Thompson, Galenson and Associates, LLC14684 Stoneridge DriveSaratoga, CA 95070-5745

Tel: (408) 647-2104Fax: (408) 647-2105lou.thompson@gmail.comhttp://www.tgaassoc.com

Where To With Caltrain Governance?Caltrain Governance Discussion

Lou Thompson

February 11, 2014

The Major Points

Caltrain does well operationally, BUT

Major changes coming Major issues to be resolved Options for new ownership and

governance structures Making the decision: benefits,

risks and resources For the sake of argument: one

idea

Passengers(millions)

MTA (LIRR)

MTA (MNRR)

NJT (NJ)

Metra (IL)

SEPTA (PA)

MBTA (MA)

Caltrain (CA)

Metrolink (CA)

MTA (MD)

VRE (VA)

Tri-Rail (FL)

NICTD (IN)

ST (WA)

DART (TX)

UTA (UT)

NCTD (CA)

RMRTD (NM)

ACE (CA)

Metro (MN)

CDOT (CT)

PENNDOT

NNEPRA (ME)

RTA (TN)

DCTA (TX)

0102030405060708090

100

NOTE: All comparisons are 2011 data from FTA database

Passenger-Miles(000)

MTA (MNRR)

MTA (LIRR)

NJT (NJ)

Metra (IL)

MBTA (MA)

SEPTA (PA)

Metrolink (CA)

Caltrain (CA)

MTA (MD)

VRE (VA)

Tri-Rail (FL)

NICTD (IN)

ST (WA)

RMRTD (NM)

DART (TX)

PENNDOT

UTA (UT)

NNEPRA (ME)

NCTD (CA)

ACE (CA)

Metro (MN)

CDOT (CT)

RTA (TN)

DCTA (TX)

-

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Revenue/Passenger-Mile($)

MTA (LIRR)

SEPTA (PA)

NJT (NJ)

VRE (VA)

MTA (MNRR)

PENNDOT

Metrolink (CA)

MTA (MD)

DART (TX)

MBTA (MA)

NNEPRA (ME)

NICTD (IN)

NCTD (CA)

Caltrain (CA)

CDOT (CT)

Metro (MN)

Metra (IL)

RTA (TN)

ST (WA)

ACE (CA)

DCTA (TX)

Tri-Rail (FL)

UTA (UT)

RMRTD (NM)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Operating Expense/Passenger-Mile($)

DCTA (TX)

CDOT (CT)

RTA (TN)

Metro (MN)

DART (TX)

ST (WA)

MTA (LIRR)

UTA (UT)

Tri-Rail (FL)

SEPTA (PA)

RMRTD (NM)

PENNDOT

NJT (NJ)

Metrolink (CA)

NCTD (CA)

MBTA (MA)

VRE (VA)

MTA (MD)

NICTD (IN)

Metra (IL)

ACE (CA)

NNEPRA (ME)

MTA (MNRR)

Caltrain (CA)

-

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200 4.24 1.96

NOTE: DCTA and CDOT are truncated as shown

Revenue/Expense Ratio(%)

MTA (MNRR)

NJT (NJ)

SEPTA (PA)

VRE (VA)

MTA (LIRR)

Caltrain (CA)

PENNDOT

MTA (MD)

NNEPRA (ME)

NICTD (IN)

Metrolink (CA)

MBTA (MA)

Metra (IL)

NCTD (CA)

ACE (CA)

DART (TX)

ST (WA)

Tri-Rail (FL)

Metro (MN)

RTA (TN)

UTA (UT)

RMRTD (NM)

CDOT (CT)

DCTA (TX)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Average Trip Length(Miles)

NNEPRA (ME)

PENNDOT

ACE (CA)

RMRTD (NM)

Metrolink (CA)

MTA (MNRR)

VRE (VA)

MTA (MD)

Tri-Rail (FL)

NICTD (IN)

NCTD (CA)

UTA (UT)

Metro (MN)

NJT (NJ)

ST (WA)

