Subject to assurance Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Executive Summary
This Strategic Outline Business Case (SOBC) is presented to obtain the commitment and approval for the development of the Great Eastern Main Line (GEML) Upgrade Programme, which proposes the application of Digital Technologies as part of a system-wide upgrade.
Conclusions and Recommendations
There is a case for Traffic Management and Connected Driver Advisory Systems (C-DAS) on the Anglia Route, independent of ETCS, delivering route-wide performance benefits. The costs and benefits of this option should be investigated further for implementation in CP6 (2019 - 2024). This aligns to Anglia Operating Strategy and Route Study and performance targets.
The development of Traffic Management and the decision support tools (such as C-DAS, stock and crew, Incident Management and Customer Information Systems) build on the skills and experience already developed as part of the Romford Traffic Management 1st Deployment on Essex Thameside. There is a strategic fit with this deployment team’s knowledge being retained and their learning being used to support the next phase of deployment.
The deployments of Thameslink, Cardiff and Romford Traffic Management Systems should be used to validate estimated performance benefits and capture lessons learnt.
The package of conventional infrastructure and ETCS without signals is good value for money if rolling stock fitment costs are shared as part of a wider programme and if timing is aligned more closely to renewals in CP7 (2024 - 2029). The package delivers capacity to increase the train service on the GEML. The conventional alternative to deliver the same output, including an additional track between Chelmsford and Stratford, does not provide value for money.
To deliver ETCS in CP7 development of the ETCS components would be required in CP6, and the rolling stock would need to be fitted. Developing an integrated programme between the conventional enhancements, digital enhancements and train operator investment is recommended. Capacity enhancements on the GEML could be phased to provide incremental benefits: o CP6: Bow Junction remodelling, dependency to unlocking additional peak paths, and enables an additional 3 peak paths; o CP7: Package of conventional and ETCS enhancements to provide capacity to enable a further 4 peak paths.
To develop the Anglia Digital Programme towards OBC will require £10 to 20 million. This does not represent a full commitment to deployment, but rather the start of the next stage of development. Following the completion of the SOBC for the Anglia Route, the Digital candidate projects across the network will be reviewed together to understand linkages and priorities. Elements of this business case may also be prioritised for earlier delivery and therefore development tranches.
Strategic Case
The East of England has seen the fastest growth in employment outside of London in recent years and contributes significantly to the UK economy. For this reason, the GEML on the
Version 1.0 Page 3 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Anglia Route is of vital economic importance. Due to its strategic location, passenger growth is expected to rise by 75% from 2011 to 20431 .
The new Greater Anglia Franchise is introducing higher capacity rolling stock which will increase peak seating capacity by 9%. However, demand is forecast to grow during CP6 and CP7 and crowding will continue without additional train services.
Providing capacity to meet the demand forecast is constrained by current infrastructure. Bow Junction remodelling is a deferred CP5 scheme. Despite the additional capacity provided by the Greater Anglia Franchise, the Bow Junction remodelling scheme is still required to meet forecast growth and is a key dependency to running additional peak paths proposed in this SOBC.
Increasing the train service robustly above 26 tph is limited by the signalling headway between Chelmsford and London Liverpool Street. ETCS would reduce the headway and would avoid the need for additional track, the delivery of which would be disruptive and expensive.
ETCS in combination with a package of conventional infrastructure enhancements would provide capacity for 27 tph peak services, meeting demand growth to the late 2020s.
Providing an all-day London to Norwich in 90 minutes and Ipswich in 60 minutes service is a key aspiration for the Route. The proposed package of ETCS with conventional infrastructure enhancements would provide capacity in the off peak for these fast services to operate with stopping and freight services.
The Anglia Route is a mixed traffic railway with much of the Route two-track. During disruption it is easy for delays to be quickly transferred between services with few regulation points available to for signallers to manage the service. Traffic Management systems automate tasks that would otherwise have to be carried out manually by the signaller, and makes communicating changes to the plan more straightforward between the controllers and the signaller. Traffic Management gives greater visibility of regulating decisions over a wide area of control, which reduces reactionary delays, and improves passenger and freight customers’ experiences. The real time information provided by the Traffic Management system can be linked to other decision support tools which when combined could provide further benefits.
