Board on June 12, 2015 for FY 2015-16 was $16,520,045 composed of $ 15,020,045 for annual operating maintenance and $1,500,000 in support of capital, rehabilitation, and third-party projects. The proposed FY 2015-16 budget consisted of $ 15,020,045 for providing inspection and maintenance of the Authority's signal, communications, centralized train control, CIS, and PTC systems and $1,500,000 for providing support for installation, testing, inspection and acceptance of capital, rehabilitation and third-party external projects. Capital and rehabilitation project support includes: communications, signal and grade crossing rehabilitation projects as identified within the 3-5-10 Year Rehabilitation plan; and support of various track rehabilitation projects. Support of third party reimbursable projects includes: grade crossing safety enhancements; grade crossing separation projects on behalf of various city, county and/or State funded projects. The total contract funding authorization approved by the Board for FY 2016-17 was $16,322,822 for a total not-to-exceed amount for the life of the contract of $109,100,164. The contract funding authorization approved by the Board for FY 2017 -18 was $17,151,113 consisted of $15,651,113 for the annual operating maintenance and $1,500,000 for support of capital, rehabilitation, and third-party projects.

Attachment A

337


2

AUDIT OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGIES

Objectives Objectives of audit include the evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of processes and internal controls over:

• Ensuring all negotiated agreements are properly reflected in the conformed contract; and • Monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms.

Scope The scope of this audit covered the period July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016. The range of items in the audit scope included:

• SCRRA Policies and Procedures • Contract Administration files

Methodology The testing methodologies utilized to achieve the objectives included:

• Reviewed applicable SCRRA Board Reports for MEC • Reviewed Contract No. MS222-09R • Reviewed applicable SCRRA Policies and Procedures • Reviewed Contract Administration files • Reviewed Contract Invoices • Performed interviews and inquiries with selected SCRRA employees • Conducted meetings with MEC staff We conducted the audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards and in conformance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing promulgated by the Institute of Internal Auditors. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

CONCLUSION

Our evaluation has found that internal controls over (1) ensuring all negotiated agreements are reflected in the conformed contract and (2) monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms need improvement. The key findings follow.

Attachment A

338


3

FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES

Finding 1. Internal controls over ensuring that all negotiated elements are properly reflected in the contract agreement need improvement. The provisions in the written contract do not conform to the negotiated agreement. There was no summary of record of negotiation to act as a control document to ensure that the negotiated contract terms are included in the final contract.

Criteria

• Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Best Practices Procurement Manual 4.7.3 which states, “It is essential that every contract award be documented with a Memorandum of Negotiations”

• Best Practice - GAO Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government - Principle

Design Control Activities 10.01 states, “Management should design control activities to achieve objectives and respond to risks.”

Condition We found that there was a disconnect between the contract provisions and the practice negotiated by SCRRA and MEC for invoicing labor costs. Contract provision 6.2.1 Labor states that: • 6.2.1A.1 - Authority shall compensate the Contractor for labor services performed under

this Agreement using Fully Burdened Labor Cost (FBLC) set forth at Appendix S • 6.2.1A.2 – The FBLC rate will be broken down as follows, and will include: • 6.2.1.A.3 – Direct Labor Costs: • Direct labor: Actual salary paid to Exempt employees and actual hourly rates paid to

Covered employees… • Employee Fringe Benefits: FBLC shall include all costs paid by the Contractor • 6.2.1.A.4 - G&A Overhead: All costs as listed at Appendix T • 6.2.1.A.5 – Profit: Profit is calculated as a percentage of Direct Labor Cost.

Additionally, contract provision 5.5 states the FBLC rates are subject to annual re-evaluation based on escalation percentages. However, in our discussion with Contract Administration and during our meeting with the Contractor they insisted the FBLC rates were negotiated fixed rates and not subject to adjustment. This is contrary to the terms in the contract document.

Attachment A

339


4

Upon review of the contract file, we could not find a documented record of negotiation. Both SCRRA Contracts and Procedures Policies and Procedures as well as the draft Contract Desk Guide currently have no reference for the requirement to document negotiations. This is despite the fact the FTA Best Practices Procurement Manual lists a Memorandum of Negotiation as a best practice and includes as part of the minimum requirement a discussion of important contract terms.

Cause There is no SCRRA requirement to write a Memorandum of Negotiation nor was one written. As a result, there was no document summarizing the important contractual terms which could be used as a control document to assure that all the negotiated terms are included in the contract text.

Effect The purpose of a contract is to establish the agreement that the parties have made and to fix their rights and duties in accordance with that agreement. When the contract does not reflect the negotiated agreement, then the written contract loses validity.

Recommendations:

1. Contract Administration establish the requirement that competitively negotiated contracts include summary negotiation documentation modeled after FTA Best Practices with the following elements: • A statement of the purpose of the procurement. • A history of the procurement, including references to important

documents with their dates and identifying numbers. • The names and positions of each person who participated in the

negotiations. • An explanation of how the final price was negotiated. This explanation

needs to reference the Pre-Negotiation Plan price objective (if a Plan was developed), the independent cost estimate (which should always be developed), and any advisory audits that may have been conducted

• A discussion of important contract terms and conditions.

2. Contract Administration require that important negotiated terms and conditions be reconciled back to the contract document, modify the contract accordingly, and document the task as completed.

3. Contract Administration should act as the official record holder of the

contract documents and all related files. Contract documents and all related files should be kept current as appropriate and accessible to Contract Management and Business Administration. If any of the three parties discover or determine a discrepancy, error or omission in the contract

Attachment A

340


5

documents or files, it should be brought to the attention of all parties for timely resolution.

4. Contract Administration, in conjunction with Operations, determine

whether the institutionalized invoicing practices for the contract, after approximately 8 years of operation, are sufficient or does the contract need modification.

Management Response Management agrees. Contracts and Procurement will institute the recommendations noted above.

Corrective Action Plan:

1. Contracts and Procurement will work with Program Management Office (PMO) on instituting a Summary of Negotiations form as part of the Contract Task Order (CTO) streamlining effort.

2. Contracts and Procurement will include an “Exceptions Form” as part of the solicitation process, which allows proposers to list proposed changes to the draft contract that is included as part of the solicitation package. Once a vendor is selected, Contracts and Procurement can more easily incorporate changes identified and agreed upon.

3. Contracts and Procurement will maintain contract file documents in accordance with existing agency-wide record retention policies. Final contract documents will be posted in a central location, which Project Managers (PMs)/Business Administrators (BAs) can access.

4. Contracts and Procurement will work with Operations to review the vendors invoicing process and modify the contract as necessary.

Target Implementation Dates:

1. July 31, 2018 2. July 31, 2018 3. July 31, 2018 4. May 31, 2018

Responsible for Implementation Brian Jacob, Program Manager, Contracts and Procurement

Accountable for Implementation Elissa K. Konove, Deputy Chief Executive Officer

Attachment A

341


6

Finding 2. Internal controls over monitoring contractor cost submissions to ensure compliance with contract terms need improvement. Contract Management and Business Administration relied on the Contract Administration oral representation of the contract terms and there is no written document providing evidence that an independent review of the contract invoicing provisions was performed by Contract Management and Business Administration. As a result, the disconnect between Contract Administration’s oral representation and the written contractual document continued for approximately eight years. Organizational checks and balances need enhancement. Criteria

Best Practice - GAO Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government - Control Activities Principle 10 provides that “management should design control activities to achieve objectives and respond to risks.” It includes checks and balances which are procedures set in place to reduce mistakes.

Condition As described in Finding 1, we found there are conflicting criteria between the contract provisions and the practice with regard to invoicing labor costs. Contract Management and Business Administration relied on the oral representations made by Contract Administration that MEC is to invoice SCRRA based on fixed rates negotiated in advance for the term of the contract including pre-determined fixed annual escalation. There is no documentary evidence that there was an independent review of the contract invoice provisions by Contract Management and Business Administration which requires that SCRRA to be invoices using fully burdened labor rates based on actual cost with annual updating for actual escalation. As a result, the contractual disconnect between Contract Administration’s oral representation and the written contract terms continued for approximately eight years of the contract’s life. Cause There was no requirement for Contract Management and Business Administration to independently review and document their review of the contract’s invoicing terms. Effect The contract contains provisions that do not reflect the invoicing practices thereby complicating contract monitoring and enforcement.

Attachment A

342


7

Recommendation

5. Contract Management and Business Administration improve procedures to ensure Contract Management and Business Administration independently review contractual invoicing provisions and document their review in a timely manner. Any resulting questions should be raised in writing with Contract Administration. The raised questions and their resolutions should be filed in the contract documents or files. Management Response

Management agrees. Business Administration will review contractual invoicing provisions and document their review in a timely manner. Resulting questions will be raised in writing with Contract Administration. Questions and answers will be filed.

Corrective Action Plan Business Manager will meet with the Business Department to develop a filing system for correspondence. Target Implementation Date

• Development of filing system for correspondence: April 1, 2018. • Review of contractual invoicing provisions: Continuous and during kick-off of new

agreements.

Responsible for Implementation Steve Holman, Senior Manager, Business Operations Accountable for Implementation Gary Lettengarver, Chief Operating Officer

Attachment A

343


8

Reviewed and acknowledged by:

April 27, 2018


Date April 27, 2018

Elissa Konove Deputy Chief Executive Officer

Date April 27, 2018


Date April 27, 2018

Darrell Maxey Deputy Chief Operating Officer

Date

Attachment A

344

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 37 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Internal Audit Department SUBJECT: Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation

Processes (#2017-14-IA) Issue The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (#2017-14-IA). Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to maintain fiscal sustainability and improve organizational efficiency. Background Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (#2017-14-IA) was conducted according to the FY18 Annual Internal Audit Plan approved by the Board. The engagement started in FY17 as a preliminary review (survey process) type of engagement. The objective and scope of the engagement have been expanded to a performance audit to comply with the auditing standards. Objectives The objective of this audit was to evaluate the effectiveness of fare revenue reconciliation processes, and review fare revenue reconciliations on a sample basis for accuracy, completeness of procedures performed, and timely completion and review.

345

Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (#2017-14-IA) Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Conclusion Based upon the results of the test performed within the limited scope of the audit, fare revenue reconciliation processes were generally adequate. Fare revenue reconciliation worksheets were adequately prepared, and reconciliation schedules and supporting documents were electronically documented and retained. However, internal controls over fare revenue reconciliation processes need improvement. The reconciliation requirements or guidelines should be documented in the Finance Policies and Procedures Manual or desk procedures and communicated within the Finance Department. In addition, Finance staff should be cross-trained, and all reconciliations should be performed, reviewed, and approved timely. Management Response Management indicated general agreement with audit findings and recommendations, and established corrective action plan with target dates to implement recommendations. Internal Audit will continue to follow up on management implementation progress. The audit is included as Attachment A to this report. Budget Impact There is no budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit


346

Performance Audit:

Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes

Audit Report No. 2017-14-IA February 21, 2018

Presented to: Board of Directors and Executive Management and Audit Committee Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, CPA, Senior Manager, Audit Andrew Hong, CIA, CISA, CFE, Senior Auditor Distributed to: Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA)

Internal Audit Department

Attachment A

347

Performance Audit: Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (2017-14-IA)

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit of Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (Phase III) as part of our FYs 2017-2018 Annual Internal Audit Plan.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE The objectives of this audit were to evaluate effectiveness of fare revenue reconciliation processes, and review fare revenue reconciliations on a sample basis for accuracy, completeness of procedures performed, and timely completion and review. To achieve these objectives, Internal Audit interviewed key staff and managers, reviewed key accounting documentation, and conducted tests for control adequacy and operating effectiveness.

