At today’s board meeting, Caltrain announced delays in the purchasing process, with unknown impact on project completion, and a delay in the electronic train control system that postpones the current date until mid-2016.
Three firms are now on the short list to provide the services to install the electric poles and wires, with contract completion now planned for summer-fall 2016 (not today as planned earlier).  The rail car procurement is also delayed.  Caltrain expects to get bids for rail cars in December.  Five bidders attended a conference to discuss the bidding process, but Marian Lee expressed concern about how many bids would be submitted; it’s a busy time for the industry, Caltrain’s order is relatively small, and the order includes custom request for features such as extra doors to support migration to level boarding and compatibility with High Speed Rail.   For riders who are interested in the decisions about bike space and bathrooms, this means the board review of the proposals has been moved til 2016.
The purchasing delays are complicating the process of securing funding for electrification. Caltrain has applied for a $220 $447 Million federal grant for the electrification project.  In order to have the strongest chance to receive the federal grant, Caltrain needs to have funding lined up from its county and regional partners to cover the current cost of the project – but the 3 county partners – San Francisco, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties,  are holding off in committing the $60 million each to complete the project, waiting for the final quotes from the construction and equipment vendors.
Caltrain’s Marian Lee mentioned that the delivery date goal has not changed, and Caltrain is still striving for a 2020 delivery date. Â Each of the project bidders will submit a schedule for building the system, and the schedule will be finalized based on the chosen vendor.
Meanwhile train control system is also running late, for various reasons including software vendor delays and coordinating interoperability with Union Pacific. One of the latest contributors to the delay is that federal regulators have announced that there will be standards for interoperability, but has not yet released the specifications. So the date for testing against the as yet undefined specs has been moved til the first quarter of 2016, and delivery date has been extended til Q2, 2016.  The federal government has given a multi-year extension on the requirement to implement train control.
Thank you for the update. Frustrating but at least things are moving along. It is nice to have a little perspective on the bidding process. Thanks! -danny
CBOSS is in very deep trouble. They’re supposed to be testing it now, and the specs are about to be handed out. Then they will start designing it, or something, which is apparently OK because there is no pressing deadline and “safety” is the ultimate excuse when requesting even more money.
How fast rolling stock can be delivered if Caltrain don’t request multiple door height? As Caltrain capacity become critical, can they find solution to accelerate electrification by some compromise in level boarding?
@Clem
August 1, 2013
“Ms. Harrington said there is a letter from Roland Lebrun with a series of questions and staff will respond to him in writing, but staff has no information that supports his statement that the project is not going to make the deadline. She said she wants to thank Mr. Lebrun for identifying a typo on the bottom of page two; it should say May instead of March.â€
“Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the National Transit Safety Board (NTSB) have known for over six months that Caltrain cannot possibly meet the 2015 PTC implementation deadline. He said this was confirmed during the testimony to the Senate Transportation Committee on June 19. Mr. Lebrun said since we now know the deadline cannot be met there is an opportunity to hit the pause button. He said this would give time to hire an independent entity that can be trusted to provide the Board with unbiased advice, including how complete re-signaling could substantially improve the capacity of the line. He said this would have no impact on the budget because the Board has already approved $90 million in unspecified oversight activities. Mr. Lebrun said the other option is to approve the staff recommendation, but how can the Board rely on the advice of people who either don’t know what is going on or are not telling the truth.â€
http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Minutes/2013/8-1-13+JPB+Minutes.pdf (page 4).
September 5, 2013
“Roland Lebrun, San Jose, said he submitted a letter to the Board on this project. He said Phase 1, specifically task 2, the PTC Development Plan, is not complete and was to be approved last year and was just submitted to the FRA at the end of May. He said the Executive Director should not have issued the Notice to Proceed for Phase 2, let alone Phase 3 because it would be unwise to start designing something the FRA might not approve. Mr. Lebrun said Senate Bill (SB) 1462 was introduced and this bill would extend the PTC implementation deadline to 2020. He finds it surprising that this bill is missing from staff’s legislative matrix.†http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Minutes/2013/9-5-13+JPB+Minutes.pdf (page 5)
“Mr. Murphy said a bill was introduced that would grant a blanket extension for the PTC deadline. The FRA’s position is there shouldn’t be a blanket extension, but year-to-year extensions granted when projects apply for them and only if they meet certain milestones. Staff doesn’t think there will be any resolution on this issue this year. None of these efforts to extend the deadline apply to JPB’s projects.â€
http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Minutes/2013/9-5-13+JPB+Minutes.pdf (page 10)
@Evans
There are 2 issues: no funding and the gallery trains were supposed to be replaced in the 2012-2015 timeframe. Assuming funding for trains and no electrification, here is a solution with a 2-year timeframe:
“When time frames for electrification may be uncertain, it provides a sustainable solution due to its adaptability to a bi- or trimodal propulsion system by pantograph connection to the overhead lines.”
http://www.mtu-report.com/Service/News/Diesel-goes-electric-Hybrid-drives-prove-themselves-in-trials
The smooth transition to level boarding was discussed extensively in this blog post and has nothing to do with a dual set of doors which is physically impossible for double-doors:
http://www.greencaltrain.com/2015/07/likely-victory-in-bathroom-battle/