j g c j b dr g d p j r k y m z agenda j h e d peninsula ...and+minutes/jpb/... · 4/6/2017 · san...

Note: All items appearing on the agenda are subject to action by the Board. Staff recommendations are subject to change by the Board.

of 4

AGENDA PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD

Bacciocco Auditorium, 2nd Floor

1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos CA 94070

April 6, 2017 – Thursday 10:00 a.m.

1. Pledge of Allegiance

2. Call to Order

3. Swearing-in of Monique Zmuda Representing the City and County

of San Francisco

4. Roll Call

5. Public Comment Public comment by each individual speaker shall be limited to two minutes

6. Consent Calendar Members of the public or Board may request that an item under the Consent Calendar be

considered separately

a) Approval of Minutes of March 2, 2017

b) Acceptance of Statement of Revenues and Expenses for

February 2017

c) Authorize Filing of Applications to the California Governor’s

Office of Emergency Services to Receive $751,397 in State

Proposition 1B Transit Security Grant Program Funds

d) Appointment of CAC Member Julia Welch Representing

San Mateo County to a Term Ending June 30, 2018

e) Resolution of Appreciation to Outgoing Director Josè Cisneros

RESOLUTIONS

7. Chairperson’s Report

a) Appointment of a Nominating Committee for Vice Chair

INFORMATIONAL

MOTION

8. Report of the Citizens Advisory Committee INFORMATIONAL

9. Report of the Executive Director

a) Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Monthly Report

b) Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Full Funding Grant

Agreement Update

INFORMATIONAL

INFORMATIONAL

10. Caltrain Business Plan INFORMATIONAL

11. Caltrain Short Range Transit Plan – Draft Elements INFORMATIONAL

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2017

JEFF GEE, CHAIR

JEANNIE BRUINS

DEVORA “DEV” DAVIS

ROSE GUILBAULT

DAVE PINE

JOÉL RAMOS

KEN YEAGER

MONIQUE ZMUDA

JIM HARTNETT

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

April 6, 2017 Agenda


of 4

12. Key Caltrain Performance Statistics February 2017 INFORMATIONAL

13. Authorize Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with the

Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority to Provide an Additional

$900,000 in Funding and to Expand the Scope of Work to Include

South Terminal Phase III and Los Gatos Creek Bridge Projects

RESOLUTION

14. Amend the Fiscal Year 2017 Capital Budget for the Ravenswood

Avenue Grade Separation Project for a Total Capital Budget from

$526,585,568 to $526,751,568

RESOLUTION

15. Caltrain Triennial Customer Survey Key Findings INFORMATIONAL

16. Legislative Update INFORMATIONAL

17. Correspondence

18. Board Member Requests

19. Date/Time of Next Regular Meeting: Thursday, May 4, 2017,

10 a.m. at San Mateo County Transit District Administrative

Building, Bacciocco Auditorium, 2nd Floor, 1250 San Carlos

Avenue, San Carlos, CA 94070

20. General Counsel Report

a) Closed Session: Conference with Real Property Negotiators

Joan L. Cassman, General Counsel, Brian W. Fitzpatrick,

Manager, Real Estate and Property Development, and

Gary Cardona, Senior Real Estate Officer, pursuant to

Government Code Section 54956.8:

Under negotiation: Price and terms of contract.

Property Location Owner APN JPB Parcel #

200 Berkshire Avenue,

Redwood City

Michael A. Buenrostro/

Michelle Buenrostro

054-201-230 JPB-SM2-138

201 and 205

Dumbarton Avenue,

Redwood City

Caballero Family Trust 054-201-490 JPB-SM2-308

200 Dumbarton

Avenue, Redwood City

Redwood Apartments 054-201-560 JPB-SM2-310

Westside Avenue,

Redwood City

Del Rio Trust 054-201-550 JPB-SM2-311

b) Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing

Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board. v. Parsons

Transportation Group et al; San Mateo County Superior Court

Case No. Case No. 17CIV00888


April 6, 2017 Agenda


of 4

c) Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing

Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):

Parsons Transportation Group v. Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers

Board et al; San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. Case

No. 17CIV00786

21. Adjourn

of 4

INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC

All items appearing on the agenda are subject to action by the Board. Staff

recommendations are subject to change by the Board.

If you have questions on the agenda, please contact the JPB Secretary at 650.508.6242.

Agendas are available on the Caltrain website at www.caltrain.com. Communications

to the Board of Directors can be e-mailed to [email protected].

Location, Date and Time of Regular Meetings

Regular meetings are held at the San Mateo County Transit District Administrative

Building located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, one block west of the

San Carlos Caltrain Station on El Camino Real, accessible by SamTrans bus Routes ECR,

FLX, 260, 295 and 398. Additional transit information can be obtained by calling

1.800.660.4287 or 511.

The JPB meets regularly on the first Thursday of the month at 10 a.m. The JPB Citizens

Advisory Committee meets regularly on the third Wednesday of the month at 5:40 p.m.

at the same location. Date, time and place may change as necessary.

Public Comment

If you wish to address the Board, please fill out a speaker’s card located on the agenda

table and hand it to the JPB Secretary. If you have anything that you wish distributed to

the Board and included for the official record, please hand it to the JPB Secretary, who

will distribute the information to the Board members and staff.

Members of the public may address the Board on non-agendized items under the

Public Comment item on the agenda. Public testimony by each individual speaker

shall be limited to two minutes and items raised that require a response will be deferred

for staff reply.

Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities

Upon request, the JPB will provide for written agenda materials in appropriate

alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including

auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public

meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address, phone

number and brief description of the requested materials and a preferred alternative

format or auxiliary aid or service at least two days before the meeting. Requests should

be mailed to the JPB Secretary at Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board,

1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, CA 94070-1306; or emailed to

[email protected]; or by phone at 650.508.6242, or TDD 650.508.6448.

Availability of Public Records

All public records relating to an open session item on this agenda, which are not

exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, that are

distributed to a majority of the legislative body will be available for public inspection at

1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, CA 94070-1306, at the same time that the public

records are distributed or made available to the legislative body.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

of 13

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB)

Board of Directors Meeting

1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos CA 94070

MINUTES OF MARCH 2, 2017

MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Bruins, J. Cisneros (Chair), D. Davis, J. Gee, R. Guilbault, D. Pine,

J. Ramos, K. Yeager

STAFF PRESENT: J. Averill, M. Bouchard, J. Cassman, A. Chan, C. Fromson,

J. Hartnett, K. Kelly, M. Martinez, N. McKenna, S. Murphy, M. Simon,

P. Skinner, S. van Hoften, N. Vigil

Chair Josè Cisneros called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. and led the Pledge of

Allegiance.

SWEARING IN OF DEVORA “DEV” DAVIS, REPRESENTING SANTA CLARA VALLEY

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA)

Martha Martinez, JPB Secretary, administered the Oath of Office.

PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED 2017 WEEKEND SERVICE CHANGES

AND TITLE VI ANALYSIS

Ms. Martinez reported on the steps taken to announce and receive public comment

after the Board called for the public hearing at the December 1, 2016 meeting.

Ms. Martinez said 14 station outreach meetings and 10 community meetings were held.

A detailed list of public outreach is in the reading file. She said 141 weekend service

comments have been received as of March 1 and a summary of the comments are in

the reading file.

Michelle Bouchard, Chief Operating Officer, Rail, presented:

Weekend change background

o Facilitate construction work windows for Peninsula Corridor Electrification

Project (PCEP)

o Supports entire JPB capital program

o Local service headways go from 60 minutes to 90 minutes, a reduction in

eight trains per weekend day

o Service reduction is major service change and requires Title VI Equity

Analysis

o Coordinated with sister transit agencies connections, contractors,

TransitAmerica Services, Inc., stakeholders

o Proposed dates: summer 2017 to winter 2020

Extensive outreach was conducted including drop-in meetings at stations

High-level comment summary

o This is not a popular change as weekend service is very well used both for

regular customers and special event service: this is a short-term impact for

a long-term benefit and a compromise between a complete shutdown

and continuing to provide weekend service

Joint Powers Board Meeting

Minutes of March 2, 2017

Page 2 of 13

o Concerns with impacts to special event service: committed to continuing

special event service

o Concerns with impacts to capacity: all weekend service will be operated

with six-car trains

o Requests for more service: promotion of alternative transportation options

Title VI: as a recipient of Federal funding, Caltrain operates its programs and

services without regard to race, color or national origin

o Slightly more non-minority passengers are impacted than minority: no

disparate impact

o Largely more non-low-income passengers than low-income passengers

impacted: no disproportionate burden

Next steps

o Board action immediately following public hearing

o Executive implementation plan effective summer 2017 consistent when

the electrification project breaks ground; there could be some delays to

the start of construction, so regular service will be provided as long as

possible

o After implementation, monitor ridership

Public Comment

Jeff Carter, Millbrae, said it is unfortunate this has to be done although he understands

why. Even the current one-hour service on the weekends is inadequate. Perhaps this

could be shortened or the project could get done faster. The United States does not

know how to do projects like these. He said stakeholders had concerns about some of

the outreach. People went to station drop-ins and couldn’t find staff, especially during

the rainy days. The Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) suggested Caltrain should

provide incentives such as fare reduction or free transfers to make this change easier.

Peter Warner, Hanford, said there is more ridership on Saturday than on Sunday and a

split schedule with 75-minute service on Saturday, which would reduce two of the round

trips instead of four round trips with the 90-minute headway, would be a better idea

given the late-night baseball and hockey games. He asked if notes will be in the

schedule that trains will hold for ball games and hockey and keep the current modified

schedules for holidays.

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the real reason this is a problem is because crews are

working on two zones at the same time. In Europe crews would work on a 10-mile zone.

Work going on in the other zone has nothing to do with electrification, it has to do with

San Mateo County working on capital projects.

Jack Ringham, Atherton, said he’s concerned about the cost of electrification of

$2 billion to electrify when there is a non-electrification alternative involving Tier 4 diesels

for about $500 million. He has spent 35 years as management consultant in

transportation and manufacturing and many of his assignments involved a comparison

of alternatives. He’s testified before the House of Representatives Transportation

Committee as an expert witness involving transportation alternatives.

Jesse [no last name or city provided], said he came to this building to get his phone,

which he lost on the train. There is no number provided for lost and found. He filled out



Page 3 of 13

the online lost and found form, but has not heard back from staff. There are small and

simple things that could be adjusted. He said someone should be at a desk on the

phone with lost and found. He said buying train tickets is on the honor system. He said

it doesn’t make sense to fine a passenger $200 for not having a ticket if they couldn’t

afford the $2 ticket in the first place. He said the station platforms should be labeled

with northbound or southbound.

Joan Cassman, Legal Counsel, said the Board heard the purpose of the meeting, staff

extensively noticed the hearing, the public was afforded the opportunity to provide

feedback, and the Board has have met all applicable legal requirements and may

consider the action before it.

Director Jeannie Bruins commended staff for trying to do the station outreach,

especially during inclement weather. It was a great way to get to the people who are

directly using the service. A tradeoff has to be made because without cutting back

service, the construction period will have to be extended. The JPB is trying to achieve a

balance and it may not be convenient, but it is the best alternative.

Close the public hearing:

Motion/Second: Bruins/Gee

Ayes: Bruins, Davis, Gee, Guilbault, Pine, Ramos, Yeager, Cisneros

Approval of the Title VI Equity Analysis Report and Proposed 2017 Weekend Service

Changes

Motion/Second: Bruins/Guilbault


PUBLIC COMMENT

Vaughn Wollfe, Pleasanton, said the governor suggested spending $1.8 billion on streets

and roads, $1.8 billion on highways, and about $400 million on transit. Railroads would

get about 1/10 of what is being spent on roads. If 90 percent of the funding for the last

60 years has been for roads, that may be the reason 90 percent of people drive. This

group and other rail groups in the State should try to emphasize that Cap and Trade

funds should go only to transit, especially rail.

Paul Jones, Atherton, said he is concerned about financing for the PCEP. It is time to

start thinking about an alternative future. He suggested over the period of construction

it will be difficult to increase capacity in the system. The first opportunity would be after

the completion of electrification until high-speed rail (HSR) operates in this area

because the JPB promised to give California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) four

hourly departures out of the 10 available, which means Caltrain will be limited to six

trains per peak period. This will be the limit of capacity increases until four tracks or

some other massive change is made to the system. Tier 4 locomotives have the

characteristics of the Electric Multiple Units (EMU) that the JPB is buying and have

85 percent less pollution than the current diesels. With these, capacity could be

increased to over 120,000 passengers per day.

Mike Brady, Menlo Park, said the JPB waited until the chaos of the changeover of the

new administration to get the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) approved. He said



Page 4 of 13

Carolyn Flowers, the acting head of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) submitted

the grant to Congress and then resigned and took a job with a company that will

benefit if the grant is made. United States Department of Transportation Secretary

Elaine Chao seized control and deferred the grant until the president submits his

budget.

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said at the August 1, 2013 meeting he alerted the Board that

the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) testified that Communications-Based Overlay

Signal System (CBOSS) could not meet the deadline. Four years later the same

conversation is being had about the PCEP and how it cannot deliver the kind of

congestion relief the peninsula needs. He asked the Board to terminate both

electrification contracts immediately.

Jeff Carter, Millbrae, said the CAC met on the weekend service changes and passed a

motion, but it was not mentioned in the staff report.

Charles Voltz, Burlingame, said technology ideas that were good 50 years ago may not

be the best solution today. The PCEP may not be the best solution. The action of

deferring the FFGA gives the JPB an opportunity to reevaluate the total situation with

what is now-available technology and what is promised technology, such as

Bombardier testing electric battery trains, Alstom testing of hydrogen cell and battery

technology, and the battery possibilities from Elon Musk’s factory where the cost of

batteries for trains will be reduced by 30 percent or more.

Peter Warner, Hanford, said when schedule changes are made the JPB needs to

coordinate with other transit operators.

George Kranen, Belmont, said the coffee is terrible and whoever is making it needs to

learn how to make coffee.

CONSENT CALENDAR

Approval of Minutes of February 2, 2017

Acceptance of Statement of Revenues and Expenses for January 2017

Approval of Enrollment in 100 Percent Renewable Electricity Service Options of

CleanPowerSF, Peninsula Clean Energy, and Silicon Valley Clean Energy, and

City of Palo Alto Utilities and Silicon Valley Power

Approval of Revisions to the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board Procurement

Policy to Incorporate Provisions of Assembly Bill 2030

Motion/Second: Davis/Pine


ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR

ENDING JUNE 30, 2016

Removed from Consent Calendar.

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the auditors uncovered a significant deficiency in the

internal controls. JPB’s cash balances were not fully reconciled for the fiscal year.



Page 5 of 13

Several months out of the fiscal year were not reconciled. This led to significant post-

closing adjustments. He said the San Mateo County Transit District (District) is messing

around with the Caltrain books. This is consistent with the District’s inability to deliver any

project on time or on budget. The District does not have a functional PeopleSoft

system.

Motion/Second: Gee/Guilbault


CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT

None.

REPORT OF THE CAC

Brian Shaw, Chair, CAC, said:

The CAC welcomed Catherine Chang representing San Francisco.

There is one vacancy on the CAC for San Mateo County.

Vice chair elections were postponed until March.

The CAC will provide an assessment of Caltrain’s performance given the

improvements staff has implemented over the past year.

The CAC voted five to two against the proposed weekend schedule changes

recommended by staff. The CAC is not convinced the proposed timetable

takes into account all interests of the Caltrain riders. Staff did not offer positive

aspects of the schedule change other than accommodating electrification

construction. The CAC suggests when offering reductions in service, the JPB

needs to offer some positive benefit such as fare reductions, extending service to

underserved areas, or adding bullet service. If the public were to receive some

gain in the schedule, the CAC will reconsider its objection. He would be glad to

appoint a taskforce to identify potential mitigation strategies.

REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

PCEP Monthly Report

Jim Hartnett, Executive Director, said this report is in the reading file.

PCEP FFGA

Mr. Hartnett said the FTA deferred the decision to approve or deny the FFGA, but stated

the FFGA could be signed if the grant is allocated funds in the president’s budget,

which could be submitted by June 15 at the latest or as early as April. All regulatory

and technical requirements have been completed as well as the mandatory 30-day

Congressional waiting period. $73 million in previously appropriated Core Capacity

Funds has been allocated. No pending Core Capacity Grants are in the same status as

the Caltrain grant. No FFGA with the level of rating this grant has been awarded has

ever not been signed. A Limited Notice to Proceed (LNTP) was issued last July to Balfour

Beatty and Staddler. March 1 was the date that was negotiated as the farthest out as

possible with the intent to authorize the Full Notice to Proceed under both contracts on

March 1 with the execution of the FFGA. For any delay past March 1 there was no

obligation for the contractors to hold contract prices. Staff negotiated an extension

through June 30 with both contracts for continuation of the LNTP period. In order to

extend the LNTP and keep the spending within the amounts agreed, design and

related work has been slowed down. The extension of the contract was the cheapest



Page 6 of 13

alternative that could be derived. The other alternative would be suspension of the

contract, but would have substantial financial consequences. Termination would also

have the same consequences. A potential cost of up to $20 million could be incurred

because of the extension, but that cost is authorized under the LNTP. This $20 million is in

the contingency amount set within the Executive Director’s authority.

CBOSS/Positive Train Control (PTC) Project Update

Mr. Hartnett said the JPB entered into contract with Parsons Transportation Group (PTG)

in October 2011 for the design and implementation of CBOSS. The contract called for

CBOSS to be in revenue service demonstration (RDS) by October 31, 2015. The JPB

received express representations and assurances as late as fall 2015 from PTG that the

JPB would be in RSD by December 2015. Due to persistent delays in delivering the

project and a lack of progress in moving the project forward consistent with PTG’s

contractual obligations, Caltrain terminated the contract on February 22, 2017. Since

the termination, the JPB began the process of identifying a replacement. This action

will complicate final delivery, but it was done to ensure it does not impede progress on

the PCEP. Progress in the PTC includes the complete installation of wayside and

onboard hardware, installation of fiber optic backbone, the build-out of a control

center facility and a significant amount of field testing. On March 1 the JPB filed a

lawsuit for breach of contract and PTG has also filed a lawsuit against the JPB.

Mr. Hartnett reported:

On-time performance (OTP) for February was 93.8 percent compared to

90.5 percent over last year.

The 2017 Annual Counts is anticipated to be completed by April.