CONCLUSION Based upon the results of the testing work performed within the limited scope of the audit, fare revenue reconciliation processes were generally adequate. Fare revenue reconciliation worksheets were adequately prepared, and reconciliation schedules and supporting documents were electronically documented and retained. However, internal controls over fare revenue reconciliations need improvement: the fare revenue reconciliation requirement should be documented in the Finance Policies and Procedures or Reconciliation Desk Procedures and communicated within the Finance Department. In addition, Finance staff should be cross-trained, and all reconciliations should be performed, reviewed, and approved in a timely manner.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Areas for improvement are: • Fare revenue reconciliations requirement needed to be documented in Finance Policies

and Procedures nor Reconciliation Desk Procedures. The Reconciliation Desk Procedures needed to be formalized.

• Monthly overall fare revenue report reconciliations needed to be completed, and general ledger accounts 40185 (fare revenue clearing account), 10150 (fare revenue cash receipts), and 10151 (fare revenue credit/debit card receipts) reconciliations needed to be performed timely.

• Managers’ supervisory review and approval of fare revenue reconciliations needed to be

performed and documented.

348


ii

RECOMMENDATIONS

Internal Audit recommends that the Finance Department management: 1. Document and implement the fare revenue reconciliation requirement in the

Finance Policies and Procedures or Reconciliation Desk Procedures. Formalize the Reconciliation Desk Procedures and communicate the formal Reconciliation Desk Procedures with the Finance staff.

2. Develop and implement a cross-training program for Finance staff to complete fare

revenue report and general ledger account reconciliations timely and accurately. 3. Complete fare revenue report and general ledger account reconciliations in a

timely manner. (See Recommendation 1.) 4. Automate the fare revenue reconciliation process to the maximum extent possible

to improve timeliness and accuracy. 5. Ensure Finance Managers review and approve all reconciliation schedules in a

timely manner, and periodically track and report to Controller and Chief Financial Officer any significant unresolved reconciling items.

Details of observations, recommendations, and management responses are included in the Observations, Recommendations, and Management Responses section.

REVIEW OF REPORT We discussed our findings and recommendations with SCRRA Finance Department management. SCRRA Finance Department management indicated general agreement with audit findings and recommendations. We thank Finance Department management and staff for their assistance and cooperation during our audit. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit at (213) 452-0335 or [email protected].

349



iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. i

Objective and Scope ................................................................................................................ i

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... i

Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................ i

Recommendations................................................................................................................... ii

Review of Report ..................................................................................................................... ii

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1

Background ............................................................................................................................ 1

Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes ................................................................................ 3

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................ 6

Audit Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 6

Audit Scope ............................................................................................................................ 6

Audit Methodology .................................................................................................................. 6

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 7

OBSERVATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES ........ 8

Internal Controls Over Reconciliation Processes .................................................................... 8

Timeliness of Reconciliation ..................................................................................................11

Completeness of Reconciliation.............................................................................................14

350


1

INTRODUCTION

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit of Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (Phase III) as part of our FYs 2017-2018 Annual Internal Audit Plan.

BACKGROUND This audit, Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes, was originally planned as part of Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes and Data Integrity Audit in FY 2014-15; however, the original audit was divided into four phases due to complexity and time constraints: (1) Fare Revenue Reconciliations Processes and Data Integrity (Phase I, 2014-03A-IA), (2) Fare Revenue Ticket Stock Inventory Controls (Phase II, 2017-03-IA), (3) Fare Revenue Reconciliation Processes (Phase III, 2017-14-IA), and (4) Fare Revenue Data Integrity (Phase IV, 2017-13-IA). Fare revenue reconciliation processes are an important internal control in the financial reporting process, and an effective reconciliation process can prevent and detect a potential misappropriation of fare revenue cash receipts. SCRRA fare revenue reconciliations consist of four reconciliation processes: (1) fare revenue report reconciliation, (2) general ledger accounts 40185 (fare revenue clearing account), (3) general ledger account 10150 (fare revenue cash receipts), and (4) general ledger account 10151 (fare revenue credit card receipts) reconciliations. The fare revenue report reconciliation ensures that the Fare Revenue Report (extracted from IT Data Warehouse and Conduent Central Management Server) ties to entries made in Oracle’s Accounts Receivable and Project Accounting modules. The general ledger account reconciliations ensure that general ledger account balances are accurate at the end of an accounting period—monthly, quarterly, and annually. However, SCRRA’s annual Single Audit reports for the past five fiscal years identified the same or similar internal control deficiencies on the general ledger account reconciliations, and key controls over general ledger account reconciliation processes. These recurring findings have not yet been thoroughly implemented because of high staff turnover, other priorities, and lack of knowledge transfer. These conditions may increase the financial or reputational risks that internal and external financial reporting is not accurate, and misappropriation of revenue receipts may not be prevented nor detected in a timely manner.

351


2

The following is a summary of historical internal control deficiencies regarding the general ledger account or bank reconciliations on the FY 2012 through FY 2016 Single Audit reports, including: • FY 2012 Single Audit Report, Finding 2012-001—Timely reconciliation and review

of accounts. “The bank and accounts payable reconciliations reviewed during planning in July 2012 for both April and May 2012 has not been reviewed by the general accounting manager. Additionally, during the year-end audit process, it was found that several of the significant account balances recorded in the general ledger did not agree to the supporting schedules provided by the Authority, nor were they provided and/or reviewed in a timely manner. The significant account balances not reconciled to detailed supporting schedules include inventory, capital assets, accrued receivables, bad debt reserve and deferred revenue.”

• FY 2013 Single Audit Report, Finding #2013-002.1—Controls over bank

reconciliations. “Ten (10) [out of eleven (11)] bank reconciliations were not finalized until 7 months/8 months after June 30, 2013. This was due to the lack of staff and the accounting records not being closed due to transactions continuing to be processed. All bank reconciliations were not properly approved, i.e. there is no formal “approved by” signature from the Accounting Manager.”

• FY 2013 Single Audit Report, Finding #2013-002.3—Fare Revenue Reconciliation “During our review of the reconciliation for account 40185 (Fare revenue Clearing), we noted that SCRRA wrote off $91,065 of TVM sales without identifying the cause for the write-off. The $91,065 is due to a discrepancy between the CMS and the actual cash collected from the TVM.”

• FY 2014 Single Audit Report, Finding #2014-001—Monthly close reconciliations and review process. “Monthly closes [reconciliations] were not performed during FY 2014 and there was no established process in place for performing month-end closes. Many existing reconciliation processes lacked the appropriate level of review.”

• FY 2015 Single Audit Report, Finding #2015-001—Monthly close reconciliations

and review process. “Monthly closes [reconciliations] were not performed during FY 2015, and there was no established process in place for performing month-end closes and the annual audit of the CAFR and Single Audit were not completed by December 31. During the year and at year end, many existing reconciliation processes lacked the appropriate level of review and approval.”

• FY 2016 Single Audit Report, Finding #2016-001—Reconciliation processes and

documentation. “During the year and at year end, many existing reconciliation processes lacked documentation of the appropriate level of review and approval.”

352


3

Figure 1 illustrates annual fare revenues and ticket sales collection for FY 2012-2016, which were reported in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR) and Fare Revenue Clearing Analysis Schedules (Account 40185). In FY 2016, SCRRA reported approximately $84,506,000 of FY 2016 CAFR Fare Revenue, which included ticket sales collections, other revenues, adjustments, and subsidy. FY 2016 Fare Revenue Clearing Analysis Schedule shows that total ticket sales collections amounted to approximately $66,344,000, of which approximately $51,354,000 (77%) was derived from credit card payments and approximately $14,990,000 (23%) was derived from cash payments. Ticket sales collection by credit card payments became more prominent in fare revenue collection services. Figure 1: Fare Revenue for FYs 2012-2016

(Source: SCRRA Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, 2012-2016)

FARE REVENUE RECONCILIATION PROCESSES As part of fare revenue controls, the Special Projects Division is responsible for fare revenue report reconciliation and the General Accounting Division is responsible for the general ledger (GL) account reconciliations. See Table 1 for Fare Revenue Reconciliations and Responsible Divisions.

$59,542 $65,929 $67,145

$60,052 $66,344

$79,986 $84,360 $85,673 $83,111 $84,506

$-

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Fare Revenues & Ticket Sales Collection FYs 2012-2016(Thousands)

Ticket Sales Collection Fare Revenues

353


4

Table 1: Fare Revenue Reconciliations and Responsible Divisions

Reconciliation Source Data Responsible Division Process #1 - Fare Revenue Report Reconciliation

Oracle Project Accounting Module to Fare Revenue Report (IT BI Data)

Special Projects Division, Finance

Process #2 - GL Account 40185 Reconciliation

GL Account 40185 to Fare Revenue Report (Sales) and Receipts

General Accounting Division, Finance


GL Account 10150 to Bank Statement for Cash Receipts (Union & Fifth Third)



GL Account 10151 to Bank Statement (Fifth Third) for Credit Card Receipts


(Source: Finance Department, Reconciliation Desk procedures) Fare Revenue Report Reconciliation • Process #1 – Fare Revenue Report Reconciliation. This reconciliation process

compares fare revenue recorded in the Oracle Project Accounting Module to Fare Ticket Sales stored in IT Business Intelligence database. This process is in place to help ensure the completeness of all fare ticket sales and the accuracy of the Passenger Fare Revenue and Ridership Report.

General Ledger Account Reconciliations • Process #2 – General Ledger Account 40185 (Fare Revenue Clearing)

Reconciliation. The clearing account is a temporary General Ledger (GL) account containing fare revenue transactions that need to be reclassified to the appropriate GL accounts on a periodic basis. The clearing account serves only as a temporary holding account until it can be reconciled. When properly reconciled, the clearing account balance will be zero. This reconciliation process compares GL account 40185 to Fare Revenue Report (Sales) and fare revenue receipts to ensure the completeness of all fare revenue sales and the accuracy of fare revenue reclassification.