Economic Analysis:
Delivery of Traffic Management and C-DAS on the Anglia Route offers medium value for money:
o A benefit cost ratio of 1.5-2; o Net Present Value of £50-£100 million.
Options to deliver ETCS without signals offer better value for money than with signals.
The package of conventional enhancements and ETCS without signals with the rolling stock fitment shared across a programme offers high value for money:
o A benefit cost ratio between two to four;
1 Network Rail (2016) “Anglia Route Study” p4 Version 1.0 Page 4 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
o Net Present Value of £600-£700 million.
The case strengthens if the timing if pushed back to align with renewals.
The conclusions of the value of money of ETCS options are very sensitive to whole life cost assumptions. The whole life costs of the option will need to be explored in detail at the next stage of development to address this uncertainty. Commercial Case:
There is high appetite for Digital Railway amongst the rail supply chain. Close and collaborative work with the supply chain is essential to the success of the Digital Railway Programme.
Financial Case:
There are opportunities which need to be explored at the next stage to introduce new private finance sources into the rail industry, to bring down the overall financial requirement.
Management Case
A delivery model (“thin client”) has been identified for the route to adopt and progress with the support of the Digital Railway team. This model will manage risks going forward, particularly the development of Digital Railway applications (ETCS and Traffic Management), which will need to be delivered at the same time as the current plans for conventional signalling renewals.
Further developments at OBC stage:
C-DAS, stock & crew systems, the interface with Customer Information Systems and Incident Management Systems should all be developed as part of Traffic Management. These form the complete suite of support tools to collectively improve the operational of the railway and will provide additional benefits not quantified in this SOBC.
Explore options to connect the Traffic Management and C-DAS deployments on Essex Thameside and Cross-London Routes, and the radial Route from London, due to the benefits for freight services.
Explore options around fitment of the ETCS in-cab equipment for the passenger trains and also to share costs of freight train fitment with other deployments (e.g. the East Coast Main Line South).
Explore opportunities to focus the train service specification assumptions for additional services with a view to reduce operating costs yet maintain benefits. This approach may further improve the value for money of the package of ETCS and conventional works and should therefore be explored. Automatic Train Operation needs to be tested to understand if it is required, feasible and whether there is a value for money case.
Further work to assess the option benefits including capacity assessment based on the new franchise proposals, development of train service specification as well as assessment of wider benefits.
Version 1.0 Page 5 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Subject to assurance Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1. Strategic Case ...... 9
1. Strategic Case ...... 9
1.1 Introduction and context ...... 9 1.2 Business Strategy ...... 10 1.3 Drivers for Change...... 13 1.4 Baseline ...... 17 1.5 Business Need and Service Gaps – The Problem Statement ...... 18 1.6 Options ...... 22 1.7 Option benefits ...... 25 1.8 Key Assumptions ...... 28 1.9 Dependant Schemes ...... 29 1.10 Risks ...... 30 1.11 Strategic Case Summary and Recommendations ...... 32
2. Economic Case...... 33
2.1 Purpose ...... 33 2.2 Approach ...... 33 2.3 Appraisal Parameters ...... 34 2.4 Economic Options ...... 34 2.5 Assumptions ...... 36 2.6 Economic Options Analysis ...... 40 2.7 Benefits ...... 43 2.8 Summary TEE table of core options ...... 44 2.9 Conclusions ...... 47 2.10 Further appraisal assumptions ...... 49
3. Commercial Case ...... 51
3.1 Purpose ...... 51 3.2 Output Specification ...... 51 3.3 Procurement Strategy ...... 54 3.4 Sourcing Options ...... 54 3.5 Pricing Framework and Charging Mechanisms ...... 58 3.6 Risk Allocation and Transfer ...... 59
Version 1.0 Page 6 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.7 Human Resource issues including TUPE ...... 61 3.8 Implementation (Contract) Timescales...... 61 3.9 Service support ...... 61 3.10 Contract Management Approach ...... 62 3.11 Best Value ...... 63 4. Financial Case ...... 65