Caltrain (CA)

Metra (IL)

CDOT (CT)

MTA (LIRR)

MBTA (MA)

DART (TX)

RTA (TN)

DCTA (TX)

SEPTA (PA)

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Average Speed(MPH)

PENNDOT

CDOT (CT)

MTA (MD)

NCTD (CA)

ACE (CA)

Metrolink (CA)

ST (WA)

RMRTD (NM)

Metro (MN)

MTA (MNRR)

NNEPRA (ME)

NICTD (IN)

Caltrain (CA)

NJT (NJ)

VRE (VA)

MTA (LIRR)

Metra (IL)

RTA (TN)

Tri-Rail (FL)

MBTA (MA)

UTA (UT)

SEPTA (PA)

DCTA (TX)

DART (TX)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Mix with HSR?

Passenger-Miles/Vehicle-Mile:Rough Indicator of Load Factor

VRE (VA)

MTA (MD)

MTA (MNRR)

Caltrain (CA)

ACE (CA)

ST (WA)

RMRTD (NM)

Tri-Rail (FL)

DART (TX)

Metra (IL)

Metrolink (CA)

MTA (LIRR)

Metro (MN)

MBTA (MA)

NJT (NJ)

NICTD (IN)

SEPTA (PA)

NCTD (CA)

NNEPRA (ME)

UTA (UT)

RTA (TN)

PENNDOT

DCTA (TX)

CDOT (CT)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Vehicle-Miles/Train-Mile:Average Train Length

MTA (LIRR)

NJT (NJ)

MTA (MNRR)

Metra (IL)

ACE (CA)

ST (WA)

VRE (VA)

MBTA (MA)

MTA (MD)

NCTD (CA)

PENNDOT

Caltrain (CA)

NICTD (IN)

NNEPRA (ME)

Metrolink (CA)

Metro (MN)

CDOT (CT)

SEPTA (PA)

RMRTD (NM)

UTA (UT)

Tri-Rail (FL)

DART (TX)

RTA (TN)

DCTA (TX)

- 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

10.0

Major Changes Are Coming

Electrification of Caltrain DTX (with ET, could double

Caltrain demand) HSR UP (freight on Caltrain line) ACE extensions (Dumbarton

Bridge)? BART to San Jose

Major Issues

Money (Caltrain, DTX and HSR) Joint operations on same lines:

who owns, schedules, dispatches, pays what to whom, and is liable?

Level boarding and common platform heights (Transbay Terminal)

Grade crossings must be eliminated

The Options

Structure Business Models

Rail Structures

  INFRASTRUCTURE   OPERATIONS    PASSENGER     PASSENGER      Suburban Intercity HSR FREIGHT   Suburban Intercity HSR FREIGHT Examples

Integral (Monolithic) Local or National Railway National Railway National 

RailwayPrivate or National Railway

 Local or National Railway

National Railway

National Railway

Private or National Railway

China, India, BART

Dominant/TenantLocal operator 

usually dominant with intercity 

tenants

Intercity operators usually dominant: freight in US, 

passenger in Japan 

Intercity freight 

operators dominant

 Local control, some freight and intercity tenants

Freight tenants  

Passenger tenants, 

some freight tenants by trackage rights

US (Class I and Amtrak), Canada, Japan

Separated Infrastructure Local or national Network provider

National Network Provider

National Network Provider

National Network Provider

  Local agencies

National Operator, 

competition possible

National Operator, 

competition possible

Multiple operators

EU model, Australia

Bringing Ownership Into the Picture

Fully State-Owned Partnerships Privately Owned

Integral (Monolithic) China, Belarus, South Africa,

Network Rail? Exclusive

Passenger and freight

concessions

Smaller US freight railroads (500),

East Japan, Central Japan

and West Japan, Taiwan

HSR

Dominant Operator Integral, tenant operators pay for access

Amtrak and VIA, Japan Rail Freight, Russia

Caltrain with UP as tenant

Most US freight railways

Vertical Separation ("Open Access") all operators pay for access

"Standard" EU model

Some UK franchises, Network Rail?