• Process #3 – General Ledger Account 10150 (Fare Revenue Cash Receipts)

Reconciliation. This reconciliation process compares GL Account 10150 detail and analysis report to Union Bank statements. All fare revenue cash receipts activities are deposited and recorded in a designated Union Bank account. The fare revenue cash receipts activities include:

Cash deposits from Ticket Vending Machines (TVMs); Cash and checks deposits from Los Angeles Union Station; Ticket Office Machines (TOMs) sales at Los Angeles Union Station; Cash collected and deposited by Contractor Sectran Security, Inc.; Amex credit card deposits for all TVMs, except for location 700; and Office deposits for Pass-by-Mail, group travel, and school group advances.

354


5

• Process #4 – General Ledger Account 10151 (Fare Revenue Credit/Debit Card Receipts) Reconciliation. This reconciliation process compares GL account 10151 detail and analysis report to Fifth Third Bank (credit card processing service provider) statements for the completeness of all credit and debit card sales and the accuracy of credit and debit card receipts. This fare revenue credit and debit card receipts activities include:

Ticket sales paid by credit and debit cards and deposited in a designated Fifth Third

Bank account, including online/mobile ticket sales by Contractor Masabi LLC; and Pass-by-Mail (PBM), group travel, school group advances received from customer in

location 700.

355


6

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY

AUDIT OBJECTIVES The primary objectives of this audit were to evaluate effectiveness of fare revenue reconciliation processes, and review fare revenue reconciliations on a sample basis for accuracy, completeness of procedures performed, and timely completion and review. Specifically, we developed sub-objectives and focused our audit on: • Whether internal controls over the fare revenue reconciliation processes were designed

adequately, • Whether fare revenue reconciliations were performed timely, • Whether fare revenue reconciliations were performed completely, • Whether fare revenue reconciliations were performed accurately, and • Whether fare revenue reconciliations were documented and retained properly. Our audit objectives were aligned with the following SCRRA’s Strategic Goals: • Goal 2: Achieve fiscal sustainability. • Goal 7: Improve organizational efficiency.

AUDIT SCOPE We audited the fare revenue reconciliations processes and schedules from July 1, 2015 through February 28, 2017. Our audit included evaluation of the fare revenue reconciliations processes, including: • Fare Revenue Report reconciliation (Sales to Fare Revenue, Special Projects Division) • General Ledger Account 40185 (GL Sales to Fare Receipts, General Accounting Division) • General Ledger Account 10150 (GL to Bank Cash Receipts, General Accounting Division) • General Ledger Account 10151 (GL to Bank Credit Cards, General Accounting Division) This audit focused on the design adequacy and operating effectiveness of controls over reconciliation processes, not on tracing the reports or vouching the supporting documents.

AUDIT METHODOLOGY We gathered audit evidence through the following techniques: • Conducted several interviews with key staff and managers in the General Accounting and

Special Projects divisions, Finance Department. • Reviewed relevant documentation such as Finance Policies and Procedures, Reconciliation

Desk Procedures, the Board meeting minutes, federal/state agencies’ fiscal and

356


7

accounting manuals, CAFR and Single Audit Reports, and record management policies and retention schedule.

• Conducted walkthroughs of the reconciliation processes. • Conducted a sample of tests for timeliness, completeness, accuracy, and proper record

retention of the fare revenue report and general ledger account reconciliations.

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards and in conformance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing promulgated by the Institute of Internal Auditors. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

CONCLUSION Based upon the results of the testing work performed within the limited scope of the audit, we noted that four reconciliation processes were generally adequate: (1) fare revenue report reconciliation, (2) general ledger account 40158 reconciliation (Fare Revenue Clearing Account), (3) general ledger account 10150 reconciliation (Fare Revenue Cash Receipts Account), and (4) general ledger account 10151 reconciliation (Fare Revenue Credit/Debit Card Receipts Account). We further noted that fare revenue reconciliation worksheets were adequately prepared, and the reconciliation schedules and supporting documents were electronically documented and retained. However, internal controls over fare revenue reconciliations need improvement: the fare revenue reconciliation processes requirement should be documented in the Finance Policies and Procedures or Reconciliation Desk Procedures and communicated within the Finance Department. In addition, the current Reconciliation Desk Procedures should be improved, and Finance staff should be cross-trained. All fare revenue reconciliations should be performed, reviewed, and approved in a timely manner.

357


8

OBSERVATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES

INTERNAL CONTROLS OVER RECONCILIATION PROCESSES Finding 1: Fare revenue reconciliations requirement needed to be documented in the Finance Policies and Procedures; The Reconciliation Desk Procedures needed to be formalized. Criteria • U.S. GAO - Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government:

10.01 Management should design control activities to achieve objectives and respond

to risks. 12.01 Management should implement control activities through policies. 12.02 Management documents in policies the internal control responsibilities of the

organization. 12.05 Management periodically reviews policies, procedures, and related control

activities for continued relevance and effectiveness in achieving the entity’s objectives or addressing related risks. If there is a significant change in an entity’s process, management reviews this process in a timely manner after the change to determine that the control activities are designed and implemented appropriately.

• Best Practices Guidelines – GFOA1 Policies and Procedures Documentation:

Communication is an essential component of a comprehensive framework of internal

controls. One method of communication that is particularly effective for controls over accounting and financial reporting is the formal documentation of accounting policies and procedures.

Every government should document its accounting policies and procedures. An appropriate level of management to emphasize their importance and authority

should promulgate accounting policies and procedures. The documentation of accounting policies and procedures should be readily available

to all employees who need it. It should delineate the authority and responsibility of all employees, especially the authority to authorize transactions and the responsibility for the safekeeping of assets and records.

Condition We assessed internal controls over fare revenue reconciliation processes and reviewed the Finance Policies and Procedures, [Fare Revenue Reconciliation] Desk Procedures

1 Government Finance Officers Association

358


9

(Reconciliation Desk Procedures), and Finance Month-end and Year-end Close Schedules, and noted that: • Finance Policies and Procedures did not include fare revenue report or general

ledger account reconciliation requirement. We reviewed the Finance Policies and Procedures, approved in January 28, 2005 and updated in May 20, 2016, June 10, 2016, and May 18, 2017, and noted that there was no fare revenue or general ledger account reconciliation requirement.

• Reconciliation Desk Procedures for Fare Revenue Report and General Ledger

Account Reconciliations needed continuous improvement. Management stated that they were using Reconciliation Desk Procedures; however, the current Reconciliation Desk Procedures provide only basic guidance on the reconciliation processes. The Reconciliation Desk Procedures did not include important areas, for example, the reconciliation frequency, time frame (due dates for preparer and manager), responsible persons, supervisory review and approval process, and document retention management. The Reconciliation Desk Procedures were not formalized nor reviewed and approved by managers.

We reviewed the four Reconciliation Desk Procedures, and noted that they illustrated the basic reconciliation process utilizing figures and tables. The Reconciliation Desk Procedures need improvement to include step-by-step procedures with sources of the supporting data/information will help Finance staff perform the reconciliations timely and accurately.

• Lack of knowledge transfer and cross-training program. During our audit, we

observed that a former accountant, who was previously responsible for the fare revenue reconciliations, was hired to perform the FY 2017 reconciliations task since the current staff needed more hands-on training. Management stated that the current staff will be fully cross-trained to perform the fare revenue reconciliations by the end of FY 2018.

Cause High employee turnover in the Finance Department over the past several years was a contributing factor to the lack of formal reconciliation requirements. Effect Lack of formal reconciliation requirements may increase delay and ineffectiveness, and consequently errors or irregularities might not be detected in a timely manner. In addition, it may increase the risk that accurate financial reports cannot be completed in a timely manner.

359


10

Recommendations

Finance Department management:

1. Document and implement the fare revenue reconciliation requirement in the Finance Policies and Procedures or Reconciliation Desk Procedures. Formalize the Reconciliation Desk Procedures and communicate the formal Reconciliation Desk Procedures with the Finance staff.

2. Develop and implement a cross-training program for Finance staff to complete fare revenue report and general ledger account reconciliations timely and accurately.

Management Response

Management agrees with these findings and recommendations.

Corrective Action Plan 1. Finance Policies and Procedures, FIN 2.1 General Accounting policy, will be

revised to include a requirement to reconcile accounts on a timely basis. The actual list of accounts and specific due dates are subject to change. Therefore, they will be maintained in separate desk procedures.

2. Cross-training for the fare revenue reconciliation process was completed in

December 2017. Procedures are under revision to incorporate more detailed information.

Target Implementation Date

By April 30, 2018

Responsible for Implementation Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Finance Tom Schamber, Controller, Finance

Accountable for Implementation Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

360


11

TIMELINESS OF RECONCILIATION Finding 2: Monthly overall fare revenue report reconciliations needed to be completed, and general ledger account reconciliations (accounts 40185, 10150, and 10151) needed to be performed timely. Criteria • SCRRA Finance Policies and Procedures, No. FIN-2.1 General Accounting (Effective January

15, 2016): Section 1.5 Month-end Close – Accounting activities for month-end close conclude on

the tenth (10th) business day of the subsequent month. Section 1.6 Year-end Close:

o Subsection 1.6.2 – Federal and State regulations require the audit to be completed within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. An extension may be granted as necessary.

o Subsection 1.6.3 – Federal regulations require the completion of the Single Audit and subsequent report within 180 days following the end of the fiscal year.

o Subsection 1.6.5 – The following critical dates will be incorporated in the Year End Closing Schedule.

o Subsubsection 1.6.5.4 Close accounts receivable, typically early September.

• Best Practices Guidelines recommend: All general ledger accounts must be monthly, quarterly, or annually reconciled to

appropriate supporting detail. General ledger accounts representing cash balances or bank deposits are to be reconciled monthly.

Each general ledger reconciliation shall be reviewed and approved by supervisors or managers. The reviewer must have the appropriate technical skills and familiarity with the data and processes underlying the reconciliation to understand the data and reconciling items, and detect any possible errors.

General ledger account reconciliations must be documented using the standard reconciliation template provided and maintained by the Finance Department.

Condition We reviewed the fare revenue reconciliation schedules, cover sheets, and supporting documents and noted that:

361


12

Table 2: Reconciliation Implementation Aging Status (July 2015 – February 2017)

(Source: Finance Reconciliation Schedules) Note: Monthly Overall Fare Revenue Report Reconciliations were not conducted. • Monthly overall reconciliations of Fare Revenue Report to Oracle Project

Accounting (PA) and Accounts Receivable (AR) modules were not completed. FY 2016 annual fare revenue report reconciliation ending June 30, 2016 was

completed on September 28, 2016. During the audit period, one annual overall reconciliation was conducted. No monthly overall fare revenue report reconciliations were completed. Finance staff obtained monthly fare revenue data but did not complete monthly overall fare revenue report reconciliations.

• Monthly reconciliations of General Ledger Account 40185 (Fare Revenue Clearing)

were not performed timely. One (5%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 1-3 months. Four (20%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 4-6 months. Seven (35%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 7-9 months. Eight (40%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed after 9 months.