4.1 Purpose ...... 65 4.2 Budget Profile ...... 65 4.3 Cost estimate ...... 66 4.4 Benchmarking ...... 66 4.5 Budget/Funding Arrangements ...... 67 4.6 Funding Arrangements ...... 67 4.7 Balance Sheet ...... 69 4.8 Conclusions and recommendations ...... 70 5. Management Case ...... 71
5.1 Introduction and Objectives ...... 71 5.2 Programme/Project Dependencies ...... 73 5.3 Programme/Project Governance, Organisation Structure and Roles ...... 73 5.4 Programme/Project Plan ...... 76 5.5 Communications and Stakeholder Management ...... 78 5.6 Programme/Project Reporting ...... 78 5.7 Implementation of Work Streams ...... 78 5.8 Key Issues for Implementation ...... 79 5.9 Contract Management ...... 79 5.10 Risk Management Strategy ...... 79 5.11 Benefits Management and Evaluation Realisation Plan ...... 80 5.12 Programme/Project Review and Evaluation ...... 84 5.13 Contingency Plan ...... 85 5.14 Recommendations ...... 86 Appendix A – Relationship between this SOBC and the wider Digital Railway Programme ...... 87
Version 1.0 Page 7 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix B – Costs ...... 89
Appendix C – Capacity Analysis Summary ...... 90
Appendix D – Performance Methodology ...... 95
Appendix E – Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) ...... 99
Appendix F – Economic Appraisal Assurance Statement ...... 101
Appendix G – Digital Railway Technology ...... 104
Appendix H – Indicative deployment approach ...... 107
Appendix I – Stakeholder map ...... 108
Appendix K – Options and problem statement ...... 112
Version 1.0 Page 8 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Subject to assurance Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1. Strategic Case
1.1 Introduction and context
The main driver for change on the Anglia Route is accommodating rising demand for Great Eastern Main Line services and addressing the performance challenge:
Although some interventions are committed in the short term, Digital Railway offers the potential to accommodate demand growth in the medium term (as well as provide a performance boost);
By removing headway restrictions, technology such as ETCS can add capacity more effectively than the provision of more track in certain key areas;
Digital technology offers a range of wider benefits in addition to capacity – including safety, skills and customer experience.
These themes will be expanded on in the Strategic Case, with additional evidence and context.
1.1.1 Stakeholder engagement
The formation of this SOBC has built upon the Anglia Route Study (20152), and the stakeholder engagement which is taking place to form that document. In addition, extensive consultation has taken place to form key inputs.
Figure S1: Stakeholder engagement for this SOBC Date SOBC Input Stakeholders 2nd February 2017 Problem Statement MTR Crossrail and Options Abellio Greater Anglia discussed and Freightliner approved at Route Anglia Route (Network Rail) Steering Board Network Strategy & Capacity Planning (Network Rail) 23rd February 2017 Cost inputs and Abellio Greater Anglia; assumptions: Department for Transport; discussed and Anglia Route (Network Rail); agreed at Route Network Strategy & Capacity Planning (Network Rail). Steering Board 8th March 2017 First draft SOBC Abellio Greater Anglia; circulated to all Department for Transport; RSB members and Rail Delivery Group; comments received Network Strategy & Capacity Planning (Network Rail); back from Anglia Route (Network Rail). 25th April 2017 Presentation of Network Rail – Anglia Route findings, and Network Rail – Digital Railway discussion of final Rail Delivery Group document Abellio Greater Anglia
A full list of the members of the Route Steering Board can be found in the Management Case.
2 Network Rail (2015) “Anglia Route Study” link Version 1.0 Page 9 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.2 Business Strategy
1.2.1 Rail Industry Strategy
Over the past 20 years, rail has been at the core of enabling economic success. Annual passenger numbers have increased from 801 million (in 1997/98) to 1.6 billion3 (in 2014/15). This rise is mirrored in part by rail freight, with a 65% increase in freight volumes since the mid-1990s4. Freight growth for the different commodities has been mixed, while coal has declined, intermodal containers from deep-sea ports (Southampton, London Gateway and Felixstowe to the Midlands, North, Wales and Bristol) and aggregates from Mendip quarries to London and the South East for construction, have grown steadily. This growth in demand has caused increased crowding on key routes and results in performance challenges.