Special event train service includes:

o Sharks

o Giants Fan Fest and baseball service

o Modified schedule on Presidents’ Day

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the PCEP will never qualify for the FFGA because the FTA

mandates an increase in seating capacity by 10 percent and the JPB can’t do it unless

it gets money for railcars and for platform lengthening. The PCEP team advanced a

conceptual design to consider alternatives to a modification of the Centralized

Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility, but a new facility is needed for EMUs.

The first eight miles of tracks will be available for testing six months late. He said if there

is no maintenance facility there will be no place to park the new railcars. The JPB spent

$140 million on electrification design and $18.5 million on EMUs, but there is nothing to

show for it. The EMU design continues to continue, and staff refuses to disclose issues

about capacity of new trains. He asked anyone who disagrees with his numbers to

come up with their own numbers and start a discussion.

George Kranen, Belmont, said Caltrain has pledged 2/3 of the money needed to

complete PCEP. He asked why the JPB doesn’t just proceed. There is plenty of time to

raise the rest of the funding. It will take time to use the money the JPB has. He asked if

there is a legal requirement to wait until all the funding is in. No private enterprise would

work like this.



Page 7 of 13

Mike Brady, Menlo Park, said the FTA grant cannot be given to Caltrain if the money is

to the benefit of the CHSRA program, and this money would be used for the direct

benefit of CHSRA. He said the JPB said this is standalone project, but Caltrain is an

integral part of the HSR system. Without PCEP the CHSRA program could not be

implemented. The JPB entered into a contract with CHSRA that if they give $600 million

in Proposition 1A bond funds, the JPB will turn over control of the corridor to them.

Vaughn Wolffe, Pleasanton, asked if the JPB doesn’t get EMUs if it could consider

leasing old trains that are being retired on the east coast. This is a 100-year project and

no matter what the JPB does it will get criticized. In April 1999 the JPB voted for

electrification of Caltrain before the HSR vote had taken place. Electrification is not

dependent on HSR, HSR is piggybacking on the electrification project.

Bruce Jenkins, Rail Passenger Association of California, said his organization has over

500 members and stands with the National Association of Rail Passengers in full support

of Caltrain electrification and HSR.

Paul Jones, Atherton, said CBOSS is and has been in trouble for a long time. When the

prime contractor is fired, it is time to start over. It is a lot of money to scrap, but it is

much cheaper to start anew. He had recommended hiring a railway signaling and

control and communication employee to oversee the project. The JPB needs technical

staff to manage this project.

Jack Ringham, Atherton, said in 1992 California State Department of Transportation

(Caltrans) sponsored an electrification study that found to electrify from San Francisco

to Gilroy would cost $296 million. That never went anywhere because of funding. There

have been five attempts since then to get electrification done, but all failed for lack of

funds. This is the sixth attempt and the price tag is $2 billion. Over $600 million from the

FTA is in jeopardy, and another $600 million is in jeopardy because of a lawsuit. He

suggested the JPB start evaluating alternatives such as modern Tier 4 diesels and

battery-powered trains.

Charles Voltz, Burlingame, said 25 years ago when Caltrain decided to use electric

overhead power, it was not the same world as today. Since then Tier 4 clean diesel

and has been developed. An old problem with EMUs was they had to be built like a

tank to be crashworthy. A waiver was given to Caltrain for lightweight crashworthy

EMUs, and the same waiver is being adopted by the FRA for Diesel Multiple Units (DMU).

Energy prices have changed dramatically: diesel is less expensive and electricity is

more expensive. Depending on how electric power is being created it may or may not

be environmentally friendly.

Jeff Carter, Millbrae, said this is a 100-year project. Diesel trains will be affected by oil

companies and prices, and are less efficient. He is 100 percent behind electrification

and hopes Caltrain can move forward with construction of infrastructure and perhaps

hold off on EMUs until the JPB gets the FFGA. He has expressed concern about CBOSS

and hopes Caltrain would go with a proven PTC such as that used in Europe or

Metrolink or other railroads. He hopes there will be a reevaluation of PTC and a

reasonable resolution that will not cost a lot of money.



Page 8 of 13

Paul Wendt, Belmont, said he has been a proponent for electrification with Bay Rail

Alliance and Peninsula Rail 2000. He is looking forward to electrification. He hopes that

people reach out to Congressman Kevin McCarthy. Electrification should proceed

independently of HSR. He hopes there is outreach to the Republican delegation.

Peter Warner, Hanford, said San Diego has 55 miles of electrified track with 56 stations.

He suggested former San Diego Trolley employees be brought onboard who were in

the light-rail operations department for their input.

Mr. Hartnett said a Frequently Asked Question sheet is available on the Caltrain website.

He and Michael Burns, Interim Chief Officer, Caltrain Planning/CalMod Program, are

heading to Washington D.C. on Monday to visit key officials about the project. He has

invited Secretary Chao to visit Caltrain and see firsthand why changes need to be

made.

Director Ken Yeager said he is in support of the extension. The $20 million, even though

it is contingency funds, came from the three partners. He said he wants to make sure

the JPB is spending that money as wisely as possible. Congressman McCarthy is key to

getting the funding through as well as the other 11 Republicans. No one is sure when

the president will say if this project will be included. He has heard the infrastructure bill is

not going to be worked on until next year. It may be well beyond July 1, and if the JPB

hasn’t heard, staff might need to start shutting down the project, but then the Board

might wonder if that was the best way to spend the $20 million. He has been reassured

it will be paid over time and not all at once so if in mid-April things are not looking good

and all hope is lost the JPB can stop spending money. He worries that the JPB just may

not know enough and it will take the Board to another decision point of further

extensions or something else. He asked what reassurances the Board has that the JPB

will spend the $20 million wisely only for projects that are essential and decide later how

much more to spend and what the timelines are going to be. Mr. Harnett said staff

shares these concerns about the unknowns. No work will be done under the extended

LNTP that is in addition to work already authorized. Work has been slowed down and

some has been deferred. The budget has not increased. If staff stopped work

altogether, the JPB would have to suspend the contract, but there would be financial

consequences and schedule and cost implications beyond that, which would be far

more than the potential $20 million. The other option is to terminate the contracts, but if

that was done the JPB would not be able to get the FFGA and would have to go out to

rebid. This is the best alternative.

Director Davis asked how the timeline would be affected by receiving the $647 million

down the road. Mr. Hartnett said the sooner the FFGA is approved the less affect it has

on the schedule. It is not a month-to-month delay because there is already

programmed a potential of delay. There will be some delay for both contractors. It will

depend on where they are in their efforts when the JPB receives the FFGA.

Director Bruins asked if the worst case is a one-month for one-month delay. She said

she hopes the JPB is protecting the back end of the schedule so a four-month delay in

getting the FFGA will not lead to six-month delay in the project. Mr. Hartnett said a one-

month for one-month delay is likely to be true as a worst case scenario.



Page 9 of 13

Director Bruins asked if funds are leftover from other things that were not utilized when

the project is done if the contingency will be paid back or if the money will be

reconciled at the end. The contingency is money from the transit agencies that have

other purposes for that money. She said she wants assurances that the contingency is

the backup if the project can’t be funded through project funds. Mr. Hartnett said the

contingency is part of the approved budget and part of the commitment from all of

the funders. There is a total budget that includes a requirement by the FTA of a certain

level of contingency. There is also an agreement between all the funding partners that

at the end of the project if it comes in under budget, the partners will get money back.

Director Bruins asked when the JPB is going to start thinking about Plan B and what

triggers Plan B. She asked if this is about the president submitting his budget or if it has

to be in an approved budget. Mr. Hartnett said he has been told that if the money is in

president’s recommended budget, that is enough to trigger the signing of the FFGA by

the FTA. The FTA Executive Director told him that it is dependent on submission.

Mr. Hartnett said the JPB already has $73 million from prior fiscal years. This is a fully

qualified grant within a well-established program. The trigger point is the budget.

Director Bruins asked for key talking points to use to communicate for consistency of

message. She said a month is a long time to wait for an update and would like to hear

updates sooner.

Director Jeff Gee thanked the team for getting this to where it is. This is not a simple

project. When there are so many funding partners and constraints and fiscal years, this

is not easy. Money comes with different constraints. Part of the reason for the delay is

the Federal government decided they didn’t like the color of money. If the rules were

clear from the beginning, this would have been approved already.

Director Joèl Ramos said he is grateful for the hard work and heavy lifting done for this

project. This project has been in discussions long before HSR was a sure thing. He said

staff should work with captains of industry whose businesses depend on the speed of

the Caltrain service.

Director Dave Pine commended staff for the advocacy efforts.

KEY CALTRAIN PERFORMANCE STATISTICS JANUARY 2017

Ms. Bouchard said:

Ridership is continuing a trend of flat to slightly down from previous year. There

are indicators that Caltrain is faring a little better than some of the regional and

national peers. Staff is focused on finding ways to find ridership growth, which

includes the implementation of the schedule in April, doubling down on fare

enforcement, and looking at where the best bang for the buck can be

obtained.

Another trend is the return to 95 percent OTP on a month-by-month basis. This

month had the lowest number in mechanical delays in several years, which can

be attributed to the implementation of programs that provide for mechanics to

ride onboard trains, mechanics at ends of the line, and incident management.



Page 10 of 13

Public Comment

Charles Voltz, Burlingame, said increased ridership and capacity has to be looked at

holistically in terms of the number of riders and the consequences of how it happens

and its impact. The Burlingame grade crossings will cost $250 million for

Broadway Avenue, and Burlingame has five other grade crossings. If there are 40

grade crossings along the system and there will be an increase in trains to increase

capacity and adding up to 10 trains per hour, this will result in a paralysis on the

peninsula. The JPB will have to figure out how to pay for the grade crossings. A solution

is needed for the next few years and what has been proposed for the interim is clean

diesel engines.

Doug Delong, Mountain View, said ridership graphs have a seasonal trend where they

go up in the good weather summer months and down in the winter months. There was

an exceptionally wet winter. He asked if there has been any effort made to see the

wetter winter exacerbated the seasonal variation and caused the decrease in

ridership.

AUTHORIZE THE FILING AND EXECUTION OF ANNUAL CAP AND TRADE FUNDING

APPLICATION WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO RECEIVE

$502,745 IN CALIFORNIA LOW CARBON TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS PROGRAM FUNDS

FOR THE PCEP

Peter Skinner, Manager, Grants and Fund Programing, said these funds are proceeds

from Cap and Trade auctions and transit agencies across the State receive a portion of

the funds by formula based on their operating revenue.

Public Comment

Jack Ringham, Atherton, said the JPB has $113 million that it thinks is committed from

Cap and Trade. Cap and Trade is generating far less money than the projection. A

portion of the expected funding in jeopardy is this $113 million. Bay Area Rapid Transit

(BART) has 104 miles of electrified lines and they want 10 miles to extend to Antioch.

They found out to continue electrification for 10 more miles would cost $1.3 billion. He

said the JPB should think about approving only what it can afford.

Charles Voltz, Burlingame, asked if the JPB would make the decision to go with

electrification if the JPB had to pay for it. If the JPB had to pay for it, the JPB would

seriously look at less expensive alternatives that would get the job done. He

recommended the JPB look at solutions for the next five years to meet the growing

capacity and use that time to look at permanent solutions that can be afforded.

Jeff Carter, Millbrae, said there is a huge cost difference building BART and

conventional rail, so it is misleading to say BART used DMUs because electrification was

too expensive.

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said five years ago he suggested decoupling EMUs from

electrification. If this was done ridership would be going through the roof now.

Motion: Gee/Guilbault




Page 11 of 13

AWARD OF CONTRACTS TO ARMAND CONSULTING, INC. AND RAIL SURVEYORS AND

ENGINEERS, INC. TO PROVIDE ON-CALL COMMUNICATION AND SIGNAL SERVICES FOR

AN ESTIMATED, AGGREGATE NOT-TO-EXCEED SHARED TOTAL AMOUNT OF $8.5 MILLION

FOR A THREE-YEAR BASE TERM

Nita Vigil, Acting Director, Contracts and Procurement, said the existing contracts will

expire in May. She said 10 proposals were received after a solicitation was issued for a

qualifications-based process. Both firms are identified as Disadvantaged Business

Enterprise (DBE) firms. Work will be issued on a work-directive basis on a project-by-

project case-by-case need.

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said this is about hiring a firm to babysit CBOSS because PTG

was just fired.

Doug Delong, Mountain View, said it is a shame these contracts to two DBE firms were

issued after Directors Malia Cohen and Sophie Maxwell left the Board and he thanked

those members for their tireless efforts.

Motion: Gee/Ramos


AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S CHANGE ORDER AUTHORITY IN AN

AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $719,000 FOR THE SAN MATEO BRIDGES REPLACEMENT PROJECT

Ms. Bouchard said this funding is in order to aid in project closeout. This was a complex

project that involved the replacement of four 100-year-old bridges through San Mateo

that also allowed for a lift in clearance. In order to close out the project there was

additional ballast and grouting needed, and there were weather conditions that led to

increased cost.

Motion: Guilbault/Davis


CALTRAIN SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN – DRAFT ELEMENTS

CALTRAIN BUSINESS PLAN

Mr. Hartnett said these will be presented next month.

CAPITAL PROJECTS QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT – 2ND QUARTER FISCAL YEAR 2017

No comments or questions from the Board.

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the JPB is at 3.5 percent DBE participation, which is short

of the 15 percent target. The Quint Street Bridge shows a savings of $4 million

presumably because the connector road is not being built, but the Marin Street and

Napoleon Avenue Bridge shows a project estimate at completion increased by

$850,000 due to additional construction management requirements and revised project

estimate, which resulted in a project shortfall of $1.5 million. Additional funding will be

requested. He suggested the $4 million surplus can account for the $1.5 million shortfall.



Page 12 of 13

Jack Ringham, Atherton, said he has given handouts on his suggestions and can

provide copies of his presentation to the public.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Casey Fromson, Manager, Government and Community Relations, said the information

is in the reading file.

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the Board should read the October 6, 2011 minutes to

understand how the JPB got into a mess about CBOSS. He said the Board should reach

out to Metrolink to see how they reached the 2015 deadline. They did it in partnership

with Wabtec, who was the lowest bidder for CBOSS in 2011 and was in a joint venture

with PTG. The cost of the owner’s team ballooned from $50 million to $80 million. These

are the people who should be fired and sued for cause. The JPB has to engage

Wabtec as soon as possible and work with PTG towards a solution that will meet the

new Federal deadline.

CORRESPONDENCE

No discussion.

BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS

None.

DATE/TIME/PLACE OF NEXT REGULAR MEETING

Thursday, April 6, 2017, 10 a.m. at San Mateo County Transit District Administrative

Building, Bacciocco Auditorium, 2nd Floor, 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, CA

94070.

GENERAL COUNSEL REPORT

Closed Session: Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Pursuant to

Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2): One Potential Case

Recessed to closed session at 12:15 p.m.

Director Yeager left at 1 p.m.

Reconvened to open session at 1:03 p.m.

Ms. Cassman said the Board met in closed session to discuss litigation regarding the

CBOSS/PTC Project. A contract was recently terminated and the parties are now in

litigation.

Consider Delegation of Authority to the Executive Director to Enter into Agreements

within the Project Budget to Continue Work to Complete the CBOSS Project

Ms. Bouchard, said in light of the termination of the contract with PTG to deliver the

CBOSS Project, this item would authorize the Executive Director to enter into interim

agreements as necessary to continue the CBOSS program for 120 days for an

aggregate of $3 million with the understanding these contracts will be approved by



Page 13 of 13

legal counsel and will comply with all Federal funding requirements and are already in

the approved CBOSS budget.

Public Comment

Adina Levin, Friends of Caltrain, said the peer review group had provided valuable

information to Caltrain about how to improve the process for managing complex

technology projects. One opportunity at this time would be to ask the peer review

group what they would recommend as the best way to move this project forward to

completion and if there are any changes.

Motion/Second: Ramos/Guilbault

Ayes: Bruins, Davis, Gee, Guilbault, Pine, Ramos, Cisneros

Absent: Yeager

Adjourned at 1:07 p.m.

AGENDA ITEM # 6 (b)

APRIL 6, 2017

PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD

STAFF REPORT

TO: Joint Powers Board

THROUGH: Jim Hartnett

Executive Director

FROM: Kathleen Kelly

Interim Chief Financial Officer

SUBJECT: STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING

FEBRUARY 28, 2017, AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

ACTION

Staff proposes the Board of Directors accept and enter into the record the Statement of

Revenue and Expenditure for the month of February 2017 and supplemental

information.

SIGNIFICANCE

Revenues: For February of Fiscal year 2017, Total Operating Revenue (line 7) is

$2,514,087 or 3.8 percent better than budget. Within total operating revenue, Farebox

Revenue (line 1) is 849,344 or 1.4 percent better than budget. Compared to the prior

year, Total Operating Revenue (line 7) is $4,971,185 or 7.9 percent higher.

Expense: Grand Total Expenses (line 50) show a favorable variance of $12,730,293 or

13 percent. Total Operating Expense (line 36) is $10,941,157 or 13.5 percent better than

budget. Total Administrative Expense (line 46) is $1,803,432 or 11.4 percent better than

budget.

Compared to prior year, Grand Total Expenses (line 50) are $4,351,215 or 5.4 percent

higher.

Use of Reserves: For February 2017, the JPB did not use its reserves, mostly due to direct

savings from fuel and lubricants.

BUDGET IMPACT

There are no budget revisions for the month of February 2017.