• Monthly reconciliations of General Ledger Account 10150 (Fare Revenue Cash

Receipts) were not performed timely. One (5%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 1-3 months. Five (25%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 4-6 months. Six (30%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 7-9 months. Eight (40%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed after 9 months.

• Monthly reconciliations of General Ledger Account 10151 (Fare Revenue

Credit/Debit Card Receipts) were not performed timely. One (5%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 1-3 months. Five (25%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 4-6 months. Six (30%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed within 7-9 months. Eight (40%) of total 20 monthly reconciliations were completed after 9 months.

Aging (Months) 1-3 months 4-6 months 7-9 months 10-12 months 12 months + Total

Account 40185 1 4 7 5 3 205% 20% 35% 25% 15% 100%

Account 10150 1 5 6 6 2 205% 25% 30% 30% 10% 100%

Account 10151 1 5 6 6 2 205% 25% 30% 30% 10% 100%

362


13

Cause The Finance Policies and Procedures or Reconciliation Desk Procedures do not state the timely fare revenue reconciliation requirement. Detailed Reconciliation Desk Procedures or guidance, knowledge transfer program, and cross-training help to ensure that Finance staff perform timely and accurately fare revenue reconciliations. Effect Untimely fare revenue reconciliation may increase the risk of accounting errors or irregularities, including undetected cash shortages and other possible discrepancies.

Recommendations

Finance Department management:

3. Complete fare revenue report and general ledger account reconciliations in a timely manner. (See Recommendation 1.)

4. Automate the fare revenue reconciliation process to the maximum extent

possible to improve timeliness and accuracy.

Management Response


Corrective Action Plan 3. Reconciliations are now performed by in-house staff. Reliance upon former staff

has been eliminated, thus the reconciliations can be performed timely.

4. The fare revenue reconciliation process is complex. Management will explore possibilities for automation, but may not find substantial improvements given the cost of developing such tools versus their benefit.

Target Implementation Date 3. Reconciliations are now being performed regularly.

4. Analysis of opportunities for automation will be complete by June 30, 2018.

Implementation of automation will vary depending upon the complexity and IT capacity.

363


14

Responsible for Implementation

Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Finance Tom Schamber, Controller, Finance


COMPLETENESS OF RECONCILIATION Finding 3: Managers’ supervisory review and approval of fare revenue reconciliations needed to be performed and documented. Criteria • Best Practices Guidelines recommend:

Each general ledger reconciliation shall be reviewed and approved by managers. The

reviewer must have the appropriate technical skills and familiarity with the data and processes underlying the reconciliation to understand the data and reconciling items, and detect any possible errors.

Condition We reviewed all sixty-one fare revenue reconciliation schedules and cover sheets during the audit period, and noted that: • The reconciliation preparers completed the reconciliation processes, including

investigating and resolving the reconciling items, and initialed and dated on all cover sheets. The prepared worksheets and supporting schedules were maintained in the Finance T drive.

• Managers’ supervisory review and approval was not documented on reconciliation cover sheets. All manager’s initial and date fields were blank on the reconciliation cover sheets. Based on our inquiry with the reconciliation preparer of the General Accounting Division, the reconciliation schedules were not reviewed nor approved by the manager.

Cause Managers’ supervisory review and approval controls were not in place.

364


15

Effect Managers’ timely review and approval may increase assurance that the financial or operational reporting is accurate, and accounting errors or irregularities can be prevented or detected.

Recommendation 5. Finance Department management ensure Finance Managers review and

approve all reconciliation schedules in a timely manner, and periodically track and report to Controller and CFO any significant unresolved reconciling items.

Management Response

Management agrees with this finding and recommendation.

Corrective Action Plan Management review of reconciliations will occur within two weeks of completion. Procedures will include a review by the Controller on a quarterly basis to ensure awareness of reconciling items.

Target Implementation Date By March 31, 2018 Responsible for Implementation Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Finance Tom Schamber, Controller, Finance Accountable for Implementation Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

365


16


March 30, 2018


Date March 30, 2018


Date

366

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 38 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Internal Audit Department SUBJECT: Performance Audit: Grant Accounting and Management

of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA) Issue The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit: Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA). Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goals to maintain fiscal sustainability and improve organizational efficiency. Background The audit of Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA) was conducted according to the FY18 Annual Internal Audit Plan approved by the Board. Objectives The primary objectives of this audit were to (1) evaluate the adequacy of internal controls over grant accounting, billing and collections processes, receivables tracking and general grant administration and (2) evaluate compliance with the Authority’s Finance Policies and Procedures. Conclusion Based upon the results of the testing work performed within the limited scope of the audit, we noted a specific internal control deficiency and some areas where processes improvements should be considered.

367

Performance Audit: Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (#2017-19-IA) Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

The Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables could be improved through the establishment of additional internal criteria, establishing/improving key management reports, and improved segregation of duties over the cash receipts function. Management Response Management indicated general agreement with audit findings and recommendations, and established corrective action plan with target dates to implement recommendations. Internal Audit will continue to follow up on management implementation progress. The audit is included as Attachment A to this report. Budget Impact The Corrective Action plan in connection with Recommendation #7, as reflected on the detailed report, could potentially reduce monthly service costs related to courier service. There is no additional budgetary impact as a result of this report. Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit


368

Performance Audit:

Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables

Audit Report No. 2017-19-IA

April 5, 2018

Presented to: Board of Directors and Executive Management and Audit Committee Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, CPA, Senior Manager, Audit David Rogers, CPA, Senior Auditor, Audit Distributed to: Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA)

Internal Audit Department

Attachment A

369

Performance Audit of Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables (2017-19-IA)

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit of Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables as part of our FYs 2017-2018 Annual Internal Audit Plan. The objectives of this audit were to (1) evaluate the adequacy of internal controls over grant accounting, billing and collections processes, receivables tracking and general grant administration and (2) evaluate compliance with the SCRRA Finance Policies and Procedures. To achieve these objectives, Internal Audit interviewed key staff and managers, reviewed key accounting documentation, reviewed processes in place and considered the adequacy and operating effectiveness of internal controls.

CONCLUSION Based upon the results of the testing work performed within the limited scope of the audit, we noted a specific internal control deficiency and some areas where processes improvements should be considered. Grant Accounting and Tracking of Grant related receivables is an extremely important process at SCRRA. Processes related to timely billing, tracking receivables, properly invoicing federal and state funding sources as well as member agencies, establishing and tracking funding patterns and processing Project Budget Reallocations can be very involved and detailed. Key reports in place over this process will allow for efficient and effective management oversight. Adequate processes and key reports that allow management by exception is critical to the oversight of this function.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Areas for improvement are: • There are no documented parameters in place that dictate the length of time that

reimbursement billing should take nor are there any management reports in use that monitor the aging of reimbursable expenditures;

• Improvements should be made to the Accounts Receivables Aging Report; • Manual alteration of dates on two (2) reimbursement billings was noted creating a

discrepancy between the billing date and the Accounts Receivables Aging Report. • Segregation of duties over the cash receipts function within the Special Projects &

Finance Group should be improved; Efficiencies could be gained over the daily deposit process.

370


ii

RECOMENDATIONS

Internal Audit recommends that the Finance Department management: 1. Establish parameters that dictate the length of time that billing for

reimbursement should take. Time periods may vary depending on the grantor agency and the amount of support required;

2. With the help of IT, develop and establish a management report that reflects the aged balances of paid expenditures ready to be billed for reimbursement;

3. Reflect actual billing terms within the Accounts Receivables Aging report and

utilize a “Current” column within the aging report to provide a more accurate reflection of the aged receivables status;

4. “Scrub” the Accounts Receivables Database and eliminate/consolidated

customers that have two or more customer numbers;

5. Update processes for reimbursement billing to ensure that the date the billing is generated is consistent with the date it is submitted to the Grantor Agency;

6. Ensure additional procedures within the Special Projects & Finance Group should

be in place to further segregate duties over the revenue receipts function; and

7. Determine if the Authority’s Bank offers free remote deposit check scanners to be used by the Special Projects & Finance Group to make daily revenue receipts deposits. This will allow deposits to be instantly processed and funds immediately available for Authority use.

Details of observations, recommendations, and management responses are included in the Observations, Recommendations, and Responses section.

REVIEW OF REPORT We discussed our findings and recommendations with SCRRA Finance Department management. SCRRA Finance Department management indicated general agreement with audit findings and recommendations. We thank Finance Department management and staff for their assistance and cooperation during our audit. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit at (213) 452-0335 or [email protected].

371



iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ i

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ i

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... i

RECOMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. ii

REVIEW OF REPORT ........................................................................................................... ii

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1

BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 1

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY ....................................................................... 2

OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................... 2

SCOPE ................................................................................................................................... 2

METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 3

CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 3

OBSERVATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES ............... 4-10

372


1

INTRODUCTION

The Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) has completed the Performance Audit of Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables as part of our FYs 2017-2018 Annual Internal Audit Plan.

BACKGROUND In May 2013, SCRRA updated its Financial Information System (FIS) to Oracle R12 primarily to address findings reflected on the Federal Transit Administrations Financial Management Oversight Review. As indicated on the review, it was determined that the Grants Management System was ineffective. The upgraded FIS included a grants management module which integrated expenditure transactional data associated with grant funded projects. As it has been some time since this upgrade was implemented, many process changes have been made in order to effectively utilize the FIS for SCRRA’s needs. This has been especially true as it pertains to finance’s role in the grants management and accounting function. Some of the key internal criteria that governs these processes include Finance Policies and Procedures, FIN 9.1 Accounts Receivable, Credit and Collections (recently amended and approved in May 2017), Oracle R12 Desk Manuals and departmental Desk Procedures. As the majority funding for the of SCRRA’s Capital and Rehabilitation projects primarily come in the form of reimbursements after the initial expenditures are incurred, it is important that processes and procedures over Grant Accounting and the overall Management of Grants Receivables is effective and efficient. As such, the Finance Department has utilized the functionality of Oracle R12 to automate processes such as reimbursement billing, monitoring and reconciling grant funded projects, establishing funding patterns and using funds controls to prevent overbilling. The graphical portrayal below provides an example of the increased usage of automated features of Oracle R12 as it applies to reimbursement billing during fiscal years 2015-2017. Table 1: Percentages of Reimbursable Billing by Fiscal Year

373


2

In response to the various process changes that have occurred as summarized above, the Performance Audit of Grant Accounting and Managements of Grants Receivables was reflected on the 2017-18 Audit Plan to review compliance with key internal criteria, examine the effectiveness and efficiency of current processes in place and to evaluate applicable internal controls.

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY

AUDIT OBJECTIVES The primary objectives of this audit were to (1) evaluate the adequacy of internal controls over grant accounting, billing and collections processes, receivables tracking and general grant administration and (2) evaluate compliance with the SCRRA Finance Policies and Procedures. Specifically, we developed sub objectives and focused our audit on: 1. Effectiveness, efficiency and adequacy of:

a. Billing processes b. Input of key project data into the Grants Management System

2. Accuracy of Grants Receivables Aging report 3. Adequate controls over

a. Cash receipts processes b. Grants Expiration Monitoring c. Reimbursement Billing

4. Compliance with: a. Internal Policies and Procedures b. Internal Desk Procedures c. Applicable best practices

Our audit objectives were aligned with the following SCRRA’s Strategic Goals: • Goal 2: Achieve fiscal sustainability. • Goal 7: Improve organizational efficiency.