The Long Term Planning Process (LTPP) informs funders as to how the railway could support the UK economy over the next 30 years. The LTPP requires an Initial Industry Advice (IIA) plan to be developed. This plan is developed by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG) with contributions from Network Rail and is communicated to the Government. The IIA details national and localised route priorities for investment, for the medium and long term future. The IIA highlights how the Secretary of State has made it clear that the priority of the railway must be to put passengers and freight operators at the heart of all decisions taken for rail. The DfT has indicated that it will look to use its funding and railway powers to deliver maximum benefits for transport users, as efficiently, effectively and economically as possible.
Prior to the publication of the High Level Output Statement, the Secretary of State has set out the following as priority areas for investment in CP6:
The cost of running the railway, comprising operations, maintenance and renewals (Hendy overhang);
Committed schemes, including the Hendy re-plan investment programme, and major projects such as HS2;
Schemes needed to prevent significant deterioration of network/system capability or the passenger experience;
Unfunded schemes with wider economic benefits or that deliver other key aims.
The benefits expected from the Digital Railway Programme, and consequently this SOBC (discussed in the Economic Case) directly correspond with the priorities of passengers and funders outlined above (such as improved performance, improved cost efficiency, greater consistency and network benefits and effective management of risks and delivery quality).
1.2.2 Digital Railway Programme
The Digital Railway Programme purpose is to assess the ability of digital technology to address the challenges faced by specific sections of the network. Based on initial analysis carried out by the programme, a targeted strategy has been adopted – focussed on alignment with demand, performance challenges, renewals and franchise opportunities.
The Digital Railway Vision is “A Digital Railway for a Modern Britain”. This will deliver a system and railway industry-wide approach to integrate the use of digital train control system technologies to
3 Rail Delivery Group (2015), “GB rail: better services, better journeys and better value”, p5 4 Network Rail (2016) Freight Network Study” p1-26 Version 1.0 Page 10 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) best effect in meeting the needs of the passengers, freight customers, funders and benefit the wider economy. An overview of the systems, technologies and business change contained within Digital Railway is set out in Figure S2.
Figure S2: Digital Railway Programme Scope
The key technologies considered in this SOBC are described in Figure S2 and in more detail below (Figure S3).
Version 1.0 Page 11 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure S3: Digital Railway Technologies
1.2.2.1 European Train Control System (ETCS)
ETCS is an automatic train protection system, based on cab signalling and track to train data transmission. It ensures trains operate safely at all times in providing safe movement authority directly to the driver through the in cab display, can apply the brakes in the event of a Signal Passed At Danger (i.e. Red) or over speed as it continuously monitor the driver’s actions. There are a number of different variants of ETCS described in Figure S3.
1.2.2.2 Traffic Management
Traffic Management is an operational control and management information system, capable of providing real-time information to passenger and freight customers. The system allows prediction of conflicts and enables real-time timetabling and re-planning as required. The Plan/Re-plan system is an integral part of the Traffic Management System and is the core functionality provided by Traffic Management. Reference to Traffic Management in this document refers to the core Plan and Re- Plan system.
There are three variations of Traffic Management:
Isolated: The system advises the operator of changes required to the existing timetable, alternative routing actions are implemented by the signaller;
Interfaced: Plan/Replan system interfaces to an existing control system. The system automatically request routes to be set following suggested conflict resolution by the planning system;
Version 1.0 Page 12 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Integrated: The plan/replace is directly interfaced to the Interlockings along the line and can set routes as required for each train. This allows functionality such as flexible areas of control, enabling ROCs to flex workload to current conditions.
The real time train information can be shared with a number of other applications / decision support tools. These systems can be standalone or interface to the Traffic Management System.