Prepared By: Jeannie Chen, Senior Accountant 650.508.6259

Sheila Tioyao, Manager, General Ledger 650.508.7752

Statement of Revenue and Expense

Page 1 of 1

% OF YEAR ELAPSED 66.7%

MONTH

CURRENT PRIOR CURRENT REVISED % REV APPROVED REVISED PROJECTION % REV

ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET

(AS PROJECTED)

REVENUE

OPERATIONS:

1 Farebox Revenue 6,893,722 57,406,131 60,153,447 59,304,103 101.4% 91,679,812 91,679,812 91,679,812 65.6% 1

2 Parking Revenue 437,070 3,229,027 3,659,877 3,119,533 117.3% 4,679,300 4,679,300 5,172,515 78.2% 2

3 Shuttles 200,718 1,016,190 1,185,339 1,633,067 72.6% 2,449,600 2,449,600 2,449,600 48.4% 3

4 Rental Income 186,347 1,141,248 1,229,245 1,154,267 106.5% 1,731,400 1,731,400 1,731,400 71.0% 4

5 Other Income 40,834 359,276 1,895,149 398,000 476.2% 597,000 597,000 1,854,314 317.4% 5

6 6

7 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE 7,758,692 63,151,872 68,123,057 65,608,970 103.8% 101,137,112 101,137,112 102,887,641 67.4% 7

8 8

9 CONTRIBUTIONS: 9

10 AB434 Peninsula & TA Shuttle Funding 143,273 1,271,536 1,132,689 1,238,502 91.5% 1,895,080 1,895,080 1,895,080 59.8% 10

11 Operating Grants 339,729 3,727,745 2,965,445 2,451,724 121.0% 3,677,586 3,677,586 3,677,586 80.6% 11

12 JPB Member Agencies 1,179,592 15,056,221 15,730,096 15,730,006 100.0% 20,448,014 20,448,014 20,448,014 76.9% 12

13 Use of Reserves 12,881,429 0.0% 19,234,237 19,234,237 8,399,404 0.0% 13

14 14

15 TOTAL CONTRIBUTED REVENUE 1,662,594 20,055,502 19,828,230 32,301,661 61.4% 45,254,917 45,254,917 34,420,084 43.8% 15

16 0

17 GRAND TOTAL REVENUE 9,421,286 83,207,374 87,951,287 97,910,631 89.8% 146,392,029 146,392,029 137,307,725 60.1% 17

18 18

19 19

20 EXPENSE 20

21 21

22 OPERATING EXPENSE: 22

23 Rail Operator Service 7,218,478 49,391,801 51,397,395 53,444,504 96.2% 80,166,756 80,166,756 79,243,962 64.1% 23

24 Rail Operator Service-Other - 600,000 291,138 1,350,000 21.6% 2,025,000 2,025,000 901,933 14.4% 24

25 Security Services 470,106 3,112,112 3,605,755 3,720,422 96.9% 5,582,867 5,578,399 5,468,877 64.6% 25

26 Rail Operator Extra work - - 63,070 114,600 55.0% 125,000 125,000 125,000 50.5% 26

27 Contract Operating & Maintenance 7,688,584 53,103,913 55,357,359 58,629,526 94.4% 87,899,623 87,895,155 85,739,771 63.0% 27

28 Shuttles Services 331,369 2,832,843 2,923,057 3,608,867 81.0% 5,413,300 5,413,300 5,413,300 54.0% 28

29 Fuel and Lubricants 749,187 5,528,570 5,758,886 10,374,651 55.5% 15,606,976 15,516,976 8,588,055 37.1% 29

30 Timetables and Tickets 20,890 84,936 56,288 174,467 32.3% 217,700 217,700 217,700 25.9% 30

31 Insurance 597,724 3,182,804 2,836,393 4,195,993 67.6% 6,293,990 6,293,990 6,293,990 45.1% 31

32 Facilities and Equipment Maint 140,680 1,011,177 1,233,313 1,555,887 79.3% 2,279,824 2,242,824 2,242,824 55.0% 32

33 Utilities 155,550 1,354,079 1,341,242 1,706,119 78.6% 2,559,188 2,559,188 2,559,188 52.4% 33

34 Maint & Services-Bldg & Other 91,099 758,713 812,099 1,014,285 80.1% 1,470,668 1,470,668 1,470,668 55.2% 34

35 35

36 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 9,775,082 67,857,034 70,318,637 81,259,794 86.5% 121,741,269 121,609,801 112,525,497 57.8% 36

37 37

38 ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE 38

39 Wages and Benefits 655,147 4,856,354 5,311,942 5,589,201 95.0% 8,790,704 8,214,640 8,214,640 64.7% 39

40 Managing Agency Admin OH Cost 473,890 3,487,049 3,913,847 4,032,528 97.1% 6,048,792 6,048,792 6,048,792 64.7% 40

41 Board of Directors 651 8,453 7,230 9,733 74.3% 14,600 14,600 14,600 49.5% 41

42 Professional Services 596,219 2,481,211 3,085,667 4,040,317 76.4% 5,746,679 6,214,467 6,214,467 49.7% 42

43 Communications and Marketing 5,071 49,101 97,318 219,567 44.3% 234,800 234,800 234,800 41.4% 43

44 Other Office Expenses and Services 242,458 1,235,157 1,576,618 1,904,708 82.8% 2,533,010 2,772,754 2,772,754 56.9% 44

45 45

46 TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE 1,973,436 12,117,325 13,992,621 15,796,053 88.6% 23,368,585 23,500,053 23,500,054 59.5% 46

47 47

48 Long Term Debt Expense 108,223 854,765 869,081 854,783 101.7% 1,282,175 1,282,175 1,282,175 67.8% 48

49 49

50 GRAND TOTAL EXPENSE 11,856,742 80,829,123 85,180,338 97,910,631 87.0% 146,392,029 146,392,029 137,307,726 58.2% 50

51 51

52 NET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) (2,435,456) 2,378,250 2,770,949 - - (0) (0) (0) 52

"% OF YEAR ELAPSED" provides a general measure for evaluating overall progress against the

annual budget. When comparing it to the amounts shown in the "% REV BUDGET" column, please

note that individual line items reflect variations due to seasonal activities during the year.

3/24/17 9:51 AM

PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARDSTATEMENT OF REVENUE AND EXPENSE

Fiscal Year 2017

February 2017

YEAR TO DATE ANNUAL


INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO

AS OF JANUARY 31, 2017

TYPE OF SECURITY MATURITY INTEREST PURCHASE MARKET

DATE RATE PRICE RATE

------------------------------------------------------ ------------------ ---------------- ------------------ ------------------

Local Agency Investment Fund (Unrestricted) * Liquid Cash 0.751% 72,404 72,404

County Pool (Restricted) ** Liquid Cash 0.945% 1,000,000 1,000,000

County Pool (Unrestricted) ** Liquid Cash 0.945% 1,557,238 1,557,238

Other (Unrestricted) Liquid Cash 0.000% 19,683,497 19,683,497

Other (Restricted) *** Liquid Cash 0.200% 24,092,741 24,092,741

------------------------------------------------------ ------------------ ---------------- ------------------ ------------------

46,405,881$ 46,405,881$

Accrued Earnings for January 2017 4,959.40$

Cumulative Earnings FY2017 39,796.22$

* The market value of Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is calculated annually and is derived from the fair

value factor as reported by LAIF for quarter ending June 30th each year.

** As of January 2017, the total cost of the Total County Pool was $4,936,011,574 and the fair market value

per San Mateo County Treasurer's Office was $4,934,788,246.

*** Prepaid Grant funds for Homeland Security, PTMISEA and LCTOP projects, and funds reserved for debt repayment.

The Portfolio and this Investment Report comply with the Investment Policy and the provisions of SB 564 (1995).

The Joint Powers Board has the ability to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.


ADRIENNE TISSIER, CHAIR PERRY WOODWARD JOSÉ CISNEROS MALIA COHEN JEFF GEE ROSE GUILBAULT ASH KALRA TOM NOLAN KEN YEAG


JOSE CISNEROS, CHAIR

JEFF GEE, VICE CHAIR

MALIA COHEN

JEFF GEE

ROSE GUILBAULT

RAUL PERALEZ

JOÉL RAMOS

ADRIENNE TISSIER

KEN YEAGER

JIM HARTNETT

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

of 2

13360174.1

AGENDA ITEM # 6 (c)

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: April Chan

Chief Officer, Planning, Grants and Transportation Authority

SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO FILE APPLICATIONS FOR STATE PROPOSITION 1B TRANSIT

SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS

ACTION

Staff Coordinating Council recommends the Board:

1. Authorize the Executive Director, or his designee, to submit grant applications,

with concurrent Letter of No Prejudice (LONP) requests, to the California

Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and

2. Authorize the Executive Director, or his designee, to file and execute

certifications, assurances and other documentation as required to receive

$751,397 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant

Program (CTSGP) funds from the State for transportation security projects.

SIGNIFICANCE

Cal OES requires eligible recipients of Proposition 1B CTSGP funds to submit resolutions

approved by their governing bodies that authorize the designated agency officer(s) to

execute any action necessary for the processing of applications associated with the

programming and receipt of funds. Approval of this item will meet Cal OES’ CTSGP

funding requirement.

In the event the State Controller is unable to sell a sufficient amount of bonds to fund all

Proposition 1B capital projects around the State, including Peninsula Corridor Joint

Powers Board (JPB) projects, the JPB will request a LONP to enable work to proceed,

utilizing JPB funds, which would then be reimbursed by the State once bond proceeds

become available.

BUDGET IMPACT

There is no budget impact related to this action. Safety and security projects proposed

to be funded with Proposition 1B CTSGP funds will be considered through the FY2018

Capital Budget development process.

of 2

13360174.1

BACKGROUND

The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006,

otherwise known as Proposition 1B, was approved by California voters on

November 7, 2006. Proposition 1B includes a funding program specifically for transit

safety and security projects, known as the CTSGP. The State Controller develops a list of

eligible transit operators and the amount of funds that each operator is eligible to

receive on an annual basis. Funding allocations are contingent on bond sales and it

has historically taken over one year to receive funds once an allocation request has

been submitted to the State.

Board authorization for the filing of applications by the agency’s appointed agent is a

Cal OES requirement. To allow greater flexibility, Cal OES does not require applicants to

list each project in their governing body resolutions. The JPB's certified resolution will be

filed with Cal OES after adoption by the Board. Cal OES informed all transit agencies

this is the last year of funding as the Proposition 1B program is coming to an end.

Prepared by: Rebecca Arthur, Senior Grants Analyst 650.508.6368

of 2

13360123.1

RESOLUTION NO. 2017 -

BOARD OF DIRECTORS, PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * *

AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF APPLICATIONS FOR STATE PROPOSITION 1B

TRANSIT SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS

WHEREAS, the California Transit Security Grant Program (CTSGP) is a program for

capital security and safety projects that is part of the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction,

Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, otherwise known as Proposition 1B,

which was approved by California voters on November 7, 2006; and

WHEREAS, the CTSGP is administered by the California Governor's Office of

Emergency Services (Cal OES); and

WHEREAS, the State Controller develops an annual list with the amounts that

each eligible project sponsor is programmed to receive; and

WHEREAS, Cal OES requires all eligible recipients of CTSGP funds to submit

resolutions approved by their governing bodies that authorize appointed agents to

take any actions necessary for the processing of applications; and

WHEREAS, due to a lack of available bond funding for new projects, the State

Controller’s Office may be unable to allocate CTSGP funds in a timely manner; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 672, signed by the governor on October 11, 2009,

authorizes approval of a Letter of No Prejudice (LONP), which allows an eligible

applicant to expend its own funds to proceed with work on CTSGP-eligible projects and

be reimbursed by the State once CTSGP funds are available; and

WHEREAS, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) is on the list of eligible

applicants for CTSGP funds; and

of 2

13360123.1

WHEREAS, Staff Coordinating Council recommends the Board authorize the

Executive Director, or his designee, to submit applications for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017

CTSGP funds, with concurrent requests for LONPs, and to file and execute certifications

and assurances and any other documentation required by Cal OES.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Peninsula

Corridor Joint Powers Board, hereby:

1. Authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to file applications and

concurrent LONP requests with Cal OES for FY2017 Proposition 1B CTSGP funds; and

2. Authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to take such actions as

may be necessary to give effect to this resolution, including executing any agreements,

certifications and assurances or other documentation that may be required to receive

the funds.

Regularly passed and adopted this 6th day of April, 2017, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

______________________

Chair, Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

ATTEST:

_____________________________________

JPB Secretary

Resolution No. 2017-15

Resolution of Appreciation Presented to

Josè cisneros

WHEREAS, since April 2004, DIRECTOR JOSÈ CISNEROS has been an advocate for Caltrain

projects and transportation issues as a member of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board of

Directors; and

WHEREAS, DIRECTOR CISNEROS provided valuable leadership during his tenure on the

Caltrain Board, which included two terms as Chair; and

WHEREAS, during DIRECTOR CISNEROS’ time on the board, his guidance helped Caltrain

reach unprecedented milestones, achieving record ridership goals while acting as the travel

option of choice for commuters making the journey between San Francisco and Silicon Valley;

and

WHEREAS, DIRECTOR CISNEROS helped coordinate multi-agency funding agreements

vital to the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP); and

WHEREAS, DIRECTOR CISNEROS supported the approval of $1.25 billion in contracts to

begin PCEP;

WHEREAS, during DIRECTOR CISNEROS’ time on the board, he helped Caltrain open its

$140 million Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility in September 2007

that provided Caltrain with its first-ever “home” for maintenance and operations; and

WHEREAS, during DIRECTOR CISNEROS’ time on the Board, he helped Caltrain celebrate

150 years of passenger rail service on the Peninsula in 2014, and in 2016, supported Caltrain’s

efforts to provide special service during the NFL’s Super Bowl 50 festivities from San Francisco to

Santa Clara counties; and

WHEREAS, DIRECTOR CISNEROS has championed the prioritization of safety measures on

Caltrain, advocating for efforts to construct grade-separation projects, conduct awareness

campaigns that stress appropriate behavior on the rail corridor, and advance enforcement

efforts to keep vehicles and people off the tracks; and

WHEREAS, as a longtime public servant, DIRECTOR CISNEROS has been a paragon of civic

engagement, providing tireless support and sponsorship for his constituents in the City and

County of San Francisco and beyond;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Caltrain Joint Power Board of Directors, does thank

and commend JOSÈ CISNEROS for his successful tenure, and wish him good fortunes in her

future endeavors.

UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED this 6th day of April, 2017.


AGENDA ITEM # 6 (d)

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Martha Martinez

Executive Officer, District Secretary

SUBJECT: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY

REPRESENTATIVE

ACTION

The San Mateo County board representatives, Directors Jeff Gee, Rose Guilbault and

Dave Pine, recommend the Board appoint Julia Welch to the Caltrain Citizens Advisory

Committee (CAC) representing San Mateo County for a partial-term ending

June 30, 2018.

SIGNIFICANCE

The appointment of the San Mateo representative will fill a vacancy left by a

San Mateo County committee member who recently resigned. There will be a full

complement of the committee following the Board’s appointment.

The CAC consist of nine members, three appointed from each constituent county

(San Francisco County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County). The term is for three

years. Each county selects its county committee members and the Peninsula Corridor

Joint Powers Board (JPB) affirms the appointments.

BUDGET IMPACT

There is no budget impact.

BACKGROUND

The Citizens Advisory Committee acts in an advisory capacity to the JPB. Its activities

shall include seeking the views of various groups of users and potential users of Caltrain

and ancillary transit facilities, and to develop proposals and recommendations for

meeting the needs of these various groups; reviewing and commenting on staff

proposals and actions as requested by the JPB; and assisting the JPB in any matter

which the Board may deem appropriate.

Prepared By: Martha Martinez, Executive Officer, District

Secretary

650.508.6242

Modernization Program Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP)

February 2017

Monthly Progress Report

February 28, 2017

Funding Partners

FTA Core Capacity

FTA Section 5307 (Environmental / Pre Development only)

FTA Section 5307 (EMU only)

Prop 1B (Public Transportation Modernization & Improvement Account)

Caltrain Low Carbon Transit Operations Cap and Trade

Prop 1A

High Speed Rail Cap and Trade

Carl Moyer Fund

Bridge Tolls Funds (RM1/RM2)

SFCTA/SFMTA

San Mateo (SMCTA) Contribution

SMCTA Measure A

VTA Measure A

Santa Clara (VTA) Contribution

San Francisco Contribution

http://www.smcta.com/smcta_com.html









THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Monthly Progress Report

Table of Contents i February 28, 2017

Table of Contents Page

1.0 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Schedule .......................................................................................................... 2-2

2.2 Budget ............................................................................................................. 2-2

2.3 Board Actions .................................................................................................. 2-2

2.4 Government and Community Affairs ................................................................ 2-3

3.0 ELECTRIFICATION – INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................ 2-1

3.1 Electrification ................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) ......................................... 3-2

3.3 Tunnel Modification .......................................................................................... 3-2

4.0 ELECTRIC MULTIPLE UNITS .................................................................................... 3-1

4.1 Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility (CEMOF) Modifications .................................................................................................... 4-2

5.0 SAFETY ...................................................................................................................... 5-1

6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE ............................................................................................. 6-1

7.0 SCHEDULE................................................................................................................. 7-1

8.0 BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES ................................................................................ 8-1

9.0 FUNDING .................................................................................................................... 9-1

10.0 RISK MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................... 10-1

11.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ................................................................................................... 11-1

11.1 Permits .......................................................................................................... 11-1

11.2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) .................................. 11-1

12.0 UTILITY RELOCATION ............................................................................................ 12-1

13.0 REAL ESTATE ......................................................................................................... 13-1

14.0 THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS ................................................................................ 14-1

15.0 GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS ......................................................... 15-1

16.0 DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PARTICIPATION AND LABOR STATISTICS ................................................................................................ 16-1

17.0 PROCUREMENT ...................................................................................................... 17-1


Table of Contents ii February 28, 2017

18.0 TIMELINE OF MAJOR PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS ....................................... 18-1

List of Tables

Page

Table 2-1 Schedule Milestones ............................................................................................... 2-3 Table 2-2 Budget and Expenditure Status ............................................................................... 2-3 Table 6-1 Quality Assurance Audit Summary .......................................................................... 6-1 Table 7-1 Schedule Status ...................................................................................................... 7-1 Table 7-2 Critical Path Summary ............................................................................................ 7-2 Table 7-3 Near-Term, Near-Critical with Less Than Three Months of Float ............................. 7-2 Table 8-1 Program Baseline Cost Estimate Summary ............................................................. 8-1 Table 8-2 Electrification Budget & Expenditure Status ............................................................ 8-2 Table 8-3 EMU Budget & Expenditure Status ......................................................................... 8-2 Table 10-1 Monthly Status of Risks ....................................................................................... 10-3 Table 10-2 Risk Classification ............................................................................................... 10-3 Table 13-1 Real Estate Acquisition Overview ........................................................................ 13-2 Table 14-1 Third-Party Agreement Status ............................................................................. 14-1

List of Figures Page

Figure 2-1 Working Segments ................................................................................................. 2-1 Figure 9-1 Funding Plan .......................................................................................................... 9-1

List of Appendices

Page

Appendix A – Acronyms .......................................................................................................... A-1

Appendix B – Schedule ........................................................................................................... B-1


Background 1-1 February 28, 2017

1.0 BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, Caltrain has experienced a substantial increase in ridership and anticipates further increases in ridership demand as the San Francisco Bay Area’s population grows. The Caltrain Modernization (CalMod) Program, scheduled to be implemented by 2020, will electrify and upgrade the performance, operating efficiency, capacity, safety, and reliability of Caltrain’s commuter rail service.