AUDIT SCOPE We audited the Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables processes and schedules from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017.

374


3

AUDIT METHODOLOGY We gathered audit evidence through the following techniques: • Conducted interviews with key staff and managers in Grants Accounting within the

Finance Department. • Reviewed relevant documentation such as Finance Policies and Procedures, Desk

Procedures and Board meeting minutes; • Conducted walkthroughs of the reimbursement billing process; • Conducted walkthroughs of the cash receipts process; • Conducted a sample of tests for timeliness, completeness, accuracy, and proper recording

of reimbursement billings.

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards and in conformance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing promulgated by the Institute of Internal Auditors. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

CONCLUSION Based upon the results of the testing work performed within the limited scope of the audit, we noted a specific internal control deficiency and some areas where processes improvements should be considered. The Grant Accounting and Management of Grants Receivables could be improved through the establishment of additional internal criteria, establishing/improving key management reports and improved segregation of duties over the cash receipts function.

375


4

OBSERVATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES

1. There are no documented parameters in place that dictate the length of time that

reimbursement billing should take nor are there any management reports in use that monitor the aging of reimbursable expenditures.

Criteria • U.S. GAO - Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government:

13.04 “Management obtains relevant data from reliable internal and external sources in a

timely manner based on the identified information requirements…Management obtains data on a timely basis so that they can be used for effective monitoring.”

Condition Billing for reimbursement from grant funded projects can take in excess of 30 days depending on the grantor agency being billed. Currently, there are no established parameters in place that provides guidance on the length of time billing for reimbursement should take.

The below graph represents a depiction of the length of time it took to process reimbursement billings on 152 Reimbursable Line Items (Reimbursable Line Items represent invoices paid by SCRRA ready to be processed for reimbursement by the Grants Receivables Group).

Table 2: Days to Bill for Reimbursement

(Source: Oracle R12 Financial Information System) In addition to the above noted comment, there is no formal report in place that allows management to monitor the aged status of each Reimbursable Line Item. Cause Policy amendment made to SCRRA Finance Department Policies and Procedures FIN – 9.1 removed criteria that defined the length of time invoicing grantor agency should take. Management exception report is lacking.

376


5

Effect Without established guidelines documenting the length of time billing for reimbursement should take or reports for management to track this function, there is the risk that reimbursement billing could take longer than needed to complete the task which could impact cash flows of the Authority.

Recommendations Finance Department management:

1. Establish parameters that dictate the length of time that billing for reimbursement should take. Time periods may vary depending on the grantor agency and the amount of support required.

2. With the help of IT, should develop and establish a management report that reflects the aged balances of paid expenditures ready to be billed for reimbursement.

Management Response Management agrees with the findings and recommendations.

Corrective Action Plan

1. Billing goals measured by the elapsed days between check issuance and grantor invoice are as follows (excluding billing for unapproved ICAP and retention held): Federal Awards Billed Directly to the FTA 60 days Pass-Through Federal Awards 90 days Preventative Maintenance Federal Awards 45 days after quarter end State, Local and MTA with Support 90 days Third Party Agreements 90 days These goals have been incorporated into Fin 6-3.

2. Provided IT with report parameters on March 15, 2018 and met with IT support staff on March 16th to discuss the business requirements and report parameters. IT is researching options and existing reports that they could leverage off of IT estimates this report can be in place by May 31, 2018.

Target Implementation Date Item 1: Completed Item 2: May 31, 2018

377


6

Responsible for Implementation Michael Naoum, Senior Manager, Finance


2. Improvements should be made to the Accounts Receivables Aging Report Criteria • SCRRA Finance Policies and Procedures No. FIN – 9.1 Accounts Receivable, Cash

Management, and Collections FIN -9.1 Procedures 1.1.3.1 for Capital and rehabilitation project receivables “…after

all eligible expenses incurred are reviewed, supporting documentation prepared, and invoices generated from the financial management system. Invoices and required additional support are submitted to the Grantors as outlined within the grant terms”

Condition While the Accounts Receivable Aging Report is properly aging invoices as it is designed to do, improvement can be made to the format and the content of the report as follows:

• Currently, the aging report does not make use of a current column to show which

outstanding invoices are still considered current under funding terms; • Currently all invoices related to reimbursement billing are given a net 30 term, despite

actual funding terms; • Seven (7) Customers were noted within the June 30, 2017 detailed Accounts Receivable

Aging Report as having two or more customer numbers. Cause The Accounts Receivable Aging Report has not been ‘scrubbed’ or analyzed for improvement since the conversion to the new version of Oracle R12. The Special Projects & Finance Manager that provided oversight of the Accounts Receivable Aging Report recently left the organization resulting in the task to clean up the Accounts Receivables database unresolved. Effect The aging “buckets’ currently used in the monthly Accounts Receivable Aging Report do not provide an accurate reflection of all aged receivables balances as it pertains to invoices related to reimbursement. Based on Grant terms, collections on reimbursable expenditures could take over 45 days to collect and still be consider ‘current’ by the grantor. Based on the current report format of the Aging report, these invoices may appear to be “past due”.

378


7

Duplicate customer numbers could create confusion when researching invoices or tracking the status of customer accounts.

Recommendations Finance Department management:

3. Reflect actual billing terms within the Accounts Receivables Aging report

and utilize a “Current” column within the aging report to provide a more accurate reflection of the aged receivables status.

4. “Scrub” the Accounts Receivables database and eliminate customers that

have two or more customer numbers. Management Response



3. Two Aging reports have been identified that could be used with modifications to properly report aging. A request was made to IT to modify either of the reports for future use on March 15, 2018 by adding an additional field to an existing Oracle report capturing the award number or adding a field and calculation methodology using award terms to properly determine aging status on an existing Polaris report. We expect this to be completed by May 31, 2018.

4. A meeting was held on March 14, 2018 with IT, Grants and Special Projects personnel to discuss consolidating customer numbers. Oracle has a customer merge process that can be tested but testing and coordinating between groups will be required prior to any merge activities. IT has generated preliminary reports for review by Grants and further assessment is needed to evaluate need, mechanics, issues and concerns. A preliminary target date for completing the consolidation is December 31, 2018.

Target Implementation Date Item 3: May 31, 2018 Item 4: December 31, 2018

Responsible for Implementation Michael Naoum, Senior Manager Finance


379


8

3. Manual alteration of dates on two (2) reimbursement billings was noted creating a discrepancy between the billing date and the Accounts Receivables Aging Report.

Criteria Grants Billing User Reference Manual section on “Adjusting an Existing Invoice Created by an Event Based Award”. The following must be done when adjusting an existing invoice: • Cancel the entire Invoice using the Cancel button on the Grants Invoice Review form • Adjust the Event Based Award "Bill Amount" to reflect the correct bill amount and

Generate Draft Invoices again (if desired). Project costs, if any, will not be flagged in any way.

Condition During our testing of reimbursement billings, we noted two (2) instances of system overrides where the billing dates were manually altered causing a discrepancy between the reimbursement billing date and the applicable Accounts Receivable Aging Report. Cause Current processes allow reimbursement billings to be generated in advance of the date the billings are to be submitted to the Grantor Agency. As it is the Granting Agencies expectation that the date on the reimbursement billing be consistent with the delivery date, this will not always be the case.

In the two cases identified above, enough time had lapsed to justify the need to issue a new reimbursement billing invoice. However, for efficiency purposes, rather than canceling the original billing and issuing a new one, the date on the original billing was altered and then submitted to the Granting Agency.

Effect The discrepancy between the Invoice Date and the Accounts Receivables Aging Report raised questions from the Granting Agency about the actual invoice date.

Recommendation 5. The Finance Department management should update processes for

reimbursement billing to ensure that the date the billing is generated is consistent with the date it is submitted to the Grantor Agency.

380


9

Management Response Management agrees with the finding and recommendation. Corrective Action Plan Grants accountants have been instructed to not override billing dates and if an invoice is past dated to cancel the invoice and regenerate a new invoice with the current date.

Target Implementation Date Item 5: Completed Responsible for Implementation Michael Naoum, Senior Manager, Finance Accountable for Implementation Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

4. Segregation of duties over the cash receipts function should be improved;

Efficiencies could be gained over the daily deposit process. Criteria • U.S. GAO - Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government:

10.13 “Segregation of duties helps prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the internal

control system. Management considers the need to separate control activities related to authority, custody, and accounting operations to achieve adequate segregation of duties.”

Condition It was noted during walkthrough procedures conducted on the revenue receipts function that the individual responsible for maintaining physical custody of checks for payment was also responsible for drafting the deposit slip and recording the transaction into FIS. In addition, methods for processing daily checks deposits could be improved. Currently, deposits are picked up by courier to be delivered to the Bank for processing. The Authority’s Bank may however, offer more efficient “automated” processes to make these deposits. Cause Adequate segregation of duties requirement over revenue receipts function not in place. Effect Lacking adequate segregation of duties over the revenue receipts functions creates additional fraud risk as it pertains to the misappropriation of cash.

381


10

Recommendations The Finance Department management: 6. Ensure additional procedures within the Special Projects & Finance Group should

be in place to further segregate duties over the revenue receipts function.

7. Determine if the Authority’s Bank offers free remote deposit check scanners to be used by the Special Projects & Finance Group to make daily revenue receipts deposits. This will allow deposits to be instantly processed and funds immediately available for Authority use.

Management Response Management agrees with these findings and recommendations.


6. Staff 1 receives, verifies and logs checks into check box log sheet. Staff 2 reviews

log sheet and prepares deposit slip for Manager review and approval prior to recording receipts into Oracle.

7. Pending Management approval, with an implementation goal of remote scanning by June 30, 2018. The Authority’s bank can provide a free scanner that has one-time $125 set-up fee. Monthly charges for remote deposits are estimated at $173, with potential costs offset against the $300 monthly courier service fees.

Target Implementation Date Item 6: Completed Item 7: June 30, 2018

Responsible for Implementation Thelma Bloes, Senior Manager, Special Projects & Finance Tom Schamber, Controller Accountable for Implementation Ronnie Campbell, Chief Financial Officer

382


11


April 5, 2018


Date April 3, 2018


Date

383

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 4, 2018 MEETING DATE: May 11, 2018 ITEM 39 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Internal Audit Department SUBJECT: Corrective Action Status Update – Quarter Ended March

31, 2018 Issue The following status of all audit related corrective actions being monitored and tracked by the Internal Audit Department (Internal Audit) at the Authority is for informational purposes. Recommendation The Board may receive and file this report. Strategic Goal Alignment This report aligns with the strategic goal of improving communications to customers and stakeholders. Background At the July 28, 2017 Board meeting, Internal Audit was directed to provide the Board with quarterly updates and to the Technical Advisory Committee with monthly updates on the corrective action status related to all past Audit (Internal & External) recommendations. Internal Audit prepared the attached matrix for open corrective actions for the quarter ended March 31, 2018 (Attachment A). Corrective Actions that were closed as of quarter ended March 31, 2018 are not reflected in this attachment. Management made significant progress to implement corrective action items. There were 13 corrective action items implemented since the Second Quarter status update. Internal Audit will continue to roll this matrix forward and present it on a quarterly basis to the Board. Budget Impact There is no immediate budget impact resulting from this status report.