Figure S4: Decision Support Tool Descriptions
Decision Support Description Tool
Stock and Crew Used in real time to ensure that the right resources are in the right place at the right time. It combines data from the train service and its actual running diagram and resource information and their associated rolling stock allocations and crew rosters.
Incident Management Helps reduce the impact an incident has on the rail network across the System whole incident lifecycle. IMS improves the time taken to get required resources to site by faster identification of incident location, faster access to supporting data and better communication.
Customer Information Uses operational information taken from other railway systems and System converts into a format that is easily understood by customers. CIS feeds information that is displayed on the electronic arrival and departure screens and displays that can be found on platforms.
C-DAS A connected version of DAS (Driver Advisory System). DAS is an existing system which optimises driving techniques, helps manage capacity/performance, improves energy consumption and reduces carbon emissions.
The role of the Digital Railway Programme is to provide common interface specification for Traffic Management and the decision support tools.
1.2.2.3 Automatic Train Operation
ATO is a system that performs automatic driving of the train to meet the (real time) operational timetable in the most energy efficient way. It has many of the same benefits as C-DAS but is able to provide significant performance improvements because the movement of the train is now automated. Automatic Train Operation must be deployed with ETCS.
1.3 Drivers for Change
Delivery of Digital Railway can support a number of industry wide initiatives:
Integration of renewals and enhancements planning: By assessing the potential for new technology to replace life expired assets, the Digital Railway Programme combines enhancement and renewal planning. This approach offers a potentially more economic and effective way to improve performance and meet demand compared to traditional industry planning, which views asset renewal as separate to network enhancements.
Version 1.0 Page 13 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Opportunities arising from technological change:
o Capacity to accommodate demand: Much of the signalling infrastructure currently in place is based on the principle of dividing tracks into fixed sections. The fixed sections are not optimised for all services, as a result, trains which could safely run closer together are barred from doing so, resulting in a network that is under-utilised, with an impact on frequency of service and journey times;
o Real time information: The current signalling systems communicates only basic real time information on rolling stock speed and location, limiting the amount of information which can be provided to customers, operators and the wider supply chain;
o Boosting train control and performance through connected systems: Adoption of digital support tools for signallers and controllers offers the opportunity to improve the performance of passengers and freight customers’ train journeys;
o Aligning the franchising process with rolling stock fitment: Where possible, alignment makes for the most efficient change as the system-wide changes can be implemented at the point of lowest cost;
o Potential to reduce cost: Conventional signalling systems require a great deal of expensive work to create a highly bespoke design for train drivers to sight signals and cater to the specific characteristics of a section of track. Once installed, these systems then require expensive renewals work, further increasing costs for the network into the future. Digital train signalling lowers cost and therefore is an opportunity to reduce these costs;
o Improve skills: Developing the next generation of skills is essential to the continued success of the UK economy. The ongoing evolution of the skills, knowledge and expertise that Digital Railway Programme will provide a benefit which can be transferred to other infrastructure sectors5. The DfT’s Transport Infrastructure Skills Strategy says that, “existing staff will need greater systems engineering, advanced telecoms, software programming and crucially business change skill sets to help fully realise the benefits of a Digital Railway”6. Successful development will build upon the industry’s existing capability, and give the opportunity to boost exports.
As well as building rail capability, Digital Railway can also enable skills to be realised across other industries – by bringing about agglomeration benefits that allow greater connections between skills and jobs, and goods with markets. Digital Railway has the potential to extend the catchment area of major cities. Accelerating these benefits could unlock additional productivity and economic growth for the UK economy.
Support national strategies: Three recent publications which demonstrate the strategic fit of the programme include those contained in:
. Transport Select Committee – Rail technology (signalling and Traffic Management Report (2016)): “Substantial benefits can be realised by the intelligent deployment of signalling and Traffic Management technology on the rail network through the Digital Railway Programme”7;
5 Institution of Civil Engineers (2016) “The case for internalising externalities in a sustainable rail asset base” p1 6 Department for Transport (2016) “Transport Infrastructure Skills Strategy” p 42 7 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmtrans/67/67.pdf Version 1.0 Page 14 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
. Rail Delivery Group – A Railway for a Digital Age (2016): “In today’s busy railway, a single problem can cause hours of disruption. A modernised railway with upgraded train control and signalling systems will deliver enhanced safety and more capacity and capability, and at lower cost.”8;
. Autumn Statement 2016: “The Autumn Statement announces a new National Productivity Investment Fund (NPIF) which will be targeted at four areas that are critical for improving productivity: housing, transport, digital communications, and research and development (R&D)”9.