Most UK franchises, Railtrack (but not Network Rail), EWS

Unbund

ling

Private Role

Business Models in Rail Passenger Service

Wholly integral – BART Management contract – Caltrain,

MBTA Gross cost franchise (UK urban

franchises) Net cost franchise (UK longer haul

franchises, Rio and BsAs suburban) Wholly private (Taiwan HSR,

Japanese HSR)

The U.K. Model?

Network Rail, a “not for profit” corporation owns, improves and maintains the infrastructure.

Network Rail charges franchises (and freight companies) a published set of access charges. These charges recover all maintenance and some of the investment: regulated by ORR

Private companies compete for 5-7 year passenger franchises awarded by DfT with some role by local authorities. Competition is usually for minimum support, but can include payments to government. Freight minimally supported.

Rolling stock leased from leasing companies (ROSCOs) Services and charges regulated by ORR

CA Services and UK Franchise Passengers

(000,000)

SW SouthnSeasternN

XEA

1st Cap

1st GW

Northn

1st ScotLon M

idLon O

vhdM

erseyC2C

Arriva

1st Tx PnE M

idChilt

Caltrain

Metrolink

NCTD

ACE

-

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

Note: UK Data taken from ORR National Rail Trends Yearbook 2010/2011

CA Services and UK Franchises:Passenger-Miles (000,000)

SW 1st GW

SouthnSeasternN

XEA

1st Cap

1st ScotE M

idN

orthnLon M

id1st Tx PnArriva

C2C

Chilt

Lon Ovhd

Mersey

Metrolink

Caltrain

NCTD

ACE

-

500.0

1,000.0

1,500.0

2,000.0

2,500.0

3,000.0

3,500.0

CA Services and UK Franchises: Miles of Line

1st ScotN

orthn1st G

WArriva

E Mid

1st Tx PnN

XEA

SW Lon Mid

SeasternSouthn1st C

apChilt

C2C

Lon Ovhd

Mersey

Metrolink

Caltrain

ACE

NCTD

- 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0

1,000.0 1,200.0 1,400.0 1,600.0 1,800.0 2,000.0

CA Services and UK Franchises:Average Trip Length (Mi)

E Mid

1st Tx Pn1st G

WChilt

Arriva

NXEA

1st Scot1st C

apLon M

idSW C2C

SouthnSeasternN

orthnM

erseyLon O

vhdACE

Metrolink

NCTD

Caltrain

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

CA Services and UK Franchises: Traffic Density

(Pass-Mile/Mile of Line)

C2C

Southn1st C

apSW SeasternLon O

vhdM

erseyN

XEA

Chilt

1st GW

Lon Mid

E Mid

1st Tx Pn1st ScotN

orthnArriva

Caltrain

Metrolink

NCTD

ACE

-

1,000.0

2,000.0

3,000.0

4,000.0

5,000.0

6,000.0

7,000.0

8,000.0

Making the Decision

Public versus market (private) benefit and cost balance: wholly public leads to BART, wholly private to Taiwan HSR. Usually the result is a balance (there is a public role)

Risk allocation (cost, schedule and demand)

Resources (who can pay and under what conditions). Model has to match the money

No magic solutions

For Argument: One Approach

DTX tracks leased to Caltrain for a fee (not based on use) Caltrain owns/leases and maintains all infrastructure

(stations?). Charges HSR/others an access fee based on use (various options)

HSR/Caltrain agree on schedules, have joint dispatching (CTC) center to ensure neutrality in dispatching

HSR franchise operator will be allowed to compete for Caltrain franchise (or contract) when re-offered

UP replaced by short line operator that uses electric traction and operates only at night (full temporal separation)

State/local program to eliminate all grade crossings before HSR

Re-open Dumbarton Bridge to remove freight and let ACE serve mid-Peninsula directly

Oversight agency to coordinate all services. Harmonize fares and and provide common ticketing?