The PCEP is a key component of the CalMod Program and consists of converting Caltrain from diesel-hauled to Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) trains for service between the San Francisco Station (at the intersection of Fourth and King Streets in San Francisco) and the Tamien Station in San Jose. Caltrain will continue Gilroy service and support existing tenants.

An electrified Caltrain will better address Peninsula commuters’ vision of environmentally friendly, fast and reliable service. Electrification will modernize Caltrain and make it possible to increase service while offering several advantages in comparison with existing diesel power use, including:

• Improved Train Performance, Increased Ridership Capacity and Increased Service: Electrified trains can accelerate and decelerate more quickly than diesel-powered trains, allowing Caltrain to run more efficiently. In addition, because of their performance advantages, electrified trains will enable more frequent and/or faster train service to more riders.

• Increased Revenue and Reduced Fuel Cost: An electrified Caltrain will increase ridership and fare revenues while decreasing fuel costs.

• Reduced Engine Noise Emanating from Trains: Noise from electrified train engines is measurably less than noise from diesel train engines. Train horns will continue to be required at grade crossings, adhering to current safety regulations.

• Improved Regional Air Quality and Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Electrified trains will produce substantially less corridor air pollution compared with diesel trains even when the indirect emissions from electrical power generation are included. Increased ridership will reduce automobile usage, resulting in additional air quality benefits. In addition, the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions will improve our regional air quality, and will also help meet the State’s emission reduction goals.


Executive Summary 2-1 February 28, 2017

2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Monthly Progress Report is intended to provide an overview of the PCEP and provide funding partners, stakeholders, and the public an overall update on the progress of the project. This document provides information on the scope, cost, funding, schedule, and project implementation. Work along the Caltrain Electrification Corridor has been divided into four work segments as shown in Figure 2-1. PCEP activities are described and summarized by work segments.

Figure 2-1 PCEP Work Segments



The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) completed all administrative and statutory requirements for the Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) of $647 million in Core Capacity. On February 17, JPB was informed by the FTA that a decision was made to defer execution of the pending $647 million FFGA for the PCEP until the Administration developed the President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Budget. In light of this news, PCEP staff issued letters to Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. (BBI) for the Electrification Project and Stadler for the EMU Vehicles to extend the existing Limited Notice to Proceed (LNTP) to June 30, 2017. Once negotiations are completed regarding the LNTP extensions, each firm will be issued a contract amendment.

The PCEP team continues work with Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. (BBI) on 65% design and field investigations. The PCEP team completed review of the 65% OCS foundation and poles design and received 65% layout design for Segment 2 Work Area 5. The PCEP team continues coordination efforts related to signal systems and also conducting utility survey, pothole location layouts, and geotechnical boring layouts.

The PCEP team continues to work with Stadler on the technical aspects of the project. The PCEP team participated in Stadler design review meetings on structural elements and crash energy aspects of the carbody, truck and coupler. The PCEP team continues to address system-wide interface issues involving the emerging EMU design and the existing wayside infrastructure, the Electrification Project, the Communications Based Overlay Signal System (CBOSS) Project, and the Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility (CEMOF) Design Upgrade.

2.1 Schedule

The Revenue Service Date (RSD) in the Master Program Schedule (MPS) remains unchanged. Without adjustment for contingency, the RSD is forecast as August 2021. With the addition of approximately five months of contingency to account for potential risk to the project, the RSD is anticipated as December 2021. Table 2-1 provides a summary of the current schedule and milestones. The overall schedule will be updated upon the execution of FFGA

2.2 Budget

A summary of the overall budget and expenditure status for the PCEP is provided in Table 2-2 below.

2.3 Board Actions

At the February 2, 2017 Board meeting, there were several items related to the PCEP:

• Informational item on the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Quarterly Update #9.

• Informational item on the Weekday Service Changes.



The agenda and meeting minutes for the February meeting can be found at the link below: http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Agendas/2017/2017-02-02+JPB+Agenda.pdf (Note: For viewers accessing the link above electronically, please cut and paste the link into a browser if it does not direct you immediately to the document.)

Table 2-1 Schedule Status

Milestones1,2 Program Plan December January

Full Notice to Proceed to Electrification Contractor N/A 03/01/2017 03/01/2017

Full Notice to Proceed to EMU Manufacturer N/A 03/01/2017 03/01/2017

Start of Electrification Major Construction 03/20/2017 07/24/2017 07/24/2017

First Eight Miles of Electrification Complete to Begin Testing 04/08/2019 10/08/2019 10/08/2019

Delivery of 1st Vehicle 06/25/2019 07/30/2019 07/30/2019

Start Pre-Revenue Operations 09/08/2020 09/22/2020 09/22/2020

Potential Limited Service 12/31/2020 12/31/2020 12/31/2020

RSD (w/ Risk Contingency) 12/30/2021 12/30/2021 12/30/2021 Notes:

1 Milestones reported on this table may differ from the current schedule. As the schedule continues to be refined over the coming months to incorporate approved baseline schedules from the Electrification and EMU contractors, changes to milestones will be thoroughly vetted prior to reflecting those changes in the Monthly Report. 2 Program Plan only considered an NTP. It did not account for an LNTP and FNTP.

Table 2-2 Budget and Expenditure Status

Description of Work Budget Cost This Month Cost To Date Estimate To Complete

Estimate At Completion

(A) (B)1 (C)2 (D) (E) = (C) + (D) Electrification Subtotal $ 1,316,125,208 $ 8,179,189 $ 147,484,773 $ 1,168,640,435 $ 1,316,125,208 EMU Subtotal $ 664,127,325 $ 806,185 $ 19,400,512 $ 644,726,813 $ 664,127,325 PCEP TOTAL $ 1,980,252,533 $ 8,985,374 $ 166,885,285 $ 1,813,367,248 $ 1,980,252,533

2.4 Government and Community Affairs

A number of community relations and outreach events took place during the month of February. PCEP team gave a total of seven presentations to stakeholders.

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Agendas/2017/2017-02-02+JPB+Agenda.pdf

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Agendas/2017/2017-02-02+JPB+Agenda.pdf


Electrification - Infrastructure 3-1 February 28, 2017

3.0 ELECTRIFICATION – INFRASTRUCTURE

This section reports on the progress of the Electrification, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), and Tunnel Modification components. A brief description on each of the components is provided below.

3.1 Electrification

The Electrification component of the PCEP includes the installation of 138 miles of single-track and overhead contact system (OCS) for the distribution of electrical power to the EMUs. The OCS will be powered from a 25-kilovolt (kV), 60-Hertz (Hz), single phase, alternating current supply system consisting of two traction power substations (TPS), one switching station (SS), and seven paralleling stations (PS). Electrification will be performed using a design-build (DB) delivery method.

Activity This Month

• The PCEP team continued working with BBI on the 65% design and field investigations. The PCEP team completed review of the 65% OCS foundation and poles design and received 65% OCS Layout Design for Segment 2, Work Area 5 and 4. The reviews for those design packages are ongoing.

• The PCEP and BBI teams hold regular workshop meetings to discuss design related to the signal system, including the conversion from direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC) and the Constant Warning Time solution. The PCEP team is working with Caltrain Engineering and Construction to provide updated signal drawings to BBI for advancement of 65% design.

• BBI continued conducting utility surveys, pothole location layouts, and geotechnical boring layouts. Physical geotechnical boring and cone penetrometer tests (CPT) on the Caltrain right-of-way (ROW) continued in Segments 1 and 3, with additional borings completed as a result from previous borings.

• Potholing of utilities at proposed OCS locations continued in Segment 2. Results from potholing are used for design purposes in the 65% design submittals.

• Coordination efforts with Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) continued for infrastructure improvements and traction power substation interconnects. PCEP team completed review of scoping documents prepared by PG&E.

Activity Next Month

• The PCEP team will continue to work with BBI on design and field investigation activities. The designs will include the continued progression of the OCS and Signal systems along with advancement of design for Traction Power and other civil infrastructures.

• Geotechnical investigations corridor wide and potholing activities will continue in Segments 2.



• In Segment 4, potholing activities will begin to support design of the signal system.

• Coordination efforts will continue with PG&E on interconnection design and final design for PG&E infrastructure. The PCEP team will complete the final Power Quality Study for PG&E. The PCEP and BBI teams are in the process of designing the 115 kV interconnection between PG&E and Caltrain’s future substations.

3.2 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)

SCADA is a system that monitors and controls field devices for electrification, including substations, paralleling stations and sectionalization. SCADA will be integrated with the base operating system for Caltrain Operations and Control, which is the Rail Operations Center System (ROCS).

Activity This Month

• Activity continues to be limited to providing technical support on an as needed basis to the Caltrain Contract and Procurement (C&P) Department for the procurement of the SCADA system.

• Final procurement documents submitted to C&P.

Activity Next Month

• PCEP staff will continue to support Caltrain C&P on providing technical support during the procurement process.

3.3 Tunnel Modification

Tunnel modifications will be required on the four tunnels located in San Francisco. This effort is needed to accommodate the required clearance for the OCS to support electrification of the corridor. Outside of the PCEP scope, Caltrain Engineering and Construction has requested the PCEP team to manage completion of design and construction management for the Tunnel 1 and Tunnel 4 Drainage Rehab Project. The Drainage Rehab Project is funded separately from PCEP and will be a Design-Bid-Build (DBB) construction package. Construction will occur concurrently with the Electrification contractor’s efforts in Segment 1.

Activity This Month

• The PCEP team continued coordination efforts with the design team on drawings and specifications on Tunnel 1 and Tunnel 4 Drainage Rehab Project.

• PCEP team continued coordination efforts with Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and other stakeholders.

• The PCEP team continues to progress 95% design drawings and specifications for tunnel modification.



Activity Next Month

• PCEP project team will complete the 95% design submittal for review.

• UPRR will be provided 95% drawings for review and comment.

• PCEP staff will review and resolve comments on 95% design drawings and specifications.

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


Electric Multiple Units 4-1 February 28, 2017

4.0 ELECTRIC MULTIPLE UNITS

The EMU procurement component of the PCEP consists of the purchase of 96 Stadler EMUs. The EMUs will consist of both cab and non-cab units configured as 16 six-car units. Power will be obtained from the OCS via roof-mounted pantographs, which will power the axle-mounted traction motors. The EMUs will replace a portion of the existing diesel locomotives and passenger cars currently in use by Caltrain.

Activity This Month

• The PCEP team participated in Stadler design review meetings on structural elements and crash energy aspects of the carbody, truck and coupler.

• Stadler continued to progress numerous management submittals, including a Master Program Schedule, an updated Contract Deliverables Requirement List (CDRL), and updated System Safety and Quality Assurance Plans. The PCEP team is currently reviewing these submittals and working with Stadler to finalize these deliverables.

• Weekly conference calls were held with Stadler, Caltrain Operations, Maintenance, Quality Assurance members, and Safety and Security group representatives. The PCEP team also conducted a more in-depth Monthly Progress Review Meeting on February 23rd.

• The PCEP team continues to address system-wide interface issues involving the emerging EMU design and the existing wayside infrastructure, the Electrification Project, the CBOSS Project, and the CEMOF design upgrade.

• The PCEP team and Stadler participated in numerous coordination meetings regarding the EMU design to support Caltrain’s Operation and Maintenance objectives plus upcoming public outreach initiatives. Sample passenger seats, as well as interior, exterior, bicycle, toilet and wheel chair lift renderings and videos have been received and are being reviewed.

Activity Next Month

• PCEP team will review for approval several documents including the Quality Plan, the Master Project Schedule, the System Safety Plan and CDRL. PCEP team’s approval of the Master Program Schedule and Quality Plan are prerequisites for upcoming milestone payments to Stadler.

• Conceptual Design Reviews (CDRs) are to be conducted with Stadler for Train Control Networks, Monitoring and Diagnostics, Passenger Information System, Lighting, Positive Train Control (PTC)/CBOSS, and Train Interior appointments.

• An Interior Mockup for engineering review purposes is to be delivered to Caltrain in March.


Electric Multiple Units 4-2 February 28, 2017

4.1 Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility (CEMOF) Modifications

The CEMOF Modifications project will provide safe work areas for performing maintenance on the new EMUs.

Activity This Month

• The PCEP team advanced the conceptual design to consider alternatives for the modification of CEMOF. The alternatives continue to be reviewed with Caltrain Operations.

Activity Next Month

• Caltrain to decide on which alternative shall be pursued for 35% design development purposes.


Safety 5-1 February 28, 2017

5.0 SAFETY

Safety and Security requirements and plans are necessary to comply with applicable laws and regulations related to safety, security, and emergency response activities. Safety staff coordinates with contractors to review and plan the implementation of contract program safety requirements. Safety project coordination meetings continue to be conducted on a monthly basis to promote a clear understanding of project safety requirements as defined in contract provisions and program safety documents.

• Safety staff continued to review BBI and Stadler’s safety and security contract documentation deliverables to ensure they meet PCEP requirements. Safety staff has been facilitating meetings with BBI and Stadler to advance project safety and security program implementation.

• Field visits were conducted to work sites to ensure that the Site Specific Work Plan (SSWP) was being followed by BBI and their subcontractors.

• A Fire/Life Safety Committee meeting was held on February 9, 2017 for the PCEP project. Monthly meetings will be held as the project continues.

• BBI low-rail and hi-rail equipment were inspected in conjunction with representatives from Transit America Services, Inc. (TASI) Maintenance of Equipment. As specified in Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) regulations, all new equipment is to be inspected prior to being placed in service.

• The PCEP team met with the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) to discuss the 16th street crossing in compliance with environmental mitigation measures, which call for technical coordination with the PCEP and SFMTA regarding re-routing of the 22 electric trolley bus. Internal meetings were held to finalize the projects comments on the analysis.

Activity Next Month

• Monthly meeting for the Safety and Security Certification Review Committee (SSCRC) will be held.

• Monthly meeting for the Fire/Life Safety & Security Committee (FLSSC) will be held.

• A final meeting with SFMTA will be held to discuss 16th Street Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA).

• All staff safety meetings will be held with PCEP, BBI employees and subcontractors to reinforce the importance of safety in the field.

• Site visits to BBI subcontractor work areas for potholing operations are planned.


Quality Assurance 6-1 February 28, 2017

6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE

The Quality Assurance (QA) staff performs technical reviews for planning, implementing, evaluating, and maintaining an effective program to verify that all equipment, structures, components, systems, and facilities are designed, procured, constructed, installed, and maintained in accordance with established criteria and applicable codes and standards throughout the design, construction, startup and commissioning of the PCEP.

Activity This Month

• The audit of BBI’s design quality control and the OCS 65% design package remains open until the Design Quality Plan has been revised to include changes prompted by the audit findings.

• An audit of Parikh Geotechnical Labs has been closed. • QA review of Stadler’s BBI’s Quality Management Plan (QMP), which includes a

Design Quality Plan, was conducted with comments outstanding. • Staff meetings with BBI QA/Quality Control (QC) management representatives

continues bi-weekly. • QA staff submitted to PCEP Management a QA Resource Plan for 2017 and

beyond. • A Pre-award audit was conducted at Signet Testing Laboratories and the lab had

one finding.

Table 6-1 below provides details on the status of audits performed through the reporting period.

Table 6-1 Quality Assurance Audit Summary

Quality Assurance Activity This Reporting Period Total to Date

Internal Audits Conducted 0 16

External Audits Conducted 1 3

Audit Findings Issued 1 15

Audit Findings Open 3 3

Audit Findings Closed 5 12

Non-Conformances Open 1 0

Non-Conformances Issued 0 4

Non-Conformances Closed 0 4


Quality Assurance 6-2 February 28, 2017

Activity Next Month

• Three audits are planned and scheduled: BBI Document Control, Construction Testing Services, and PGH Wong Design Package for Traction Power System at 65%.

• QA review of Stadler’s QMP revision for EMU procurement.

• Regularly scheduled design reviews and surveillances will begin on project design packages and will continue through the late summer.


Schedule 7-1 February 28, 2017

7.0 SCHEDULE

The schedule provided in this Monthly Progress Report is the approved schedule from January 2017 due to the timeframe necessary to update and approve the schedule. As indicated in Table 7-1, the RSD, which is the date in which the project is deemed completed, remains unchanged in the MPS. Without adjustment for contingency, the RSD is forecast as August 2021. With the addition of approximately five months contingency to account for potential risk to the project, the RSD is anticipated as December 2021. A summary of the overall schedule status for the PCEP is provided in Table 7-1, which provides comparisons between the baseline schedule (Program Plan), the previous update (December 2016) and the current update (January 2017) to capture any potential changes in the schedule. A complete summary schedule can be found in Appendix B.

Items listed in Table 7-2 show the critical path activities/milestones for the PCEP. Table 7-3 lists near-critical activities on the horizon.

Notable Variances There were no notable variances this month.

Table 7-1 Schedule Status

Milestones1,2 Program Plan December January

Full Notice to Proceed to Electrification Contractor N/A 03/01/2017 03/01/2017

Full Notice to Proceed to EMU Manufacturer N/A 03/01/2017 03/01/2017

Start of Electrification Major Construction 03/20/2017 07/24/2017 07/24/2017

First Eight Miles of Electrification Complete to Begin Testing 04/08/2019 10/08/2019 10/08/2019

Delivery of First Vehicle 06/25/2019 07/30/2019 07/30/2019

Start Pre-Revenue Operations 09/08/2020 09/22/2020 09/22/2020

Potential Limited Service 12/31/2020 12/31/2020 12/31/2020

RSD (w/ Risk Contingency) 12/30/2021 12/30/2021 12/30/2021 Notes: 1 Milestones reported on this table may differ from the current schedule. As the schedule continues to be refined over the coming months to incorporate approved baseline schedules from the Electrification and EMU contractors, changes to milestones will be thoroughly vetted prior to reflecting those changes in the Monthly Report. 2 Program Plan only considered an NTP. It did not account for an LNTP and FNTP.