These drivers are directly aligned with the aims and proposed options in this SOBC.
1.3.1 Anglia Route Strategy
GEML forms part of the Anglia Route, one of the eight Network Rail routes. It runs from London Liverpool Street to Norwich, with associated branch lines (see Figure S5).
Figure S5: The Anglia Route
The 2016 Anglia Route Study10 (forming part of the LTPP) analysed the future growth and requirements for the next 30 years in order to establish the capacity and capability of the railway. The process included stakeholder engagement with the Great Eastern taskforce, local operators and central and local Network Rail teams.
8 http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/about-us/publications/our-customers-our-people.html 9 UK Government (2016) link 10 Network Rail (2016) “Anglia Route Study” p4 Version 1.0 Page 15 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300 Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
It forecasted passenger growth on the GEML outer suburban services into London serving commuter markets from Southend Victoria, Chelmsford, Clacton on Sea and Braintree to rise by up to 75% from 2011 to 204311. This was reported due to the East of England seeing the fastest growth in employment outside London in recent years, and contributes significantly to the UK economy. For this reason, the study outlined the vital economic importance for the GEML on the Anglia Route, including:
Significant commuter flows of 33,000 per peak hour into London Liverpool Street;
Long distance travel providing connectivity to the bioscience, engineering and energy industries;
An artery for freight traffic to and from the major port at Felixstowe.
To meet the Anglia route demand growth, the study identified a number of priority interventions that are required. The introduction of Crossrail services in 2019 was acknowledged as providing the capacity required for inner demand growth between Shenfield and London in the short to medium term. However, the study outlined a capacity gap for outer suburban GEML services and concluded that digital technologies would help deliver capacity, journey time and performance outputs.
Figure S5: The proportion of people commuting to Greater London
Data: Census 2011, Crown © Office for National Statistic and National Records of Scotland Boundary data: UK Data Service, 2011 census boundary data England and Wales [2015]
11 Ibid, p4 Version 1.0 Page 16 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.4 Baseline
To provide some level of capacity uplift, a number of schemes are already committed on the Anglia route. These works form the “Do Minimum” against which all options will be assessed (for further detail, see the Options section below), and are additions to the planned maintenance and renewals. The schemes are:
Crossrail: Twelve trains of nine cars each and 205 meters in length will service the stations between (and including) Shenfield and the Crossrail Core via London Liverpool Street in the high peak hour. There will also be a service of 4tph between Gidea Park and Liverpool Street;
Greater Anglia Franchise: The new Greater Anglia Franchise is delivering new high capacity rolling stock and revising the timetable to 20 tph between Liverpool Street and Shenfield on the main lines. These changes will provide 9% more seating capacity compared to today. The demand forecasts from the Greater Anglia franchisee have been used with the LTPP demand forecast applied beyond that point. A lower growth sensitivity using TfL RailPlan has also been tested;
Figure S6: Projected increase in capacity from the Greater Anglia franchise
Increase in Seated Capacity - GEML 20,000
19,500 9% increase
19,000
18,500 Seats
18,000
17,500
17,000 2017 2020
Bow Junction: will provide capacity for an additional two trains between Southend Victoria and London Liverpool Street in the high peak and an additional train between London Liverpool Street and Chelmsford. The delivery of this scheme has been deferred to CP6 following the Hendy Review.
Version 1.0 Page 17 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.5 Business Need and Service Gaps – The Problem Statement
There are a number of factors which make intervention on the Anglia Route necessary now. The existing Baseline initiatives do not address the following challenges and factors directly or to the sufficient levels.