384

Corrective Action Status Update – Quarter Ended March 31, 2018 Transmittal Date: May 4, 2018 Meeting Date: May 11, 2018 Page 2

Prepared by: Elisabeth Lazuardi, Senior Manager, Audit


385

ATTACHMENT A INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT

QUARTERLY CORRECTIVE ACTION STATUS – THIRD QUARTER (As of March 31, 2018)

Quarterly Corrective Action Status Page 1 of 16

RECOMMENDATIONS – AUDIT REPORTS ISSUED DURING THIRD QUARTER2017‐07‐IA (11/9/2017)

PERFORMANCE AUDIT: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY GENERAL CONTROLS

RECOMMENDATION 1: IT Department management should maintain a complete, accurate, and up‐to‐date inventory of the major information systems, improve IT Policies and Procedures on the inventory of major information systems, and conduct an annual physical inventory in a timely manner.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: a. An inventory of the major information systems and improved IT policies and procedures will be Implemented by December 2017. (Implemented – Verified)

b. Infrastructure assets (servers, routers, switches, firewalls, etc.) will be up to date by June 2018.

c. End user assets (laptops, desktops, printers, phones, office equipment etc.) will be up to date by September 2018.

DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: a. 12/31/2017, 03/31/18

b. 06/30/18 c. 09/30/18

STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 2: IT Department management should collaborate with the HR Department to ensure that

the hiring, transfer, and termination procedures include the IT‐related security procedures, and that all signed confidentiality or security agreements are properly maintained.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: A data confidentiality and security agreement will be created and approved by the IT Director and IT policies updated. (Implemented – Verified). HR and managers hiring contractors will be provided with the new agreement and informed of the new process.

DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: 12/31/17, 05/31/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: IT Department prepared the agreement but has not provided it to HR. RECOMMENDATION 3: IT Department management should ensure that security management skills for security

management personnel and for a selection of other system users are periodically reassessed, monitored, and improved. Employees’ training and professional development should be documented and monitored.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will review specific instances of current gaps in skills relative to the job description identified in the audit and mitigate the gaps as required. This is ongoing and will be implemented moving forward. (Implemented – Pending Verification)

DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: 09/30/17 STATUS: Implemented – Pending Verification RECOMMENDATION 4: IT Department management should improve the IT Policies and Procedures and IT

technical services contracts to effectively monitor the activities of third‐party contractors.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: IT policies will be updated to include this requirement and the new process conveyed to our contracting agency bench.

386




a. Communications of new procedures for all contractors hired by IT have been sent to all contracting agencies in which we hire contractors under. All contracting agencies are now being required to complete a background checks and review for the contractor being hired prior to their employment with IT. (Implemented – Pending Verification)

b. IT policies are currently being updated to reflect the new procedure. DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: a. 10/31/17

b. 03/31/18, 04/15/18 STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 5: IT Department should work with PTC Network Control Systems Group to ensure that

PTC Network user access privileges are authorized based on business and safety needs in accordance with the IT Policies and Procedures.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: PTC user access permissions and levels will be reviewed and adjusted based on their need and job responsibility. (Implemented)

DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control Systems TARGET DATE: 01/31/18 STATUS: Implemented – Verified RECOMMENDATION 6: IT Department should ensure that inactive accounts and accounts for terminated

individuals (employees or contractors) are disabled or removed in a timely manner. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: This is an ongoing task that will be implemented shortly. (Implemented) DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: 09/30/17 STATUS: Implemented – Verified RECOMMENDATION 7: IT Department should ensure that resource owners (data file or application program

owners) periodically review access authorization for continuous appropriateness. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Access to the network infrastructure, servers, network shares and applications will be

reviewed every six months for their appropriateness and adjusted where necessary. The date the access was reviewed will be documented and reviewed then. (Implemented ‐ Verified) IT policies will also be updated to include this new requirement.

DEPARTMENT: IT Department TARGET DATE: 09/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: IT Department reviewed three applications—salesforce.com, Trapeze EAM, and Oracle. RECOMMENDATION 8: IT Department and PTC Network Control Systems Group management work with the

Security Manager to ensure that all inactive and terminated accounts are disabled or removed in a timely manner, and improve the data relationships among HR, IT, and Security employee database for the efficiency.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: IT Department and PTC Network Control Systems Group will receive badge # details for all badge holders and update our systems. IT will also provide this information to HR to update their systems. Moving forward both departments will add the badge # as part of their user creation procedures.

387




DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control System Group TARGET DATE: 09/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Due to the headquarter move (04/23/18), IT Department planned to implement this by

09/30/18. RECOMMENDATION 9: IT Department and PTC Network Control Systems management should immediately

improve, periodically test, and update the comprehensive offsite data backup plan and disaster recovery plan as appropriate.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: a. IT Department – Infrastructure to support offsite data backup and environment‐wide DRP will be setup, configured and necessary technology implemented. IT backup policy will also be updated to reflect off‐site data backups. The data center move that will be required when we exit our current facilities in March 2018 has been factored in the timelines for the comprehensive DR plan.

b. PTC Network Control Systems – Management will begin improving the data backup plana and disaster recovery plan for its train control, data centers, and server rooms operations and management.

DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control System Group TARGET DATE: a. 09/30/18

b. 09/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: IT Department and PTC Train Control Systems data backup and disaster recovery

procedures and plans are in the process of being created. RECOMMENDATION 10: IT Department, in collaboration with PTC Network Control Systems management,

should develop the Data Center and Server Room Policy on physical security and environmental controls, including the minimum requirements for designing, installing, securing, monitoring, maintaining, protecting, and decommissioning a data center or server rooms.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: A new policy will be created and approved by the IT Director (Implemented – Pending Verification).

DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control System Group TARGET DATE: 09/30/18, 03/31/18 STATUS: Implemented ‐ Pending Verification COMMENTS: IT Department developed/revised IT Policy and Data Center Policy. RECOMMENDATION 11: IT Department, in collaboration with PTC Network Control Systems management,

should ensure that all portable fire extinguishers at the data center and server rooms are in operable condition. Perform monthly visual inspections and annual maintenance checks, and maintain records showing that testing or inspection has been performed.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: IT will ensure our outside vendor responsible for the verification of our fire extinguishers health regularly checks all fire extinguishers within our IT rooms and that all IT rooms have a fire extinguisher in them with clear and accurate markings as to their location and last inspection date. (Implemented)

DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control Systems Group TARGET DATE: 01/31/18 STATUS: Implemented – Verified

388




RECOMMENDATION 12: IT Department, in collaboration with PTC Network Control Systems management, should ensure that there are signs at data center/server room door(s) marking the room as restricted access as well as prohibiting food, drink, and smoking in the computer room.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: The need for signs will be evaluated for all IT rooms and placed where necessary. (Implemented)

DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control Systems TARGET DATE: 01/31/18 STATUS: Implemented – Verified 2017‐17‐CA (12/20/2017)

CONTRACT AUDIT: ON‐CALL PROFESSIONAL ENIGNEERING DESIGN ‐ CONTRACT NO. E740‐14

RECOMMENDATION 1: Project Management, in conjunction with PMO and Contracts & Procurements Department, should determine the dollar threshold when a Summary Record of Negotiations will be required.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: A dollar threshold will be set, which will determine when a Summary Record of Negotiations is required. Language will be included in the PMO SOP No. PC‐9.0 with dollar threshold amount and instructions for completing the Summary Record of Negotiations. The Summary Record of Negotiations will include history of negotiations, names of each participant, a summary of the negotiation and how the final price was derived, and a section for Contracts to initial for acceptance.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery, Business Operations

TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: PMO has completed a final draft of the revised CTO SOP to address all corrective actions

and recommendations. However, because the entire CTO process is also under review by Contracts and Business Staff, in order to streamline and coordinate with departments across the agency, finalization of the corrective actions, along with full implementation and training of the new CTO Process and SOP will be delayed (along with the VTMI Review) until July 16, 2018. In the interim, PMO has implemented a revised Record of Negotiations form and process for all CTOs, knowing that there may continue to be minor changes based on the final CTO process revisions.

RECOMMENDATION 2: PMO should amend PMO Standard Operation Practice (SOP) No. PC‐9.0: a. to require a Summary Record of Negotiations at a specific dollar threshold level to be completed at the end of each negotiation; b. to require the Summary Record of Negotiations to list the most important aspects of the procurement: (1) history of negotiations; (2) names and positions of each person who participated in the negotiations; and (3) an explanation of how the final price was negotiated.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Recommendation 1 above. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery,

Business Operations TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for Recommendation 1.

389




RECOMMENDATION 3: Project Management should consistently enforce PMO SOP No. PC‐9.0, Contract Task

Order Approval, and require a timely Fair Cost Estimate with each CTO. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Ensure that an Independent Fair Cost Estimate is performed for every CTO prior to

releasing the RFP to the Consultant. RFP shall not be issued without an FCE, except in an emergency or urgent situation which may require an immediate execution of the CTO, which will then be noted in the contract file. Cost proposal shall still be examined for fairness.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 02/28/18 STATUS: Implemented RECOMMENDATION 4: Project Management, in collaboration with PMO, should develop charts with

predetermined weights in order to standardize and simplify the assignments of weights for the Schedule, Size of Contract Task Orders, and Sub‐consultant’s factors.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Modify the fixed‐fee calculation worksheet with predetermined weights that correlate with the Period of Performance (Schedule), Rate of Work (Duration), Size of the Contract Task Order, Level of Complexity, Degree of Risk, and Subconsultant involvement.

The worksheet shall also include a write‐in space for providing a justification for the weights applied. Ensure that one version is circulated among Project Managers and Consultants.

The Contract Manager and the Program Management Office will train Project Managers, Consultants, and Contract Administrators individually on how to complete the updated fixed‐fee calculation worksheet, and guide them through the process during submittal.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 04/15/18, Training – 05/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: PMO and Project Management have collaborated to create new charts with

predetermined weights to standardize and simplify the assignment of weights for the Schedule, Size of CTOs, Risk, Complexity, and Sub‐consultant factors. This new form has been developed and is the final stages of revisions for those CTO Contracts that have a fee structure. The worksheet also requires a justification for the weights applied. When the form is finalized, we will implement and begin training. This form can be implemented prior to the final CTO process revisions. We expect full implementation by April 15, 2018 and training by May 30, 2018.