Schedule 7-2 February 28, 2017

Table 7-2 Critical Path Summary

Activity Start Finish

Electrification Design to Begin Major Construction 09/06/2016 07/21/2017

EMU Design to Delivery of First Carbody 09/06/2016 10/13/2017

Electrification OCS Construction 07/24/2017 02/26/2020

Electrification Acceptance & Integrated Testing 02/26/2020 04/25/2020 PG&E Complete Infrastructure Upgrades to Provide Permanent Power1

08/31/2020 08/31/2020

Vehicle Manufacturing & Assembly to Provide First Five Trainsets

11/13/2017 09/09/2020

Pre-Revenue Operations 09/22/2020 12/10/2020

Potential Limited Service1 12/31/2020 12/31/2020

RSD w/out Risk Contingency1 08/16/2021 08/16/2021

RSD w/ Risk Contingency1 12/30/2021 12/30/2021

Note: 1Milestone activity

Table 7-3 Near-Term, Near-Critical with Less Than Three Months of Float

WBS Activity Responsibility

FTA Path to FFGA Project Delivery

Utilities PG&E Supplemental Agreement #3 for Final Design Approval Project Delivery

Utilities PG&E Final Design Project Delivery

Utilities Overhead Utility Relocation Project Delivery


Budget and Expenditures 8-1 February 28, 2017

8.0 BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES

The summary of overall budget and expenditure status for the PCEP is shown in the following tables. Table 8-1 reflects the Electrification budget, Table 8-2 reflects the EMU budget, and Table 8-3 reflects the overall project budget.

Table 8-1 Electrification Budget & Expenditure Status

Description of Work Budget Cost This Month Cost To Date

Estimate To Complete


(A) (B)1 (C)2 (D) (E) = (C) + (D)

ELECTRIFICATION Electrification3 $ 696,610,558 $ 6,112,850 $ 69,603,350 $ 627,007,208 $ 696,610,558 Tunnel Notching $ 11,029,649 $ - $ - $ 11,029,649 $ 11,029,649 Real Estate $ 28,503,369 $ 139,550 $ 5,811,305 $ 22,692,064 $ 28,503,369 Private Utilities $ 63,515,298 $ 600,820 $ 4,252,572 $ 59,262,726 $ 63,515,298 Management Oversight4 $ 141,526,164 $ 913,225 $ 64,206,105 $ 77,320,058 $ 141,526,164 Executive Management $ 7,452,866 $ 96,720 $ 2,916,394 $ 4,536,472 $ 7,452,866 Planning $ 7,281,997 $ 70,737 $ 4,326,508 $ 2,955,489 $ 7,281,997 Community Relations $ 2,789,663 $ 17,520 $ 919,797 $ 1,869,866 $ 2,789,663 Safety & Security $ 2,421,783 $ 31,206 $ 529,617 $ 1,892,166 $ 2,421,783 Project Management Services $ 19,807,994 $ 159,451 $ 7,273,286 $ 12,534,708 $ 19,807,994 Engineering & Construction $ 11,805,793 $ 39,970 $ 1,921,558 $ 9,884,236 $ 11,805,793 Electrification Engineering &

Management $ 50,461,707 $ 330,553 $ 15,895,123 $ 34,566,585 $ 50,461,707 IT Support $ 331,987 $ - $ 331,987 $ 0 $ 331,987 Operations Support $ 1,445,867 $ 10,973 $ 393,816 $ 1,052,051 $ 1,445,867 General Support $ 4,166,577 $ 50,411 $ 1,350,670 $ 2,815,908 $ 4,166,577 Budget / Grants / Finance $ 1,229,345 $ 24,229 $ 255,486 $ 973,858 $ 1,229,345 Legal $ 2,445,646 $ 25,763 $ 2,068,553 $ 377,094 $ 2,445,646 Other Direct Costs $ 5,177,060 $ 55,692 $ 1,689,953 $ 3,487,106 $ 5,177,060

Prior Costs 2002 - 2013 $ 24,707,878 $ - $ 24,333,358 $ 374,520 $ 24,707,878 TASI Support $ 55,275,084 $ 346,721 $ 1,453,391 $ 53,821,693 $ 55,275,084 Insurance $ 4,305,769 $ - $ 1,155,769 $ 3,150,000 $ 4,305,769 Environmental Mitigations $ 14,972,645 $ - $ 472,000 $ 14,500,645 $ 14,972,645 Required Projects $ 17,337,378 $ - $ 367,028.00 $ 16,970,350 $ 17,337,378 Maintenance Training $ 1,021,808 $ - $ - $ 1,021,808 $ 1,021,808 Finance Charges $ 5,056,838 $ 66,022 $ 163,253 $ 4,893,585 $ 5,056,838 Contingency $ 276,970,649 $ - $ - $ 276,970,649 $ 276,970,649 Owner's Reserve $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ELECTRIFICATION SUBTOTAL $ 1,316,125,208 $ 8,179,189 $ 147,484,773 $ 1,168,640,435 $ 1,316,125,208 Notes regarding tables above:

1. Column B "Cost This Month" represents the cost of work performed this month. 2. Column C "Cost To Date" includes actuals (amount paid) and accruals (amount of work performed) to date. 3. Cost To Date for “Electrification” include 5% for Contractor’s retention until authorization of retention release. 4. The agency labor is actual through December 2016 and accrued from January 2017 to current reporting period.


Budget and Expenditures 8-2 February 28, 2017

Table 8-2 EMU Budget & Expenditure Status

Description of Work Budget Cost This Month Cost To Date Estimate To

Complete Estimate At Completion

(A) (B)1 (C)2 (D) (E) = (C) + (D) EMU $ 550,899,459 $ - $ 1,242,300 $ 549,657,159 $ 550,899,459 CEMOF Modifications $ 1,344,000 $ - $ - $ 1,344,000 $ 1,344,000 Management Oversight3 $ 64,139,103 $ 765,720 $ 18,087,425 $ 46,051,679 $ 64,139,103 Executive Management $ 5,022,302 $ 63,236 $ 1,634,584 $ 3,387,718 $ 5,022,302 Community Relations $ 1,685,614 $ 16,042 $ 308,251 $ 1,377,363 $ 1,685,614 Safety & Security $ 556,067 $ 7,078 $ 162,947 $ 393,121 $ 556,067 Project Management Services $ 13,275,280 $ 95,813 $ 4,887,362 $ 8,387,919 $ 13,275,280 Engineering & Construction $ 89,113 $ - $ 23,817 $ 65,296 $ 89,113 EMU Engineering & Management $ 32,082,556 $ 483,426 $ 8,000,291 $ 24,082,265 $ 32,082,556 IT Support $ 1,027,272 $ 15,383 $ 240,664 $ 786,608 $ 1,027,272 Operations Support $ 1,878,589 $ 2,285 $ 298,097 $ 1,580,491 $ 1,878,589 General Support $ 2,599,547 $ 21,513 $ 648,817 $ 1,950,730 $ 2,599,547 Budget / Grants / Finance $ 712,123 $ 11,072 $ 136,480 $ 575,644 $ 712,123 Legal $ 1,207,500 $ 16,199 $ 705,595 $ 501,905 $ 1,207,500 Other Direct Costs $ 4,003,139 $ 33,673 $ 1,040,521 $ 2,962,618 $ 4,003,139 TASI Support $ 2,740,000 $ - $ - $ 2,740,000 $ 2,740,000 Required Projects $ 4,500,000 $ - $ - $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Finance Charges $ 1,941,800 $ 40,465 $ 70,787 $ 1,871,013 $ 1,941,800 Contingency $ 38,562,962 $ - $ - $ 38,562,962 $ 38,562,962 Owner's Reserve $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

EMU SUBTOTAL3 $ 664,127,325 $ 806,185 $ 19,400,512 $ 644,726,813 $ 664,127,325 Notes regarding tables above:

1. Column B "Cost This Month" represents the cost of work performed this month. 2. Column C "Cost To Date" includes actuals (amount paid) and accruals (amount of work performed) to date. 3. The agency labor is actual through December 2016 and accrued for January 2017 to current reporting period.

Table 8-3 PCEP Budget & Expenditure Status

Description of Work Budget Cost This Month Cost To Date Estimate To Complete


(A) (B)1 (C)2 (D) (E) = (C) + (D) Electrification Subtotal $ 1,316,125,208 $ 8,179,189 $ 147,484,773 $ 1,168,640,435 $ 1,316,125,208 EMU Subtotal $ 664,127,325 $ 806,185 $ 19,400,512 $ 644,726,813 $ 664,127,325 PCEP TOTAL $ 1,980,252,533 $ 8,985,374 $ 166,885,285 $ 1,813,367,248 $ 1,980,252,533

Notes regarding tables above: 1. Column B "Cost This Month" represents the cost of work performed this month. 2. Column C "Cost To Date" includes actuals (amount paid) and accruals (amount of work performed) to date.


Funding 9-1 February 28, 2017

9.0 FUNDING

Figure 9-1 depicts a summary of the funding plan for the PCEP. It provides a breakdown of the funding partners as well as the allocated funds. As previously reported, all non-core capacity funds have been committed to the PCEP project. In February, the FTA informed the JPB it would be deferring execution of the FFGA until the Administration developed the President’s FY2018 Budget.

Figure 9-1 Funding Plan


Risk Management 10-1 February 28, 2017

10.0 RISK MANAGEMENT

The risk management process is conducted in an iterative fashion throughout the life of the project. During this process, new risks are identified, other risks are resolved or managed, and potential impacts and severity modified based on the current situation. The Risk Management team’s progress report includes a summary on the effectiveness of the Risk Management Plan, any unanticipated effects, and any correction needed to handle the risk appropriately.

Risks are evaluated periodically and updated when needed. The Risk Management team has identified the following items as top risks for the project:

• Delay in execution of FFGA would cause a delay in issuing full NTP.

• Relocation of overhead utilities must precede installation of catenary wire and connections to TPSs. Relocation work will be performed by others and may not be completed to meet the DB contractor’s construction schedule.

• Upgrades to the PG&E power stations for permanent power may not be designed and constructed in time for initiation of limited revenue service.

• As-built drawings furnished to DB contractor could be incomplete thus affecting final design.

• Proposal to run a new duct bank from Caltrain ROW to the proposed TPS1 site that runs under UPRR rails would require additional coordination with UPRR, which may cause delays to the installation.

• TASI ability to deliver sufficient resources to support construction and testing for the electrification contract may cause delays to construction schedule.

• Delays to the CBOSS Project could affect testing activities.

• Relocation of underground utilities must precede construction of catenary pole foundations and may not be completed on time to meet the DB Contractor’s construction schedule.

Activity This Month

• Updates were made to risk descriptions, effects, and mitigations based upon weekly input from risk owners. Monthly cycle of risk updating was completed based on schedules established in the Risk Identification and Mitigation Plan.

• Risk retirement dates were updated based upon revisions to the project schedule and input from risk owners.

• Continued weekly monitoring of risk mitigation actions and publishing of the risk register.



• The PCEP Risk Management Team attended Electrification, Project Delivery, and Systems Integration meetings to monitor developments associated with risks and to identify new risks.

• The Risk Assessment Committee convened to review risks proposed for retirement and major changes to grading of risks. Grading and descriptions of two risks were revised. Two potential new risks were referred for further development, mitigation, and grading. Continued discussion of reputational risk as a potential adjunct to current risk management efforts.

Tables 10-1 and 10-2 show the risks identified for the program. Risks are categorized as: top risk, upcoming risk, long lead, and all other risks. The categories are based on a rating scale composed of schedule and cost factors. Simply put, top risks are considered to have a significantly higher than average risk grade. Upcoming risks are risks for which mitigating action must be taken within 60 days. Long-lead risks are risks for which mitigating action must be taken as much as a year or more into the future. All other risks are risks not falling into other categories.

Table 10-1 Monthly Status of Risks

Total Number of Active Risks = 104



Table 10-2 Risk Classification

Total Number of Active Risks = 104

Activity Next Month

• Update risk descriptions, effects, mitigations and retirement dates.

• Conduct weekly monitoring of risk mitigation actions and continue publishing risk register.

• Further develop reputational risk analysis and submit recommendation.


Environmental 11-1 February 28, 2017

11.0 ENVIRONMENTAL

11.1 Permits

The PCEP requires environmental permits from the following agencies/federal regulations: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the San Francisco Bay Conservation Development Commission (SFBCDC).

Section 106 of the NHPA process as well as Section 7 of the ESA process have concluded.

Activity This Month

• All environmental permits have been obtained.

Activity Next Month

• There are no planned permit activities in the next month.

11.2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency establish a program to monitor and report on mitigation measures that it has adopted as part of the environmental review process. The PCEP team has prepared a MMRP to ensure that mitigation measures identified in the PCEP Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are fully implemented during project implementation. PCEP will implement the mitigation measures through its own actions, those of the DB contractor and actions taken in cooperation with other agencies and entities. The MMRP is available on the Caltrain website:

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Electrification+Documents/MMRP.pdf (Note: For viewers accessing the link above electronically, please cut and paste the link into a browser if it does not direct you immediately to the document.)

Activity This Month

• Biological, archaeological, and Native American monitors continued to be present during design phase investigation activities (geotechnical and potholing activities) occurring in areas that require environmental compliance monitoring. The monitoring was conducted in accordance with measures in the MMRP in an effort to minimize potential impact on sensitive environmental resources.

• Protocol-level surveys for a sensitive avian species continue at previously identified potential habitat locations and inspections of over-passes and bridges

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Electrification+Documents/MMRP.pdf

http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Electrification+Documents/MMRP.pdf


Environmental 11-2 February 28, 2017

initiated in order to determine the potential for nesting swallows were completed, and surveys for nesting birds ahead of design phase activities were initiated (nesting bird season is February 1st through August 31st).

• An architectural historian continued to take photos and document site conditions at a number of historic railroad stations in support of historic documentation required as part of the MMRP.

Activity Next Month

• Biological, archaeological, and Native American monitors will continue to monitor design phase investigation activities (geotechnical and potholing activities) occurring in areas that require environmental compliance monitoring. Biological surveyors will continue surveys for nesting birds ahead of design phase investigation activities occurring during the nesting bird season (February 1st through August 31st) and will continue to conduct protocol level surveys for sensitive avian species.


Utility Relocation 12-1 February 28, 2017

12.0 UTILITY RELOCATION

Implementation of the PCEP requires relocation or rerouting of both public and private utility lines and/or facilities. Utility relocation will require coordination with many entities, including regulatory agencies, public safety agencies, federal, state, and local government agencies, private and public utilities, and other transportation agencies and companies. This section describes the progress specific to the utility relocation process.

Activity This Month

• PCEP team continued monthly coordination meetings with telecommunication and power utilities. These meetings focused on overall project and relocation schedules, designation of responsibilities, applicable design standards, and reconciliation of agreements and records.

• Work continued with all utilities on review of overhead utility line relocations based on the current preliminary design. This effort is expected to continue for the next several months to support identification and confirmation, agreements, and design of all relocations.

• PCEP team sent relocation notices and requested design information to PG&E as a part of the relocation process.

• PCEP team continued to work with Verizon on the relocation of fiber optics cable within the Caltrain ROW.

Activity Next Month

• Monthly meetings will continue with telecom and power carriers.

• PCEP team will continue to send relocation notices to utility owners and will also continue to provide design information for relocation designs.

• PCEP team will continue to work with utility owners to update the relocation schedule.


Real Estate 13-1 February 28, 2017

13.0 REAL ESTATE

The PCEP requires the acquisition of a limited amount of real estate. In general, Caltrain uses existing rights-of-way (ROW) for the PCEP, but in certain locations, will need to acquire small portions of additional real estate to expand the ROW to accommodate installation of OCS supports (fee acquisitions or railroad easements ) and associated Electrical Safely Zones (easements). There are two larger full acquisition areas required for wayside facilitates (i.e., traction power stations, switching stations and paralleling stations). The PCEP real estate team (RE team) manages the acquisition of all property rights. Caltrain does not need to acquire real estate to complete the EMU procurement portion of the PCEP.

Activity This Month

Table 13-1 below provides a brief summary of the Real Estate acquisition overview for the project.

• The RE team continues negotiations on offers pending, including working through relocation of two commercial businesses.

• The agency continues to negotiate the cooperative agreement for eminent domain authority with the City & County of San Francisco. The target for completion is May 2017.

• Three appraisals were updated and offers will be made in April.

Activity Next Month

• Negotiations for all outstanding offers will continue.

• The PCEP team issued work directives to appraise and acquire parcels in Segments 1 and 3 and appraisals commenced.

• It is anticipated that properties will close escrow for grantors who have accepted the offers.

Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Monthly Progress Report

Real Estate 13-2 February 28, 2017

Table 13-1 Real Estate Acquisition Overview

Segment No. of

Parcels Needed*

No. of Appraisals Completed

Offers Presented

Offers Accepted

Acquisition Status

Escrow Closed

Value Litigation

Parcel Possession

Segment 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0

Segment 2 27 24 21 5 1 0 0

Segment 3 11 0 0 0 0 0 0

Segment 4 10 10 9 0 0 0 0

Total 56 34 30 5 1 0 0 Note: During design development, the real estate requirements may adjust to accommodate design refinements. Parcel requirements will adjust accordingly. The table in this report reflects the current property needs for the Project.


Third Party Agreements 14-1 February 28, 2017

14.0 THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS

Third-party coordination is necessary for work impacting public infrastructure, utilities, ROW acquisitions, and others. The table below outlines the status of necessary agreements for the PCEP.

Table 14-1 Third-Party Agreement Status

Type Agreement Third-Party Status

Governmental Jurisdictions

Construction & Maintenance1

City & County of San Francisco In Process City of Brisbane Executed City of South San Francisco Executed City of San Bruno Executed City of Millbrae Executed City of Burlingame Executed City of San Mateo Executed City of Belmont Executed City of San Carlos Executed City of Redwood City Executed City of Atherton In Process County of San Mateo Executed City of Menlo Park Executed City of Palo Alto In Process City of Mountain View Executed City of Sunnyvale Executed City of Santa Clara Executed County of Santa Clara Executed City of San Jose Executed

Condemnation Authority San Francisco In Process San Mateo Executed Santa Clara Executed

Utilities Infrastructure Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) Executed

3

Operating Rules California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Executed2

Transportation & Railroad

Construction & Maintenance Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Executed4 Construction & Maintenance California Dept. of Transportation (Caltrans) Not needed5

Trackage Rights Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Executed4

Notes regarding table above: 1. Agreements memorialize the parties’ consultation and cooperation, designate respective rights and obligations

and ensure cooperation between the JPB and the cities and counties in connection with the design and construction of the PCEP. A comprehensive agreement is planned for each of the 17 cities and three counties along the Caltrain ROW and within the PCEP limits.