1.5.1 Provide capacity to meet passenger and freight demand
Despite the additional 9% capacity that the Greater Anglia franchise will provide from 2020, passenger standing is still forecast between Chelmsford and Wickford to London Liverpool Street in the morning peak by 2023. This is shown in the figure below which includes the original route study analysis next to the updated version based on the Greater Anglia Franchise.
Figure S7: High peak average load factor 2023 Route Study and updated version
Route study (March 2016) 24tph (with Updated (Feb 2017) – Bow Jn giving 2tph increase on 2013) 20tph & new rolling stock
Chelmsford Chelmsford WDF WDF
Ingatestone Ingatestone Wickford Wickford Billericary Billericary
Shenfield Shenfield
Seats available – up to 75% taken Seats available – 75-85% seats taken Seats full – some standing (85-100% seats taken) 0-40% standing space utilised London London Stratford Stratford Liverpool Street Liverpool Street 40-80% standing space utilised 80 + % standing space utilised
To avoid this crowding on the GEML, additional services are required. Figure S8 below shows the requirement gap by setting out the current services delivered, the 2020 Greater Anglia franchise commitments, and the additional services required in both 2023 and 2043 to meet demand (assuming 20 tph baseline).
Figure S8: GEML Seats / train paths required 2017 (current 2020 Greater 2023 capacity 2043 capacity service Anglia requirements requirements provided) franchise commitment[1] To 15 tph 14 tph 1700 +2 tph 6100 +6-7 tph Chelmsford seats seats To Southend/ 7 tph 6 tph 2300 +2-3 tph 4900 +5 tph Southminster seats seats Total 22tph 20tph 24-25 tph 31-32 tph [1] High capacity rolling stock is introduced therefore although a decrease of 2 tph provides an increase in seating capacity.
Version 1.0 Page 18 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure S9: Paths required (GEML)
Seats / Paths Required - GEML 12,000 14 10,000 12 10 8,000 8 6,000 6
SeatsRequired 4,000 4
2,000 2 Train Paths RequiredPaths Train 0 0 2023 2025 2029 2043 Trains required - right axis Seats Required - left axis
As well as an intensive passenger network, the Anglia Route provides two important arteries for long distance freight flows from the east coast ports of Felixstowe and Harwich. By the mid-2020s it is anticipated that the Port of Felixstowe will require 48 freight trains per day (ftpd) to continue on both the cross-country route (via Ely) and London via the GEML. This requirement will further add to the congestion of the network.
The current infrastructure layout on the Anglia Route prevents the aforementioned level of train service to be provided. The Anglia Route Study tested whether up to 27 tph could be accommodated on existing infrastructure (peak passenger services), and a number of pinch points were identified. These are set out in Figure S10. The implementation of enhancements at Bow Junction will provide capacity for an additional three trains per hour in addition to the Greater Anglia 20 tph timetable. However, these additions to the service are not enough; crowding is still expected in CP6 and CP7.
Version 1.0 Page 19 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure S10: GEML constraints
Modelling work completed by Digital Railway Programme and conclusions from the Early Contractor Involvement work streams have identified that digital solutions can increase capacity where plain line headway is the constraint; however, where junctions or speed mix is the constraint although ETCS will deliver improvements it will not fully resolve the constraints. Therefore, a system wide upgrade approach combining digital and conventional works is required to deliver the 27tph output.
Further details on the capacity constraints and conclusions can be found in Appendix C.
1.5.2 Improve performance whilst increasing capacity
There is a need to improve performance of both passenger and freight services on the route whilst also increasing frequency to meet the demands of customers. The key areas identified are the Great Eastern Main Line, the West Anglia Main Line, the North London Line and the Gospel Oak to Barking line. The Felixstowe to Nuneaton freight route will be considered if this SOBC progresses to the next stage of development.
On the GEML there is no regulation point for freight trains from Felixstowe between Colchester and the North London Line in the Up direction. The lack of regulation point acerbates the speed differential between Colchester and Shenfield between freight and passenger trains.