RECOMMENDATION 5: PMO should provide training to the consultants and Project Management to ensure there is a consistent understanding to assign weights for Duration, Complexity, and Degree of Risk factors.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Recommendation 4 above. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 05/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for Recommendation 4.

390




RECOMMENDATION 6: Project Management should immediately ensure that the consultants use fixed‐fee calculation worksheets which have a column with spaces for providing justification for determining value.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Recommendation 4 above. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 05/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for Recommendation 4. RECOMMENDATION 7: PMO, as part of PMO SOP No. PC‐9.0, should include the requirement for a Conflict of

Interest Form in each CTO package. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Requirement of a Conflict of Interest Form in each CTO package will be written in the

PMO SOP No. PC‐9. The Contract Administrator shall instruct Consultants of their contractual obligation to avoid a Conflict of Interest and the need for completing a Conflict of Interest Form. Implemented

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering, Contracts & Procurement, Planning & Project Delivery, Business Operations

TARGET DATE: 02/28/18 STATUS: Implemented – Pending Internal Audit’s verification RECOMMENDATION 8: Project Management and Business Operations should be trained regarding the

contractual requirement for Conflict of Interest Forms. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Recommendation 5 above. DEPARTMENT: IT Department & PTC Network Control System Group TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Training on the new Conflict of Interest Forms will be held by July 16, 2018 along with

general training of the entire new CTO process, as described in the Status Update under Recommendation 1.

2018‐04‐EA (12/30/17)

EXTERNAL AUDIT: CAFR/SINGLE AUDIT

FINDING 2017‐001 Accounting for Accrued Accounts Receivable and Advances for Construction (Significant Deficiency in Internal Control)

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management to continue to review life to date costs of projects open for more than one year, apply deposits and reduce accounts receivable. Management should also review staffing allocations to ensure that as expenses are incurred for reimbursable projects, invoices are completed timely and sent to customers to result in timely receipt of funds for cash flow needs.

DEPARTMENT: Finance STATUS: In Process TARGET DATE: 6/30/19 COMMENTS:

Approximately 130 projects have been reconciled since this finding was issued. Focused efforts will continue through the FY18 year‐end closing process to further reduce the backlog, thereby reducing the need for accruals that have the potential for error. We are on target for being current with project reconciliation and billing by the end of FY19.

391




FINDING 2017‐003 Capital Assets & Project Management (Significant Deficiency in Internal Control). CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management to incorporate additional reviews over capital asset activity to ensure that

assets meet the criteria for capitalization and are properly classified for depreciation. Management to continue to find tools which allow project managers the ability to more effectively and efficiently contain project costs.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department STATUS: In Progress TARGET DATE: 6/30/18 COMMENTS: Finance staff has performed mid‐year review of capital activity to allow for greater

awareness of understanding of project status. We are on target to implement a more thorough and accurate process for FY18 year‐end closing.

FINDING 2017‐004

Capital Assets and Project Management (Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Financial Reporting)

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management to continue efforts to evaluate obsolete inventory and refine its process for estimating obsolete inventory regularly. The methodology for the estimate should also be formalized and applied consistently going forward. Inventory should also be closely monitored throughout the year to ensure that inventory is not ordered in excess of need.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department STATUS: In Progress TARGET DATE: 6/30/18 COMMENTS: The methodology is in place and will be applied during the year‐end close process in a

timely manner. We are on target to resolve this finding. 2017‐09‐EA

EXTERNAL AUDIT: CALTRANS PROPOSITION 1B AUDIT

Finding 1: SCRRA claimed unapproved reimbursements for indirect expenditures totaling $60,872 on three HRCSA projects. SCRRA needed to have an approved ICRP approved by Caltrans prior to reimbursements

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Reimburse Caltrans in the amount of $60,872 DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 06/29/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: A repayment will be made Finding 2: SCRRA lacks adequate policies and procedures detailing how to ensure claimed indirect

expenditures are based on approved ICRP rates. SCRRA violated Caltrans’ agreement provisions, and federal and state regulations, regarding personnel expenditures.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Develop a written procurement manual detailing all policies and procedures for expenditures and reimbursements requirements.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 04/16/18, 05/31/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Finance Policy 6‐3 will be updated to specifically state that no ICAP costs are to be billed

until rates have been approved by cognizant agencies. Policy change is effective immediately.

392




RECOMMENDATIONS – PRIOR PERIOD AUDIT REPORTS 2017‐03‐IA (3/09/17)

PERFORMANCE AUDIT: FARE REVENUE TICKET STOCK INVENTORY CONTROLS (PHASE II)

RECOMMENDATION 2: Communicate and implement SCRRA Standard Operating Procedures for TAP Enabled Ticket Stock Inventory Management with employees and the Contractor. Ensure all Departments policies and procedures are communicated and logically maintained in a central location accessible to all employees.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Fare Collection Services (FCS) will provide a copy of current SCRRA Operating Procedures for TAP enabled Ticket Stock Inventory to Xerox. (Implemented) Also, SOP's for Tap Enabled Ticket Stock Inventory Management approved by the Board in 2014 will be updated based on the services provided by the Contractor that is awarded the new TVD RFP.

DEPARTMENT: Fare Collections Services (FCS) TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 – Pending new TVD installation. STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: On 03/23/18, the Board authorized the CEO to award Contract No. H1660‐18

Procurement of Ticket Vending Devices to INIT. RECOMMENDATION 4: Enhance the Contractor's responsibilities in Contract No. MS227‐15, if feasible,

including ticket stock inventory planning, procurement, management, perpetual or physical inventory requirement, and ticket stock data management.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: FCS will better define Contractors' responsibilities in the new contract for the new TVD system in October 2017, including ticket stock inventory management, physical inventory requirement and ticket stock data management.

DEPARTMENT: Fare Collections Services TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 – Pending new TVD installation. STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: On 03/23/18, the Board authorized the CEO to award Contract No. H1660‐18

Procurement of Ticket Vending Devices to INIT. RECOMMENDATION 7: Complete reconciliations of the ticket stock inventory data in AssetWorks with the

source documents immediately to improve the data reliability for effective decision‐making or establish an alternative simplified reconciling process using an Excel Spreadsheet.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Once ticket stock data can be extracted from AssetWorks, FCS will work with the vendor to compare the ticket stock inventory data in AssetWorks to the physical inventory ticket stock. FCS will monitor ticket stock inventory data in AssetWorks with the tools available. Meanwhile, FCS will add measures to ticket stock inventory management to improve data reliability in the new system.


Procurement of Ticket Vending Devices to INIT. RECOMMENDATION 8: Establish an effective Ticket Stock Inventory Data Management Procedures Manual to

include disposition of ticket stock, annual physical counts, and reconciliations of ticket stock inventory data in AssetWorks to the source documents.

393




CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will establish an SOP for Ticket Stock Inventory Management and include disposal of obsolete tickets and reconciliation of ticket stock inventory data. See also Corrective Action Plan for Recommendation #2.


Procurement of Ticket Vending Devices to INIT.

2017‐04‐IA (07/12/17)

PERFORMANCE AUDIT: SHARED USE AGREEMENTS (SUA) REVENUE PROCESS

RECOMMENDATION 1: Establish a dedicated group to oversee railroad agreement services. Group should include experienced and knowledgeable employees, assign clear roles and responsibilities, and delegate authority.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will develop working group (staff from Planning, Finance, Operations, Legal, Audits, Contracts and other departments) as needed. Management will review and discuss SUA issues and meet quarterly. Management will also analyze staffing needs in Nov 2017 as part of FY 2019 Budget.

DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development TARGET DATE: 11/30/17, 02/16/18, 07/01/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: An open position has been identified that can be used immediately and job description

has been drafted. RECOMMENDATION 2: Develop and implement policies and procedures or standard operating practices for

SUA management and administration to achieve the SUA objectives effectively and efficiently.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will write two different sets of Policies and Procedures (one addressing financial administration and the other addressing more general agreement management). The Finance Group Policy & Procedure will be more in the form of an instructional desktop manual.

DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development TARGET DATE: 02/28/18, 06/15/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Target date moved out as Planning need clarification from Finance. RECOMMENDATION 3: Review the master lists of SUA for accuracy and completeness as necessary annually,

and share the lists within relevant SCRRA departments to ensure that all SUA revenues have been billed and collected.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will update master list and engage multiple departments to update it annually. The list will cross reference documents related to SUAs stored in a central location.

DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development TARGET DATE: 09/1/17,

a. 11/10/17, 11/30/17, 12/29/17, 02/16/18, 12/31/18 b. 11/24/17, 12/08/17, 01/30/18, 03/01/18, 12/31/18

STATUS: In Progress

394




COMMENTS: The SUA Master list for agreements where the SCRRA is a “host” or “tenant” railroad was developed (pending verification). The list does not include Purchase & Sale Agreements or trackage rights (easement) agreements. These would be on another list.

RECOMMENDATION 4: In collaboration with the Human Resources Department, develop the record management policies and procedures for SUA and other relevant documentation and maintain all SUA documentations in the central electronic drive or folder completely, safely, and logically for easy access and use.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: a. Management will refine its existing document storage filing system in the short‐term existing shared drives by 11/01/17.

b. Management will work with HR to implement long term document storage & management solutions for a more comprehensive set of agency wide documents.

DEPARTMENT: Planning & Development TARGET DATE: a. 11/01/17

b. 06/30/18, 12/31/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Target date based upon HR Record Retention Phase 3 timeline RECOMMENDATION 5: Update the Finance Policies and Procedures or develop standard operating procedures

for revenue billing, accounts receivable, and collections procedures, including SUA revenue.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will update additional policies related to revenue, billing, and collections will be updated by end of next fiscal year.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Work on Standard Operating Procedures manual is underway RECOMMENDATION 6: Continue to develop detailed billing procedures, including billing timeframe when the

invoice timeframe in the agreements is unavailable (see Recommendation 5). CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: a. Additional policies related to revenue, billing, and collections will be updated by

06/30/18. b. Procedural documentation is currently being updated for Shared Use agreement

invoicing and collections will also be Implemented by 06/30/18. DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Billing calendar/schedule is complete. File is saved on shared‐drive. RECOMMENDATION 7: Continue to develop detailed internal collection procedures, review the SUA receivable

aging report monthly, and follow the internal collection procedures (see Recommendation 5).