2. Approved by City Council, or Board of Supervisors, and awaiting signature for execution. 3. The Master agreement and supplemental agreements 1, 2 and 5 have been executed. Supplemental agreements

3 and 4 are to be negotiated and executed. 4. Utilizing existing agreements. 5. Caltrans Peer Process utilized. Formal agreement not needed.


Government and Community Affairs 15-1 February 28, 2017

15.0 GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

The Community Relations and Outreach team coordinates all issues with all jurisdictions, partner agencies, government organizations, businesses, labor organizations, local agencies, residents, community members, other interested parties, and the media. In addition, the team oversees the DB contractor’s effectiveness in implementing its Public Involvement Program. The following PCEP related external affairs meetings took place in February:

• Presentations/Meetings

– Caltrain Accessibility Advisory Committee – City/County Staff Coordinating Group – JPB Citizen Advisory Committee – JPB Bicycle Advisory Committee – SFCTA Citizen Advisory Committee – Local Policy Maker Group – SMCTA Citizen Advisory Committee

• Third Party/Stakeholder Actions

No actions to report this month.


DBE Participation 16-1 February 28, 2017

16.0 DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PARTICIPATION AND LABOR STATISTICS

DBE and labor statistics will be reported after construction has commenced.


Procurement 17-1 February 28, 2017

17.0 PROCUREMENT

Contract Activity

• Issued letters to BBI for the DB Electrification Project and Stadler US for the Bi-Level EMU Vehicles to extend the LNTP to June 30, 2017. Once negotiations are completed regarding the LNTP extensions, each firm will be issued a contract amendment.

Invitation for Bid (IFB)/Request for Qualifications (RFQ)/ Request for Proposals (RFP) Advertised this Month:

• RFQ issued for On-Call Ambassador Support Services for six-month term.

IFB/RFQ/RFP Received this Month:

• No IFB/RFQ/RFPs were received for February.

Contract Awards this Month:

• No contract awards were made for February.

Work Directive (WD)/Purchase Order (PO) Awards & Amendments this Month:

• Multiple WDs & POs were issued to support the program needs for February.

Upcoming IFB/RFQ/RFP:

• RFP - SCADA system to support CalMod. (Issue in early April)

• RFP - On-Call Ambassador Support Services. (Issue in Mid-April)

• RFP - On-Call Quality Assurance Independent Testing Laboratory (Late April)

Upcoming Contract Awards:

• No upcoming contract awards.


Timeline 18-1 February 28, 2017

18.0 TIMELINE OF MAJOR PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Below is a timeline showing major project accomplishments from 2002 to 2017:

Date Milestone 2002 Conceptual Design Completed

2004 Draft NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA)/Environmental Impact

Report (EIR) (2004)

2008 35% design complete

2009 Final NEPA EA/EIR and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)

2014 Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Electrification Request for Information for EMU

2015 JPB Approves Final CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) JPB Approves Issuance of RFP for Electrification JPB Approves Issuance of RFP for EMU

Receipt of Electrification of Proposal for Electrification FTA approval of Core Capacity Project Development

2016 JPB Approves EIR Addendum #1: PS-7 FTA Re-Evaluation of 2009 FONSI Receipt of Electrification BAFOs Receipt of EMU Proposal Application for Entry to Engineering to FTA Completed the EMU Buy America Pre-Award Audit and Certification Negotiations completed with Stadler for EMU Vehicles Negotiations completed with BBI, the apparent best-value Electrification

firm JPB Approves Contract Award (LNTP) BBI JPB Approves Contract Award (LNTP) Stadler

FTA approval of Entry into Engineering for the Core Capacity Program

2017 FTA finalized the FFGA for $647 million in Core Capacity funding


Appendices February 28, 2017

APPENDICES


Appendix A February 28, 2017

Appendix A – Acronyms


Acronyms A-1 February 28, 2017

AIM Advanced Information

Management

ARINC Aeronautical Radio, Inc.

BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District

BBI Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc.

CAISO California Independent System Operator

CalMod Caltrain Modernization Program

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CBOSS Communication Based Overlay Signal System

CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife

CDR Conceptual Design Review

CDRL Contract Deliverables Request List

CEMOF Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act (State)

CHSRA California High-Speed Rail Authority

CIP Capital Improvement Plan

CPT Cone Penetrometer Test

CPUC California Public Utilities Commission

DB Design-Build

DBB Design-Bid-Build

DBE Disadvantaged Business Enterprise

DEMP Design, Engineering, and Management Planning

EA Environmental Assessment

EAC Estimate at Completion

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EMU Electric Multiple Unit

ESA Endangered Species Act

ESA Environmental Site Assessments

FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report

FFGA Full Funding Grant Agreement

FLSSC Fire/Life Safety & Security Committee

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

FRA Federal Railroad Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GO General Order

HSR High Speed Rail

ICD Interface Control Document

IFB Invitation for Bid

ITS Intelligent Transportation System

JPB Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board



LNTP Limited Notice to Proceed

MMRP Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MPS Master Program Schedule

NCR Non Conformance Report

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act (Federal)

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

NTP Notice to Proceed

OCS Overhead Contact System

PCEP Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project

PCJPB Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric

PHA Preliminary Hazard Analysis

PMOC Project Management Oversight Contractor

PO Purchase Order

PS Paralleling Station

PTC Positive Train Control

QA Quality Assurance

QC Quality Control

QMP Quality Management Plan

QMS Quality Management System

RAMP Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan

RE Real Estate

RFI Request for Information

RFP Request for Proposals

RFQ Request for Qualifications

ROCS Rail Operations Center System

ROW Right-of-Way

RRP Railroad Protective Liability

RSD Revenue Service Date

RWP Roadway Worker Protection

SAMCEDA San Mateo County Economic Development Association

SamTrans San Mateo County Transit District

SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

SCC Standard Cost Code

SPUR San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association

SFBCDC San Francisco Bay Conservation Development Commission

SFCTA San Francisco County Transportation Authority

SFMTA San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

SFRWQCB San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board



SOGR State of Good Repair

SS Switching Station

SSCP Safety and Security Certification Plan

SSCRC Safety & Security Certification Review Committee

SSMP Safety and Security Management Plan

SSWP Site Specific Work Plan

TASI Transit America Services Inc.

TBD To Be Determined

TPS Traction Power Substation

TVA Threat and Vulnerability Assessment

UPRR Union Pacific Railroad

USACE United States Army Corp of Engineers

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

VTA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

WD Work Directive


Schedule February 28, 2017

Appendix B – Schedule

# Activity Name Duration Start Finish

1 MASTER CPM SCHEDULE C15.07 2001d 05/01/14 A 12/30/21

2 MILESTONES 2001d 05/01/14 A 12/30/21

3 PLANNING / APPROVALS PHASE 929d 05/01/14 A 11/22/17

4 ENVIRONMENTAL 466d 05/01/14 A 02/11/16 A

5 DESIGN/BUILDER PROCUREMENT 596d 05/01/14 A 09/02/16 A

6 AGENCY COORDINATION / APPROVALS 635d 10/01/14 A 03/31/17

7 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 466d 04/16/15 A 02/15/17

8 JURISDICTIONAL AGREEMENTS 635d 10/01/14 A 03/31/17

9 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 515d 11/03/14 A 11/10/16 A

10 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 612d 11/03/14 A 03/31/17

11 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 322d 02/02/15 A 05/05/16 A

12 BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT 221d 06/18/15 A 04/29/16 A

13 SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 242d 06/18/15 A 05/31/16 A

14 LABOR AGREEMENT 128d 01/02/15 A 07/02/15 A

15 UTILITIES 486d 04/01/15 A 02/28/17

16 PERMITS 468d 12/01/14 A 09/30/16 A

17 RIGHT-OF-WAY 732d 02/02/15 A 11/22/17

18 SCADA 526d 03/30/15 A 04/21/17

19 DESIGN / ENGINEERING PHASE 960d 10/01/14 A 07/12/18

20 PG&E INFRASTRUCTURE 346d 03/03/17 07/12/18

21 TUNNEL MODIFICATION 845d 10/31/14 A 03/01/18

22 CEMOF 804d 10/01/14 A 11/30/17

23 VEHICLES PHASE 1902d 05/01/14 A 08/13/21

24 SPECIFICATION 134d 07/01/14 A 01/12/15 A

25 PROCUREMENT 613d 05/01/14 A 09/06/16 A

26 DETAILED DESIGN (STADLER) 364d 09/06/16 A 02/12/18

27 PROCUREMENT (MATERIAL & EQUIPMENT) (STADLER) 416d 01/09/17 A 08/24/18

28 MOCK-UPS (STADLER) 202d 12/15/16 A 09/29/17

29 ELECTRIC LOCO 834d 03/01/17 06/10/20

30 MANUFACTURING, TESTING, & TAKE OVER (STADLER) 953d 11/13/17 08/13/21

31 CONSTRUCTION / INSTALLATION PHASE 853d 04/21/17 08/31/20

32 PG&E INFRASTRUCTURE 699d 12/01/17 08/31/20

33 TUNNEL MODIFICATION 313d 03/02/18 05/24/19

34 SCADA 764d 04/21/17 04/24/20

35 CEMOF 109d 12/01/17 05/04/18

36 TESTING / STARTUP PHASE 426d 04/27/20 12/30/21

37 PRE-REVENUE OPERATIONS 236d 09/10/20 08/13/21

38 REVENUE OPERATIONS 172d 12/11/20 08/16/21

39 RISK CONTINGENCY 426d 04/27/20 12/30/21

40 OPERATIONAL READINESS PHASE 791d 06/28/17 08/07/20

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 32014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

MASTER CPM SCHEDULE C15.07... Data Date: 02/01/17 _PCEP C15.07 Summary FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY 02/28/17 12:55

Prog Plan (C14.02)

Last Months Update

Progress

Remaining

Near Critical

Critical

Start Milestone

Finish Milestone

Prog Plan (C14.02)

Last Months Update

Critical Milestone

Risk Contingency

Page 1 of 2

Filename: _C15.07 022217...

Date Revision Checked Approved02/22/2017 Updates & Revisions Completed By A. Christofas & S. Iyer02/23/2017 Checked By S. Iyer & A. Christofas x02/27/2017 Approved By R. Viswanathan x

# Activity Name Duration Start Finish

41 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE STAFFING 543d 06/28/17 08/16/19

42 NON-REVENUE EQUIPMENT 258d 08/05/19 08/07/20

43 SPARES 258d 08/05/19 08/07/20

44 OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE TRAINING 255d 06/28/17 06/28/18

45 LOCAL AGENCY TRAINING 64d 03/22/18 06/20/18

46 ELECTRIFICATION SCHEDULE (BB) 020117 1606d 09/06/16 A 10/13/20

47 General 1606d 09/06/16 A 10/13/20

48 General 1551d 09/06/16 A 08/23/20

49 Communication 69d 11/22/16 A 02/28/17

50 Sitework 91d 09/07/16 A 12/23/16 A

51 Civil 129d 10/03/16 A 04/03/17

52 Traction Power 45d 12/19/16 A 02/17/17

53 Rail Signal & Comm System 1126d 11/22/16 A 10/08/19

54 Testing & Start-up 639d 02/25/19 10/13/20

55 Deleted Activities 530d 02/01/17 06/11/18

56 Design 1359d 09/06/16 A 02/25/20

57 All Work Areas 1359d 09/06/16 A 02/25/20

58 Segments 2 WA 5 370d 09/07/16 A 08/17/17

59 Segment 2 WA 4 & 5 213d 04/21/17 11/05/17

60 Segment 2 WA 4 430d 09/07/16 A 10/12/17

61 Segment 2 & 4 460d 09/07/16 A 11/10/17

62 Segment 4 654d 09/12/16 A 05/14/18

63 Segment 2 559d 09/07/16 A 02/10/18

64 Segment 2 Wa's 1, 2, & 3- 475d 10/12/16 A 12/28/17

65 Segment 1 & 3 828d 09/19/16 A 10/30/18

66 Segment 1 737d 02/01/17 12/20/18

67 Segment 3 893d 01/17/17 A 04/29/19

68 Submittals 166d 09/06/16 A 02/07/17

69 Procurement 654d 01/30/17 A 10/01/18

70 All Work Areas 268d 01/30/17 A 02/16/18

71 Segment 4 192d 07/25/17 01/20/18

72 Segment 2 174d 06/21/17 11/29/17

73 Segment 1 451d 08/07/17 10/01/18

74 Segment 3 372d 08/07/17 07/19/18

75 Permits 498d 02/01/17 01/18/19

76 Construction / Installation 1298d 11/02/16 A 02/26/20

77 Segment 4 971d 02/13/17 08/09/19

78 Segment 2 974d 11/02/16 A 04/29/19

79 Segment 1 1150d 03/16/17 02/24/20

80 Segment 3 1153d 03/17/17 02/26/20

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 32014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

MASTER CPM SCHEDULE C15.07... Data Date: 02/01/17 _PCEP C15.07 Summary FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY 02/28/17 12:55

Prog Plan (C14.02)

Last Months Update

Progress

Remaining

Near Critical

Critical

Start Milestone

Finish Milestone

Prog Plan (C14.02)

Last Months Update

Critical Milestone

Risk Contingency

Page 2 of 2

Filename: _C15.07 022217...

Date Revision Checked Approved02/22/2017 Updates & Revisions Completed By A. Christofas & S. Iyer02/23/2017 Checked By S. Iyer & A. Christofas x02/27/2017 Approved By R. Viswanathan x

of 2

AGENDA ITEM # 10

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Mark Simon

Chief of Staff

SUBJECT: CALTRAIN BUSINESS PLAN

ACTION

This report is for information only. No Board action is required.

SIGNIFICANCE

At the April Board meeting, Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) staff will make

an informational presentation to seek feedback on the proposed work program for the

development of a Caltrain Business Plan.

The Caltrain Business Plan will be an implementing document for the Caltrain Strategic

Plan (2014) that also builds upon the 10-year, fiscally constrained capital and operating

plans included in the forthcoming Caltrain Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). When

completed, the Business Plan will:

• Provide a framework for addressing the expanding demands for traffic

congestion relief in the region and begin to define the potential role for Caltrain

in addressing that significant issue

• Develop a framework for addressing JPB’s ongoing and unsustainable operating

and capital funding, including a range of near-term and long-term options for

further consideration

• Outline the potential range of improved Caltrain services that are enabled by

the system’s electrification and articulate the benefits and costs associated with

each

• Identify supplemental capital projects needed to fully modernize the railroad

and realize the full benefit of the public’s investment in electrification

• Develop cost, revenue and funding targets that support improved Caltrain

services and ensure the agency’s ongoing financial stability

• Define opportunities for the long-term expansion of the Caltrain system and

develop a consistent business framework for ongoing coordination with regional

and State projects

• Develop a long-range, unconstrained vision for Caltrain and define the capital

and operating needs necessary to achieve that vision

of 2

Critically, the Business Plan will also form the basis for the JPB’s participation in potential

local, regional and state funding initiatives contemplated in the 2018 timeframe.

BUDGET IMPACT

There is no impact on the budget.

BACKGROUND

The Board adopted Caltrain’s Strategic Plan in 2014, setting a vision for the agency to

provide a safe, reliable, sustainable modern rail system that meets the growing mobility

needs of the San Francisco Bay Area region. Within this broad vision, the plan

elaborates a range of focus areas, goals and objectives that provide guidance around

critical policy and business choices.

Since the plan’s adoption, the JPB has significantly advanced its Modernization

Program. The agency has environmentally cleared the Peninsula Corridor Electrification

Project (PCEP) at both the State and Federal levels and has issued limited notice to

proceed contracts for the construction of both the electrified infrastructure and electric

multiple unit trains. During this time the agency has also adopted a SRTP providing a

baseline, 10-year projection of one way that Caltrain’s service and capital plans could

evolve in the context of an electrified system.

As the PCEP moves into construction, the JPB has the opportunity to refocus its business

model and ensure that it is taking full advantage of the public’s investment in an

electrified system. This means evaluating a range of options for improving and

expanding rail services and better understanding their benefits and costs to Caltrain’s

customers and the region. The JPB also needs to identify additional capital investments

that may be needed to supplement and complement electrification to truly enhance

and modernize the entire railroad.

Planning for Caltrain’s business success also means achieving financial stability by

aligning the railroad’s costs and service delivery with available revenue streams.

Lacking a dedicated funding source beyond fare box revenues, Caltrain has struggled

with its annual budgets. The lack of a dedicated funding source has the potential to

undermine Caltrain’s ability to maintain the system and sustain levels of service that

meet the needs of the region. Caltrain’s Business Plan will seek to identify new revenue

streams and funding sources and will establish framework for controlling costs and

ensuring long term financial stability for the railroad and its funding partners.

Prepared by: Sebastian Petty, Senior Policy Advisor 650.622.7831

of 2

AGENDA ITEM # 11

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Michelle Bouchard

Chief Operating Officer, Rail

SUBJECT: CALTRAIN SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN – DRAFT ELEMENTS

ACTION


SIGNIFICANCE

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) requires San Francisco Bay Area

transit districts periodically to prepare and submit Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP)

describing their systems and policies and identifying 10-year operating and capital

plans. Caltrain’s most recent SRTP was adopted in 2015 and covers fiscal years 2015-

2024.

Throughout 2016, Caltrain staff has worked to develop an updated SRTP covering fiscal

years 2017-2026. The development of the updated SRTP has been conducted in

accordance with MTC’s published guidelines and has been coordinated with financial

capacity work undertaken as part of Caltrain’s participation in the Federal Transit

Administration’s (FTA) Core Capacity Grant Program.

At its December 2016 meeting the Board directed staff that this SRTP be financially

constrained to ensure consistency with financial plan documents submitted to FTA and

to demonstrate Caltrain’s commitment to maintaining its assets in a State of Good

Repair.

At the April meeting staff will present an overview of key elements in Caltrain’s

forthcoming SRTP including highlights of the proposed FY2017-2026 operating and

capital improvement plans.

Following the April Board meeting, staff will complete and submit a draft SRTP

document to MTC for review and confirmation of conformance with MTC’s guidelines.

This draft will also be provided to the Board and will be posted on Caltrain’s website.

Based on the timing and outcome of MTC’s review, staff anticipates returning to the

Board in the spring of 2017 with a final draft SRTP and to ask the Board to consider

adoption at that time.

of 2

BUDGET IMPACT


BACKGROUND

Prior to 2010, MTC required Bay Area transit operators to prepare full SRTPs every four

years and shorter, “mini” SRTPS annually. Caltrain last completed a “full” SRTP in 2008

and completed a “mini” SRTP in 2009. In 2010, MTC initiated the Transit Sustainability

Project (TSP) and temporarily suspended the requirement that operators produce SRTPs.

In the fall of 2013, following completion of the TSP, MTC renewed its requirement that

the largest seven transit agencies in the Bay Area (Alameda Contra-Costa Transit, Bay

Area Rapid Transit, Caltrain, Golden Gate Transit, San Francisco Municipal

Transportation Authority, SamTrans, and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority)

complete and submit SRTPs. The Board adopted Caltrain’s current SRTP in 2015 and staff

began work on an update to the SRTP in 2016.

The Caltrain SRTP serves as a midterm planning document that is used by MTC to inform

the development of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Transportation

Improvement Plan (TIP), which fulfills key regulatory requirements of the FTA. In addition

to fulfilling a regional planning function, the SRTP provides Caltrain with a venue to

concisely describe its existing system and policies as well as its future operating and

capital plans for the next 10 years.

Prepared by: Sebastian Petty, Senior Policy Advisor 650.622.7831

of 6

AGENDA ITEM # 12

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Michelle Bouchard

Chief Operating Officer, Rail

SUBJECT: KEY CALTRAIN PERFORMANCE STATISTICS FEBRUARY 2017

In February 2017, Caltrain’s average weekday ridership (AWR) decreased 3.7 percent

to 57,618 from February 2016 AWR of 59,831. The total number of passengers who rode

Caltrain in February 2017 also decreased 7.5 percent to 1,392,561 from 1,506,185 in

February 2016. Ridership was unusually high in February 2016 due to Super Bowl 50

events and festivities which carried 66,582 extra riders along the Caltrain corridor.

Without Super Bowl 50 ridership, February 2016 AWR reduces to 56,974 and

February 2017 AWR increases by 1.1 percent. In addition, inclement weather this winter

attributed to the decrease in ridership for February 2017. This is California’s wettest year

on record. Local rain fall precipitation in February 2017 increased 734 percent to

7.09 inches from 0.85 inches in February 2016. Staff continues to monitor ticket types

sold to identify other potential trends. This month, with the exception of Eligible Discount

(ED) – Monthly ticket sales are up 4.0 percent, all other ticket types sold decreased from

February 2016. Farebox revenue decreased 2 percent from February 2016.

On-time performance (OTP) for February 2017 was 93.8 percent, compared to

90.5 percent OTP for February 2016. Taking into account trains arriving within 10 minutes

of the scheduled arrival time, OTP rises to 96.1 percent. In February 2017 there were 792

minutes of delay due to mechanical issues compared to 1,661 minutes in February 2016.

On customer service statistics, there were 8.0 complaints per 100,000 passengers in

February 2017 which decreased from 9.7 in February 2016.

Shuttle ridership for February 2017 is down 2.2 percent from February 2016. For the

station shuttles, the Millbrae-Broadway shuttle averaged 199 daily riders. The Belmont-

Hillsdale shuttle averaged 43 daily riders. The weekend Tamien-San Jose shuttle

averaged 50 daily riders. When the Marguerite shuttle was removed, the impact to

ridership was a decrease of 10.8 percent.

of 6

Caltrain Promotions – February 2017

www.go.caltrain.com launch – With so many fun events and activities going on along

the Peninsula, Caltrain is a great alternative to driving. To help promote these fun

destinations, Caltrain launched a newly designed site to be used as a guide to feature

all the attractions in one location on the Caltrain website. Go.caltrain.com is the one

stop shop of events happening in along the corridor that are accessible by bus and/or

train. From sporting events, street fairs and farmers’ markets, the site connects

customers to the fun. To carry the new design throughout, the Transit Fun Guide was

also redesigned along with the website to display more eye appeal with bigger photos

and easy to read navigation about connecting bus routes and information. Being a

soft launch of the site, communications to promote the site included Peninsula Moves

blog post, newly designed web button on homepage, take-ones onboard buses and

organic social media push. A heavier promotional push will be developed once minor

bugs are flushed out and more content/events come online.

Giants FanFest – The 24th annual Giants FanFest was held on February 11 at AT&T Park.

Giants fans got the opportunity to get up and close to their favorite players and ball

park. Caltrain added extra capacity by operating one extra advanced train prior to

the festival and one extra train after the festival. Caltrain carried an additional 3,140

fans to and from the festival. The communications plan included Peninsula Moves blog,

listing on the go.caltrain.com website and organic social media posts. Media outlets

were heavily encouraging fans to use public transportation.

Partnerships – Caltrain partnered with the Bay Area Travel & Adventure Show held at

the Santa Clara Convention Center February 11 and 12. As part of the partnership, the

co-promoted event was listed on the GoCaltrain Take-One and placed onboard the

train and at select stations, showcased on the gosamtrans.com website, Peninsula

Moves Blog and organic social media posts promoting the event. As part of the

partnership, the event also posted ad cards onboard buses and trains, logos posted on

travel show’s website and offered Caltrain/SamTrans customers a $2 discount if they

took transit to the event.

On-going

San Jose Sharks at SAP Center – For the month of February, the Sharks played four home

games. Caltrain carried an additional 1,485 customers for the month of February. Year-

to-date, additional ridership boarding at San Jose Diridon is 11,080, which represents an

increase of 18 percent increase compared to same number of games in the 2015/2016

season.

of 6

Caltrain Social Media Analytics – February 2017

February saw record engagement for Caltrain social media with the ongoing

electrification saga. Issues like transit, jobs and politics are an irresistible conversation for

many. The influx of messages has been non-stop for about two weeks. In addition to

the regular posts, Caltrain is sponsoring social ads to promote the initiative and muster

support.

Caltrain held an exciting contest giving away Cinequest Festival Gold Passes, good for

all 70+ Cinequest movies. There were more than 50 entries from Facebook, Twitter and

Instagram. In other political activity, the Caltrain twitter account was used to inform

passengers of the Proposed Weekday Changes that were finalized based on public

comment received and live-tweeting the board meeting was popular given all the

Federal intrigue.

of 6

Prepared by: James Namba, Marketing Specialist 650.508.7924

Jeremy Lipps, Social Media Officer 650.622.7845

Catherine David, Principal Planner 650.508.6471

of 6

Table A

Graph A

FY2016* FY2017 % Change

Total Ridership 1,506,185 1,392,561 -7.5%

Average Weekday Ridership 59,831 57,618 -3.7%

Total Farebox Revenue $7,036,741 $6,893,722 -2.0%

On-time Performance 90.5% 93.8% 3.6%

Average Caltrain Shuttle Ridership 10,137 9,910 -2.2%

FY2016* FY2017 % Change

Total Ridership 12,577,846 12,270,064 -2.4%

Average Weekday Ridership 59,359 58,412 -1.6%

Total Farebox Revenue $57,406,131 $60,153,447 4.8%

On-time Performance 88.4% 94.0% 6.3%

Average Caltrain Shuttle Ridership 8,844 9,201 4.0%

*Revised February 2016 Ridership

February 2017

Year to Date

of 6

Graph B

Graph C

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Feb

-15

Ap

r-1

5

Ju

n-1

5

Au

g-1

5

Oc

t-1

5

De

c-1

5

Fe

b-1

6

Ap

r-1

6

Ju

n-1

6

Au

g-1

6

Oc

t-1

6

De

c-1

6

Fe

b-1

7

De

lay

Min

ute

s p

er

Mo

nth

MONTHLY MECHANICAL DELAYS

of 2

13384230.1

AGENDA ITEM # 13

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: April Chan

Chief Officer, Planning, Grant and

Transportation Authority

SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO AMEND THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE

CAPITOL CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE AN

ADDITIONAL $900,000 IN FUNDING AND TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF WORK

TO INCLUDE SOUTH TERMINAL PHASE III AND LOS GATOS CREEK BRIDGE

PROJECTS

ACTION

Staff Coordinating Council (SCC) recommends the Board authorize the Executive

Director, or his designee, to amend the cooperative agreement with the Capitol

Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) to allow the Peninsula Joint Powers Board (JPB)

to receive an additional $900,000 in State funding to complete conceptual planning,

preliminary engineering and final design for the South Terminal Phases II, III and

Los Gatos Creek Bridge projects.

SIGNIFICANCE

In 2014, the CCJPA, which operates the Capitol Corridor commuter rail service

between Sacramento and San Jose, provided $1 million to help partially fund

conceptual planning and preliminary engineering for the South Terminal Phase II

Project.

The CCJPA recently identified an additional $900,000 in State funding that will expire if

not expended by April 30, 2017. The CCJPA asked if the JPB could use the funds to pay

for expenses related to planning and engineering work that has been completed on

the South Terminal III and the Los Gatos Creek Bridge projects. These projects benefit

Capital Corridor service on the Caltrain right of way between Santa Clara and

San Jose.

BUDGET IMPACT

The additional $900,000 will be used to fund expenditures made in the South Terminal

Phase III and Los Gatos Creek Bridge projects. There is no need to amend the budgets

for these projects; this action only changes the funding source.

of 2

13384230.1

BACKGROUND

The South Terminal Phase II Project will add an additional track along with signal

controls between the Centralized Equipment Maintenance and Operations Facility and

Diridon Station. The South Terminal Phase III Project will provide a tail track south of

Diridon Station. The Los Gatos Creek Bridge Project includes an expanded bridge deck

to support the tail track that is part of the South Terminal Phase III Project. Combined,

these three projects provide additional operational flexibility for Caltrain and tenant

railroads, such as Capitol Corridor.

Prepared By: Peter Skinner, Manager of Grants and Fund

Programming

650.622.7818

of 2

13388565.1

RESOLUTION NO. 2017 –


STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * *

AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE CAPITOL

CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL $900,000 IN FUNDING

FOR SOUTH TERMINAL PHASE III AND THE LOS GATOS CREEK BRIDGE PROJECTS

WHEREAS, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) is a joint powers

authority and operates commuter rail passenger service (Caltrain) between

San Francisco Station and Gilroy Station; and

WHEREAS, Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) is a joint powers

authority and operates the Capitol Corridor commuter rail service along its route

entirely owned by host railroads; and

WHEREAS, in September 2014, CCJPA agreed to provide $1 million in funding for

planning and preliminary engineering related to the South Terminal Phase II Project; and

WHEREAS, CCJPA desires to provide an additional $900,000 for planning,

preliminary engineering and final design work related to the South Terminal Phase III

and the Los Gatos Creek Bridge Projects.


Corridor Joint Powers Board:

1. Authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to amend the JPB's

cooperative agreement with the CCJPA related to the South Terminal

Phase II Project to provide an additional $900,000 in funding for the

South Terminal Phase III and Los Gatos Creek Bridge Projects, for a total

CCJPA contribution of $1,900,00; and

of 2

13388565.1

2. Authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to file any other

required documentation and to take any other actions necessary for the

purpose of obtaining this funding from the CCJPA.

Regularly passed and adopted this 6th day of April, 2017 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:


ATTEST:

JPB Secretary

of 2

13364463.1

AGENDA ITEM # 14

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Kathleen Kelly

Interim Chief Financial Officer

SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE FISCAL YEAR 2017 CAPITAL BUDGET BY

$166,000 FOR THE RAVENSWOOD AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT

FOR A TOTAL CAPITAL BUDGET OF $526,751,568

ACTION

Staff Coordinating Council recommends the Board amend the Fiscal Year (FY) 2017

Capital Budget to increase budget authority for the Ravenswood Avenue Grade

Separation Project (Project) by $166,000 for a total FY2017 Capital Budget of

$526,751,568.

SIGNIFICANCE

The existing Ravenswood Avenue at-grade crossing of Caltrain is a critical rail crossing

within the city of Menlo Park (City). This crossing is within the City's El Camino Real/

Downtown Specific Plan Area, and falls within the City’s Priority Development Area. A

grade separation would improve both safety and traffic flow on Ravenswood

approaching El Camino Real. The proposed budget amendment will be used to

develop a comprehensive Project Study Report (PSR), which analyzes feasible

alternatives for the construction of the Ravenswood Grade Separation. The PSR would

refine the preliminary concepts identified in the prior 2003-2004 grade separation

studies in order to develop design concepts and gain community consensus around a

preferred alternative. The recommended preferred alternative will reflect the consensus

developed from the City, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB), and the City

community regarding a viable grade separation project at Ravenswood Avenue.

JPB will be responsible for joint project oversight and direction, in collaboration with the

City. JPB staff, or a consultant on its behalf, will review documentation to ensure

compliance with JPB standards, operations, the Caltrain Modernization Program and

tenant services.

of 2

13364463.1

BUDGET IMPACT

The JPB applied for, and on February 22, 2016 received, $166,000 in the San Mateo

County Transportation Authority (TA) funding for the Project. This $166,000 in TA funding

for the Ravenswood Avenue Grade Separation Project needs to be added to the

FY2017 Capital Budget. The revision increases the FY2017 Capital Budget from

$526,585,568 to $526,751,568.

BACKGROUND

The FY2017 Capital Budget was adopted in the amount of $250,948,910 pursuant to

Resolution No. 2016-30. On October 6, 2016, the Board passed Resolution No. 2016-53,

which increased the Capital Budget by $165,300,000 for the 25th Grade Avenue

Separation Project for a new total of $416,248,910. On November 3, 2016, the Board

passed Resolution No. 2016-59, which increased the Capital Budget by $108,675,991 for

the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project and by $1,060,667 for the Grade Crossing

State of Good Repair Phase II Project for a revised Capital Budget of $525,985,568. On

January 5, 2017, the Board passed Resolution No. 2017-04, which increased the Capital

Budget by $600,000 for the Caltrain Station Management Toolbox Project for a revised

Capital Budget of $526,585,568.

Prepared by: Sam Le, Manager Budgets 650.508.6426

FY2017 CAPITAL BUDGET |April 6, 2017Attachment A

4/2017

Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source Amount

i. SOGR

Right of Way / Signal & Communications

1 Grade Crossing SOGR - Design - FY17 13 Robert Tam 380,000 0 76,000 76,000 (2) 0 76,000

2 Grade Crossing SOGR - Phase II - FY16 13, 16 Robert Tam 2,499,000 360,000 1,730,133 1,060,667 (9) 263,895 Prop 1B 109,506 (2) 296,065 1,730,133

3 Los Gatos Creek Bridge Replacement 14, 15, 16 Parand Maleki 33,847,800 23,302,000 7,295,800 5,836,640 Sec 5337 1,459,160 7,295,800

4 Marin St. Bridge Rehabilitation and Napoleon St. Bridge

Replacement

13 - 16 Bin Zhang 3,000,000 1,364,000 1,000,000 800,000 Sec 5337 200,000 1,000,000

5 Track SOGR - FY17 16 Pedro Gutierrez 9,663,000 0 3,000,000 2,400,000 Sec 5337 600,000 3,000,000

6 PA Upgrades 13 - 16 Robert Tam 1,073,000 0 488,000 390,400 Sec 5337 97,600 488,000

7 Railroad Communication System SOGR - FY17 13 Uhila Makoni 1,075,000 0 442,000 353,600 Sec 5337 88,400 442,000

8 Signal Rehab - FY17 16 Hubert Chan 1,210,000 0 900,000 720,000 Sec 5337 180,000 900,000

35 25th Avenue Grade Separation 16 Rafael Bolon 179,800,000 14,500,000 165,300,000 94,000,000 (6) 71,300,000 (8) 0 165,300,000

180,231,933 11,561,307 (1) 94,263,895 71,485,506 2,921,225 180,231,933

Rolling Stock

9 F-40 Mid Life Overhaul 16 David Bennett 6,300,000 4,000,000 2,300,000 2,300,000 2,300,000

10 Bombardier Technical Spec. Mid Life Overhaul 11 David Bennett 183,642 0 183,642 183,642 183,642

11 Gallery Spec Mid Life Overhaul 12 David Bennett 183,642 0 183,642 183,642 183,642

12 F-40 SEP-HEP Replacement - FY17 16 David Bennett 2,745,000 223,865 2,130,000 2,130,000 2,130,000

13 F-40 Locomotive SOGR project - FY17 16 David Bennett 1,254,199 0 1,254,199 160,000 Sec 5307 1,094,199 1,254,199

14 Main Engine Rebuild (F40 Inframe Overhaul) 16 David Bennett 1,350,000 0 945,592 945,592 945,592

6,997,075 160,000 (1) 0 0 6,837,075 6,997,075

Station & Intermodal Access

15 Station Enhancements and Renovations 13 - 19 Rob Scorpino 780,000 0 600,000 600,000 600,000

16 Sunnyvale Station Platform Rehabilitation 16 Rob Scorpino 1,300,000 650,000 550,000 550,000 (2) 0 550,000

17 Systemwide SOGR Stations - FY17 13 - 19 Rob Scorpino 950,000 0 300,000 300,000 300,000

1,450,000 0 0 550,000 900,000 1,450,000

ii. CALTRAIN MODERNIZATION

18 Electrification 12 - 13 Raja Viswanathan 1,159,500,000 99,142,587 256,667,737 (7) 256,667,737 EIP (3) 256,667,737

19 EMU Procurement 12 - 15 Raja Viswanathan 821,100,000 44,828,000 59,205,335 (7) 59,205,335 EIP (3) 59,205,335

315,873,072 0 0 315,873,072 0 315,873,072

iii. LEGAL MANDATES AND REQUIRED ENHANCEMENTS

20 CBOSS PTC 16 Sherry Bullock 246,700,000 231,000,000 14,309,789 6,000,000 Prop 1B 8,309,789 TBD 14,309,789

21 MS4 Year 4 11 Hubert Chan 440,000 0 389,000 389,000 389,000

22 HPPL & LLEPM on Passenger Cars 16 David Bennett 743,435 721,294 22,141 22,141 22,141

14,720,930 0 6,000,000 8,309,789 411,141 14,720,930

iv. OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS/ENHANCEMENTS

23 Right of Way Fencing - FY17 16 Rob Scorpino 1,500,000 0 1,174,058 939,246 (5) 234,812 1,174,058

24 Upgrade Equipment Room Cooling 13 - 16 Joe Conn 1,020,000 0 500,000 500,000 (2) 500,000

25 Santa Clara Grade Crossing Medians - FY17 15 - 19 Robert Tam 1,097,000 229,000 868,000 868,000 868,000

26 Train Departure Monitor - FY17 16 - 19 Robert Tam 1,530,000 1,407,000 123,000 92,753 (4) 30,247 123,000

27 New Control Point at Brittan 13 - 16 Eric Stocklmeir 7,715,362 5,000,000 1,562,500 1,250,000 FTA (TPI) 312,500 1,562,500

28 Life Cycle Facilities Equipment Replacement CEMOF 16 David Bennet 365,000 0 200,000 200,000 200,000

29 CTAMS Enhancements - FY17 13 - 19 Rick Peredia 500,000 0 200,000 200,000 200,000

30 MPLS Data Network 13 - 15 Joe Conn 250,000 0 95,000 95,000 95,000

4,722,558 1,250,000 939,246 592,753 1,940,559 4,722,558

TotalEstimated

Total Cost

Previously

Programmed

Proposed

BUDGET

Federal State

Ite

m #

PROJECT TITLE / Description Phase Project ManagerOther Members

1 | 2

Amount Source Amount Source Amount Source Amount

TotalEstimated

Total Cost

Previously

Programmed

Proposed

BUDGET

Federal State

Ite

m #

PROJECT TITLE / Description Phase Project ManagerOther Members

v. PLANNING/STUDIES

31 Capital Project Development 11 1,675,933 0 500,000 500,000 500,000

32 Capital Program Management 11 500,000 0 500,000 500,000 500,000

33 Capital Contingency Funds - Engineering 11 330,000 0 330,000 330,000 330,000

34 Capital Contingency Funds - Rail 11 660,000 0 660,000 660,000 660,000

36 Caltrain Toolbox 11 Sebsastian Petty 750,000 150,000 600,000 600,000 FTA (10) 600,000

37 Ravenswood Grade Separation 11 Elizabeth Ankin 166,000 0 166,000 166,000 (11) 166,000

2,756,000 600,000 0 166,000 1,990,000 2,756,000

GRAND TOTAL 526,751,568 13,571,307 101,203,141 396,977,120 15,000,000 526,751,568

Excluding EIP (CalMOD projects) 196,568,707 13,571,307 95,203,141 72,794,259 15,000,000 196,568,707

Notes:

(1) Assume MTC will release $10.5M in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5337 (SOGR Grants) and $160k in Section 5307 (Urbanized Area Formula) funds.