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: a. Additional policies related to revenue, billing, and collections will be updated by 06/30/18.

b. Procedural documentation is currently being updated for Shared Use agreement collections, review of aging, and disputed to be Implemented by 06/30/18.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 STATUS: In Progress

395




2017‐08‐CA (8/01/17)

CONTRACT AUDIT: AMTRAK ‐ METROLINK OPERATOR SERVICES CONTRACT NO. OP136‐10

RECOMMENDATION 1: Initiate discussion with Amtrak to clarify Amtrak’s understanding of Management Fee, Overhead, and Profit in the contract and seek recovery of all excess charges for this audit period and all other contract periods of performance.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Contracts and Procurement to meet with Amtrak to negotiate these rates. DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/ Finance/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 3/31/18, 6/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: An audit on the field rate for G&A Overhead will be performed. Internal Audit to engage

an outside firm to perform the audit. RECOMMENDATION 2: Review contract provisions with Amtrak management to clarify Amtrak’s position,

request Amtrak to recalculate their G&A by eliminating all non‐Metrolink‐related cost, and seek recovery of any unallowable and unallocable charges for this audit period and all other contract periods of performance.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will meet with Amtrak to clarify Amtrak's position. Conditional upon clarification from Amtrak Management, SCRRA Management will request Amtrak recalculate their G&A for all contract periods and seek recovery if there is an identification of unallowable & unallocable charges. In the event of a new RFP for operator services, a fixed fee contract will be pursued.

DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/ Finance/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 3/31/18, 6/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: An audit on the field rate for G&A Overhead will be performed. Internal Audit to engage

an outside firm to perform the audit. RECOMMENDATION 3: Review and define, in advance, the elements of a contractor’s G&A that benefit

Metrolink Operator Services and therefore chargeable, for future contracts. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Corrective Action Plan for #2 above. DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/ Finance/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 3/31/18, 7/1/20

COMMENTS: Work on Standard Operating Procedures for collection is underway. Efforts included Team’s daily review of AR aging report, focus on past due amounts over 90 days, and following up payments from customers by calling and emailing contacts summary of their outstanding invoices

RECOMMENDATION 8: Develop detailed procedures for credit memo issuance and approval process. The procedures should include approval authorization limit and a review requirement by appropriate personnel in Operations to verify SUA related invoices adjustments or billing disputes (see Recommendation 5).

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will complete an analysis to identify credit memo authorization limits and review process.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department TARGET DATE: 06/30/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Work on Standard Operating Procedures for credit memo issuance and approval

process is underway. Efforts included layers of review among staff prior to AR Manager’s adjustment approval.

396




STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Fixed rate fee to be implemented in future contract. RECOMMENDATION 4: Review the Amtrak contract to determine whether it is possible to seek recovery from

Amtrak for unreasonable indirect costs for layover. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management to review possibility of seeking recovery from Amtrak for any

unreasonable indirect costs. SCRRA Management will negotiate with Amtrak to the extent allowable under current contract to lower admin. Charge for layover services (or consider other options such as outsourcing). In the event of a new RFP for operator services, a fixed fee contract will be pursued.

DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 01/31/18, 4/16/18 STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 5: Negotiate a lower administration charge for layover or consider deleting the contract

provision for this service and have SCRRA internally administer this service in all future negotiations with Amtrak.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Corrective Action Plan for #4 above. DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 01/31/18, 4/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: Staff partnering with Contracts & Procurement to explore cost savings administering

this service in house RECOMMENDATION 6: Review the existing Amtrak contract and pending contracts to determine whether there

are excessive pass‐through conditions and correct them. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: See Corrective Action Plan for #4 above. DEPARTMENT: Contracts & Procurement/Dispatch & Operations TARGET DATE: 10/31/17, 01/31/18, 4/16/18 STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 7: Request supporting documents and implement the necessary procedures to ensure

labor charges and cellphone usage charges billed to SCRRA are accurate. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Internal process for monitoring wage labor is currently in development and on

schedule. Cellular issue solution implemented. In the event of a new RFP for operator services, a fixed fee contract will be pursued.

DEPARTMENT: Dispatch & Operations/ Business Management TARGET DATE: 12/31/17, 01/31/18 – Internal Process developed

07/01/20 – New fixed fee contract STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 8: Develop an approved engineer and conductor registry with totals to act as the baseline

and control number. For future backfills, Amtrak should submit to Dispatch and Operator Services Department and Business Management the supporting documents for each new chargeable backfill event to assure that the backfill charge is appropriate.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: SCRRA Management has reached out to Amtrak to initiate the process of developing required reports for an engineer and conductor registry. Follow up on this item is scheduled for the next monthly meeting with Amtrak.

397




DEPARTMENT: Dispatch & Operations/ Business Management TARGET DATE: 07/01/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: A headcount request/received in December 2017. Contractor provides a monthly

register for conductors, we’ve requested a comprehensive list of T&E to assist with managing backfill.

2017‐15‐CA (10/20/17)

CONTRACT AUDIT: VTMI – CONTRACT NO. MS214‐09

RECOMMENDATION 1: Update the PMO SOP or other applicable process and procedure documents to establish a specific dollar threshold and require determination documentation for using CTOs to ensure SCRRA receives the best value.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will update the PMO SOP or other applicable process and procedure documents to establish a specific dollar threshold and require determination documentation for using CTOs to ensure SCRRA receives the best value.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering/ Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: PMO has completed a final draft of the revised PMO CTO COP to address all corrective

actions. However, because the entire CTO Process is being reviewed and streamlined in coordination with several departments, finalization of these corrective actions, will be delayed until 07/16/18.

RECOMMENDATION 2: Train staff to the updated PMO SOP requirements. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will train staff as to the updated PMO SOP requirements. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering/ Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, within four weeks of 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 1. All staff and consultant training on the revised

PMO CTO SOP/Process Changes will be completed within four weeks of 07/16/18. RECOMMENDATION 3: Determine the specific dollar threshold to trigger a Summary Record of Negotiation. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will determine the specific dollar threshold that would trigger a Summary

Record of Negotiation. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering/ Planning & Project Delivery/ Contracts & Procurement TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 1. RECOMMENDATION 4: Amend PC‐9.0:

a. to require a Summary Record of Negotiations at a specific dollar threshold level to be Implemented at the end of each negotiation; b. to require the record of negotiations to list the most important aspects of the procurement: (1) the purpose of the procurement; (2) history of negotiations describing the most important aspects of the procurement; (3) names and positions of each person who participated in the negotiations; (4) an explanation of how the final price was negotiated and; (5) a description of important contract terms and conditions

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management to amend PC‐9.0 accordingly. DEPARTMENT: Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 07/16/18

398




STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 1. RECOMMENDATION 5: Train staff as to the requirements of PC‐9.0. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will train staff as to the requirements of PC‐9.0. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering/ Business Management TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, within four weeks of 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 2. RECOMMENDATION 7: Refrain from using Contract No. MS214‐09 for new construction and rehabilitation in

the future. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will refrain from using Contract No. MS214‐09 for new construction and

rehabilitation in the future. Will incorporate audit recommendations into the new merged Track, Signal, Train Control Systems and Maintenance Contract.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18 – Short‐term changes

03/15/18 – Mid‐term changes Summer 2019 – Long‐term changes

STATUS: In Progress RECOMMENDATION 8: Enhance PMO SOP PC‐9.0 to ensure that Contracts & Procurements Department has a

role in determining the appropriateness of the projects that are contracted under the Special Supplementary Maintenance Section prior to the RFP release.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will enhance PMO SOP PC‐9.0 to ensure that Contracts & Procurements Department has a role in determining the appropriateness of the projects that are contracted under the Special Supplementary Maintenance Section prior to the RFP release.

DEPARTMENT: Planning & Project Delivery/ Contracts & Procurement TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: PMO met with both Contracts and Business staff on 02/01/18 to review changes to the

CTO process. PMO is assisting with the creation of new “electronic forms” for the revised CTO process.

RECOMMENDATION 9: Train staff as to the updated PMO SOP requirements. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will train staff as to the updated PMO SOP requirements. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, within four weeks of 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 2. RECOMMENDATION 11: Train staff to implement the newly designed controls. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will train staff to implement the newly designed controls. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, within four weeks of 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 2. RECOMMENDATION 12: Enhance the PMO SOP to establish internal controls for mitigating cost risks associated

with Time and Material contracting.

399




CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will enhance the PMO SOP to establish internal controls for mitigating cost risks associated with Time and Material contracting.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering/ Planning & Project Delivery TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 1. RECOMMENDATION 13: Implement the newly designed controls and train staff in accordance with the new

procedure. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will Implement the newly designed controls and train staff in accordance

with the new procedure. Staff work assignments will be assessed and reviewed to improve contractor oversight.

DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, within four weeks of 07/16/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 2. RECOMMENDATION 14: Collaborate with Contract and Procurement to update the contract to respond to

changed conditions. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Contract MS214‐09 will be clarified and revised accordingly. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 04/30/18, 05/31/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: With the April 27th Board meeting cancelled due to the office move, we are planning on

the May 11th Board meeting for the approval of Contract revisions item. RECOMMENDATION 15: Enforce all reporting requirements and train staff regarding the contractual changes. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management will enforce all reporting requirements and train staff regarding the

contractual changes. DEPARTMENT: PTC, C&S, and Engineering TARGET DATE: 12/15/17, 02/15/18, 04/30/18, 05/31/18 STATUS: In Progress COMMENTS: See comments for recommendation 14. 2015‐16

EXTERNAL AUDIT: AGREED UPON PROCEDURES – NTD

FINDING: No written procedures exist related to the system of reporting and maintaining data in accordance with NTD requirements. Metrolink staff, were however aware of the requirements (set forth in 49 CFR Part 630).

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Internal methodology has been and continues to be reviewed and efforts to improve are being noted in parallel with the current (FY17) AUP process with Moss Adams. Meetings continue to take place with Planning Dept and are scheduled with I.T. to continue to explore opportunities to gain efficiencies.

DEPARTMENT: Business Operations TARGET DATE: 6/30/18 STATUS: In Progress 2015‐16 (04/18/17)

EXTERNAL AUDIT: LACMTA MOU COMPLIANCE AUDIT

400




RECOMMENDATION 1: a. Establish more efficient and effective review and reconciliation policies and procedures as a customary part of the accounting and reporting process. b. Appropriate schedules of unearned revenue and self‐insurance reserve accounts be maintained in accordance with LACMTA requirements. c. Consider developing an accounting and reporting mechanism in its accounting system similar to the fund accounting system.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN: Management disagreed: a. The delays in providing schedules to the auditors were not caused by a lack of review and reconciliation policies or processes. b. Upon review, it was noted that the work performed [by outside consultant] did not meet the requirements for a prior period adjustment to be processed in the FY16 Audit. This work will be re‐scoped and Implemented within the calendar year. c. SCRRA’s current accounting system utilizes projects, tasks and awards to track activity by MOU. This provides adequate tracking of activity on a going forward basis.

DEPARTMENT: Finance Department STATUS: In Progress (Pending Completion of FY 2018 MOU Compliance Audit) COMMENTS: Phase I of the deferred revenue project has been Implemented.

Phase II of the deferred revenue analysis is underway. We have communicated with LACMTA staff that this will be completed at the conclusion of the FY18 audit process.

401

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY 11, 2018 - Granicus

Documents

Transcript of BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY 11, 2018 - Granicus