(2) Project Savings from prior years, including previously de-obligated Prop K funds.

(3) EIP: The $1.98 billion Early Investment Program is funded through the 2012 nine-party and 2016 seven-party agreements that leverage local, regional and federal funding to match $705 million in voter-approved high-speed rail bond revenues.

(4) Budget savings from Narrow Banding project.

(5) ROW Fencing FY2017: $939,246 will come from Prop 1B, last year of Caltrain Transit Security Grants Program (CTSGP) funds.

(6) Funding from California High Speed Rail Authority (CHRSA) $84M and CPUC Section 190 $10M

(7) Budget increase of $108,675,991 for PCEP Program (Balfour and Stadler contracts) which will support the execution of the FNTP

(8) Funding from SMCTA Measure A $65.3M and City of San Mateo $6M

(9) Funding from FRA of 1.06M is 50% match to local funds from FY 17 and FY 18 Capital Budget

(11) Funding from SMCTA Measure A for $166,000

(10) Budget increased by $600,000 to reflect the FTA funds received and are to be matched by $150,000 in Member Agency funds (SamTrans and VTA with a 50-50 split), originally approved in the FY15 Capital Budget.

2 | 2

of 2

13364465.1

RESOLUTION NO. 2017 –


STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * *

INCREASING THE FISCAL YEAR 2017 CAPITAL BUDGET BY $166,000

FOR THE RAVENSWOOD AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT

FOR A TOTAL CAPITAL BUDGET OF $526,751,568

WHEREAS, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) Board of Directors

(Board) approved Resolution No. 2016-30 on June 2, 2016, adopting the Fiscal Year (FY)

2017 Capital Budget of $250,948,910; and

WHEREAS, the Board approved Resolution No. 2016-53 to amend the FY2017

Capital Budget to increase it by $165,300,000 for the 25th Avenue Grade Separation

Project; and


Capital Budget by $1,060,667 for the Grade Crossing State of Good Repair Phase II

Project, and by $108,675,991 for the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project; and


Capital Budget to increase it by $600,000 for the Caltrain Station Management Toolbox;

and

WHEREAS, the JPB applied for, and on February 22, 2016 received, $166,000 in

San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) funding for completion of a Project

Study Report (PSR) for the Ravenswood Avenue Grade Separation Project (Project);

and

of 2

13364465.1

WHEREAS, the Board now desires to amend the FY2017 Capital Budget by

$166,000 to provide the requisite budget authority to receive these allocated funds and

complete a PSR for the Project.


Corridor Joint Powers Board hereby amends the FY2017 Capital Budget to increase it by

$166,000, for a new total FY2017 Capital Budget of $526,751,568, to fund a Project Study

Report for the Ravenswood Grade Separation Project.

Regularly passed and adopted this 6th day of April, 2017 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:


ATTEST:

JPB Secretary

of 3

AGENDA ITEM # 15

APRIL 6, 2017


STAFF REPORT



Executive Director

FROM: Seamus Murphy

Chief Communications Officer

SUBJECT: CALTRAIN TRIENNIAL CUSTOMER SURVEY PRESENTATION

ACTION

This report is for information only. No board action is required.

SIGNIFICANCE

The Caltrain Triennial Customer Survey was conducted between October 4 and

October 26. The results of this survey provide rider and trip characteristics,

demographics, satisfaction ratings, access and egress, barriers to use Clipper and

communications information. The data collected from this study supports Title VI

analysis, development of service and fares, and promotion strategies.

This research project was managed and implemented by Corey, Canapary & Galanis,

a professional market research company. Specific steps were taken to ensure the

highest possible response rate, including the use of professional, experienced onboard

surveyors on the project, making the questionnaire available in English and Spanish,

and providing a business reply mail-back option for persons who did not have time to

complete the survey onboard.

The weekday shifts were allocated to allow for surveying during morning and afternoon

peak periods, as well as off-peak periods. Saturday and Sunday trains were also

surveyed at various times of the day. The dates of the fieldwork were scheduled to

avoid surveying during special events that would unduly impact ridership. A total of 62

weekday routes and 10 weekend routes. Of the 62 weekday routes surveyed, 29 were

Limited trains, 19 were Local trains, and 14 were Bullet trains. For each train sampled, a

specific car was selected, and we attempted to survey every passenger in the

selected car.

of 3

5,554 responses were received which equates to a system-wide margin of error of +/-

1.30 percent (at the 95 percent confidence level). This represents a 65 percent

response rate (calculated by dividing the total number of completes by all the eligible

passengers riding on the sampled trains).

Key findings from the study include:

Ridership

More than a third of riders (34 percent) have been riding Caltrain less than one

year.

Nearly two-thirds of riders (62 percent) said they ride Caltrain to avoid traffic. This

is an increase from 57 percent who said they rode Caltrain for this reason in 2013.

Those who have ridden Caltrain less than one year cited a change in company

(31 percent), worsening traffic (29 percent), and lack of access to a car

(21 percent) as the reasons they began riding Caltrain.

Nearly half of respondents (49 percent) travel 10 miles or less to reach their

Caltrain station and more than a third (35 percent) travel 20 or more miles.

Satisfaction with Caltrain

Overall, Caltrain riders rated their experience on Caltrain 4.09 (out of 5.00), an

increase over 2013’s 4.04 (and a return to 2010 satisfaction levels).

Riders rated the effectiveness of station signs 3.90, compared to 2013 rating of

3.81.

Fare Media

Use of Clipper cash value to pay for their Caltrain trip is up (16 percent in 2016 vs.

11 percent in 2013 )

More than one third of respondents (36 percent) paid for their Caltrain trip with a

Clipper Caltrain Monthly Pass. However, this is a decrease from 2013, when

41 percent paid in this way.

The share of riders that paid for their Caltrain trip using a Go Pass rose from

14 percent in 2013 to 21 percent in 2016.

Demographics

Caltrain riders speak one of the 72 languages identified in the survey in their

homes, and while 60 percent say they are born in the United States, 40 percent

were born in one of 105 countries around the world.

Nearly all riders (96 percent) have a high school diploma, while 81 percent have

graduated college, including 38 percent who have a post graduate degree.

BUDGET IMPACT


of 3

BACKGROUND

Every three years Market Research & Development Department is responsible for the

development, implementation and delivering the Caltrain customer survey. The

department works with communication, operations and planning staff to determine

requirements and ensure that the assigned on-call market research company delivers a

statistically valid survey that meets 95 percent confidence level. The methodology is

established to ensure maximum participation. Data collected through the survey is

confidential to preserve respondent identity and the results are presented in

aggregate.

Prepared by: Christiane Kwok, Manager, Market Research

& Development

650.508.7926

Project Manager: Julian Jest, Market Research Analyst 650.508.6245

of 2

AGENDA ITEM # 16

APRIL 6, 2017

PENINSULA CORRIRDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD

STAFF REPORT



General Manager/CEO

FROM: Seamus Murphy

Chief Communications Officer

SUBJECT: STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

ACTION


SIGNIFICANCE

Staff will provide regular updates to the Board in accordance with the approved

Legislative Program.

STATE ISSUES

AS OF 3/20/2017:

Governor Jerry Brown and legislative leaders are working to complete a transportation

funding package by April 6, when lawmakers leave for spring recess and before the

annual budget process dominates the Capitol.

The governor’s plan would generate an average of $4.2 billion annually over 10 years,

while Assemblymember Jim Frazier and Senator Jim Beall’s transportation funding bills

would provide almost $6 billion a year (Assembly Bill 1 and Senate Bill 1). The Republican

funding proposal introduced by Assemblymember Paul Fong generates $5.6 billion in

multi-year funding and $2.2 billion in one-time revenues.

The governor’s office, leadership in the Assembly and Senate, as well as key

transportation chairs are meeting on a regular basis to discuss and negotiate a

package that would garner the needed support to pass both chambers.

Leadership Change

On March 14, 2017, Senator Patricia Bates (R-Laguna Niguel) was elected leader of the

Senate Republican Caucus.

of 2

FEDERAL ISSUES

As of 3/20/2017:

On March 16, the Office of Management and Budget published the Administration's

Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 "skinny” budget. The budget increases military spending and cuts

many other programs, including those at Department of Transportation (DOT). The “full”

budget that will include more details about department and program budgets is

expected to be released in May.

Information from the skinny budget:

Limits funding for the Federal Transit Administration’s Capital Investment Program

(includes the Core Capacity Program) to projects with existing full funding grant

agreements only.

Terminates Federal support for Amtrak’s long distance train services, which have

long been inefficient and incur the vast majority of Amtrak’s operating losses.

Eliminates funding for the TIGER Discretionary Grant Program.

A copy of the budget document can be viewed here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blue

print.pdf

Although Congress will take this budget proposal under advisement, the House and

Senate will ultimately develop their own FY2018 budget and spending bills to be signed

into law.

Nominations

On March 7, President Donald Trump announced his intent to nominate Jeffrey Rosen

as deputy secretary of the Department of Transportation. Mr. Rosen previously served

as general counsel at DOT from 2003 to 2006, and then as general counsel and senior

policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget during the Bush 43

administration. Mr. Rosen is currently a senior partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, and his

clients have included General Motors and Hyundai. If the Senate confirms Mr. Rosen, he

will be responsible for the day-to-day operations of the DOT.

Prepared By: Lori Low, Government and Community

Relations Specialist

Casey Fromson, Director, Government and

Community Affairs Director

650-508-6391

650-508-6493

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf


State Legislative Matrix as of 3/15/2017

Page 1 of 3

Bill ID/Topic Location Summary Position

AB 1

Frazier D

Transportation

funding.

Assembly

Transportation

Existing law provides various sources of funding for transportation purposes, including funding for the state highway

system and the local street and road system. These funding sources include, among others, fuel excise taxes,

commercial vehicle weight fees, local transactions and use taxes, and federal funds. Existing law imposes certain

registration fees on vehicles, with revenues from these fees deposited in the Motor Vehicle Account and used to fund

the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Department of the California Highway Patrol. Existing law provides for the

monthly transfer of excess balances in the Motor Vehicle Account to the State Highway Account.

This bill would create the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program to address deferred maintenance on the

state highway system and the local street and road system. The bill would require the California Transportation

Commission to adopt performance criteria, consistent with a specified asset management plan, to ensure efficient

use of certain funds available for the program. The bill would provide for the deposit of various funds for the program in

the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund,

including revenues attributable to a $0.012 per gallon increase in the motor vehicle fuel (gasoline) tax imposed by the

bill with an inflation adjustment, as provided, an increase of $38 in the annual vehicle registration fee with an inflation

adjustment, as provided, a new $165 annual vehicle registration fee with an inflation adjustment, as provided,

applicable to zero-emission motor vehicles, as defined, and certain miscellaneous revenues described in (7) below

that are not restricted as to expenditure by Article XIX of the California Constitution. This bill contains other related

provisions and other existing laws. Introduced: 12/5/2016

Support

AB 17

Holden D

Transit Pass

Program:

free or

reduced-fare

transit passes.

Assembly

Transportation

Existing law declares that the fostering, continuance, and development of public transportation systems are a matter

of statewide concern. Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation to administer various programs and

allocates moneys for various public transportation purposes.

This bill would create the Transit Pass Program to be administered by the department. The bill would require the

Controller of the State of California to allocate moneys made available for the program, upon appropriation by the

Legislature, to support transit pass programs that provide free or reduced-fare transit passes to specified pupils and

students. The bill would require the department to develop guidelines that describe the criteria that eligible transit

providers, as defined, are required to use to make available free or reduced-fare transit passes to eligible participants,

as defined, and to ensure that moneys from the program are used to expand eligibility or further reduce the cost of a

transit pass under existing programs. The bill would exempt the development of those guidelines from the

Administrative Procedure Act. The bill would require eligible transit providers and eligible participants to enter into

agreements for the distribution of free or reduced-fare transit passes to students. This bill contains other related

provisions. Introduced: 12/5/2016

Pending

http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=5SsqBNuJEOhqY8VTaDPNj%2bcv8V8cKjtKy4tXHEEnKK1dNCnBkbH2yvqloSNxLIhx

http://asmdc.org/members/a11/

http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=sZh1lm5pEj%2fpL4lq1BsQS8IJKu%2fZ2s6dUyFfKlMTnnyMozLKOZVYNALutXzrDdbG

https://a41.asmdc.org/



Page 2 of 3


AB 467

Mullin D

Local

transportation

authorities:

transactions

and use taxes.

Assembly Local

Government

4/5/2017

1:30 p.m. - State

Capitol, Room

447 ASSEMBLY

LOCAL

GOVERNMENT,

AGUIAR-CURRY,

Chair

The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act provides for the creation in any county of a local

transportation authority and authorizes the imposition by the authority, by ordinance, of a retail transactions and use

tax, subject to approval of the ordinance by 2/3 of the voters. Existing law provides for the authority to adopt a

transportation expenditure plan for the proceeds of the tax, and requires the entire adopted transportation

expenditure plan to be included in the voter information handbook sent to voters.

This bill would exempt an authority from including the entire adopted transportation expenditure plan in the voter

information handbook if the authority posts the plan on its Internet Web site, and the sample ballot and the voter

information handbook sent to voters include information on viewing an electronic version of the plan on the Internet

Web site and for obtaining a printed copy of the plan by calling the county election office. The bill would require the

authority to provide sufficient copies of the plan to the county election office for mailing to each person requesting a

copy. By imposing additional requirements on county election officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local

program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws. Introduced: 2/13/2017

Pending

AB 496

Fong R

Transportation

funding.

Assembly

Transportation







This bill would create the Traffic Relief and Road Improvement Program to address traffic congestion and deferred

maintenance on the state highway system and the local street and road system. The bill would provide for the deposit

of various existing sources of revenue in the Traffic Relief and Road Improvement Account, which the bill would create

in the State Transportation Fund, including revenues attributable to the sales and use tax on motor vehicles, revenues

attributable to automobile and motor vehicle insurance policies from the insurer gross premiums tax, revenues from

certain diesel fuel sales and use taxes, revenues from certain vehicle registration fees, and certain miscellaneous State

Highway Account revenues. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws. Amended: 2/28/2017

Pending

AB 1613

Mullin D

San Mateo

County Transit

District: retail

transactions

and use tax.

Assembly Print Existing law authorizes the board of the San Mateo County Transit District to adopt a retail transactions and use tax

ordinance in accordance with specified provisions of law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all such

taxes that may be imposed in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the board to exceed that 2% limit to

impose a retail transactions and use tax set at a rate of no more than 0.5%, if approved by the board before

January 1, 2021. Introduced: 2/17/2017

Pending

http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=9mw02NgO76pJALsbFK7zus1oytoWlFy9ZFaY4f4V4C7zEOEsksTRlQT62gzf9gGU


http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=YBoWW1Rmy4SQUBdzwoB9%2fn0ZIJ3qX9u4Rwu6v67xTOO49AhaxbwGJO40zEOCQPHb

https://ad34.asmrc.org/

http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=F5dQm1767%2bJjYkSxybqkm9fluFiszPZxa0IRbiRXErgOqCX1gWV96gFoP%2biQmMau




Page 3 of 3


SB 1

Beall D

Transportation

funding.

Senate

Appropriations







This bill would create the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program to address deferred maintenance on the

state highway system and the local street and road system. The bill would require the California Transportation

Commission to adopt performance criteria, consistent with a specified asset management plan, to ensure efficient

use of certain funds available for the program. The bill would provide for the deposit of various funds for the program in

the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account, which the bill would create in the State Transportation Fund,

including revenues attributable to a $0.12 per gallon increase, phased in over 3 years, in the motor vehicle fuel

(gasoline) tax imposed by the bill with an inflation adjustment, as provided, an increase of $38 in the annual vehicle

registration fee with an inflation adjustment, as provided, a new $100 annual vehicle registration fee with an inflation

adjustment, as provided, applicable to zero-emission motor vehicles, as defined, and certain miscellaneous revenues

described in (7) below that are not restricted as to expenditure by Article XIX of the California Constitution. This bill

contains other related provisions and other existing laws. Amended: 1/26/2017

Support

http://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publishbillinfo.aspx?bi=lVhmyPwThFTjX2u9Hr%2bWCdGtTeORcIpVKJ93I619HvYopLD3XJqUBf75rjbHbEHS

http://sd15.senate.ca.gov/