Train control operations are currently based around significant manual operation in a complex infrastructure configuration. This can lead to train regulation decisions that are currently not optimised and at times of perturbation can become a real issue for service management and recovery. Replacement of train control systems could significantly automate the decision making Version 1.0 Page 20 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) process and improve the decisions made in both normal operation and at times of perturbation, reducing reactionary delay.
The Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) workstream has estimated the potential reduction of delay minutes related to the different varieties of Traffic Management, see Figure S11. Further details on performance benefit assumptions can be found in Appendix D.
Figure S11: Impact of Traffic Management
1.5.3 Improve Journey Time
The East Anglia Franchise specification includes a commitment to deliver one peak Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 minutes train. To deliver this service consistently throughout the day additional capacity is required to run fast services alongside stopping services and freight trains. The constraints outlined in Figure S10 also need to be resolved to deliver the journey time aspirations.
Currently the Train Planning Rules include additional time for approach control and pathing time is often added to timetables to achieve compliant paths. ETCS offers potential opportunities to reduce these allowances, which could improve journey times, this needs to be explored in more detail in the next stage of development.
1.5.4 Assets are due for renewal in CP6 and CP7
On the Anglia Route a number of signalling assets are due for notional life expiry in CP6 and CP7. Liverpool Street Integrated Electronic Control Centre (IECC) equipment will transfer to the Romford ROC in circa 2020.
Version 1.0 Page 21 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.6 Options
1.6.1 Do Minimum
The SOBC does not include an option to “Do Nothing” option because without additional investment there will still be a requirement to maintain and renew assets and deliver the already committed enhancements in the Enhancement Delivery Plan. The baseline ‘do minimum’ compares options against the Command Control and Signalling (CCS) renewals included in the Network Rail Plan submission over 60 years, committed enhancements in the Enhancement Delivery Plan and service changes in franchises track access agreements.
The ‘do minimum’ option would result in the Anglia Route maintaining its current output ability, in addition to the committed changes which have been made by the Greater Anglia franchise and Crossrail. However, there will still be a crowding gap by 2023, by which point passengers will increasingly be forced to stand from Chelmsford to London Liverpool Street, a journey of 35 minutes or more. If additional services are not provided passengers will be increasingly left behind on platforms which will increase dwell times impacting on the reliability of the current service.
Ultimately this will stifle economic growth prospects for the region and have a detrimental effect upon the labour market for jobs in London. It will forgo a critical opportunity to improve productivity for a key part of the UK economy.
1.6.2 Discounted options
The analysis conducted for this SOBC and over the course of the Anglia Route Study has discounted a number of options that would otherwise increase capacity in the peak. A description of each option and the justification for it being deemed inappropriate for this SOBC is provided:
Figure S12: discounted options Option Reason for option being discounted Discounted Timetable The Greater Anglia franchise is assumed by the programme and the Anglia changes Route Study to have made the maximum use of the available rolling stock and infrastructure capacity and therefore there is no further option to change the timetable to meet demand Train By 2020 the new Greater Anglia franchise’s commitment will extend trains to the Lengthening maximum possible length with current infrastructure – 240 meters. The rolling stock will also have high density seating. The Anglia Route study concluded that the works necessary to achieve trains longer than 240m would cost more and produce fewer benefits than capacity enhancement works to enable more trains to run Fares Policy Fare rises would be a potential way of smoothing demand growth on the Great Eastern Main Line. However this is not developed further here due to the wider economic disbenefits such an approach would involve, and likely lack of support from Government and stakeholders
Terminate Terminating West Anglia Main Line (WAML) services at Stratford would release WAML capacity for additional GEML services between Stratford and London Liverpool services at Street. This is not consistent with growth demands of WAML and the impact WA Stratford services have on GEML trains at London Liverpool Street is minimal. In addition, terminating WAML services would result in a worsening of the congestion at Stratford
Version 1.0 Page 22 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Double The Anglia Route study concluded that the works necessary to achieve double Decker deck trains would cost more and produce fewer benefits than capacity trains enhancement works to enable more trains to run. In addition, the increase in capacity is likely to be outweighed by increase in dwell time. ETCS Level It was assumed that within the timescales of the problem statement (2019-2024) 3 & ATO that ETCS Level 3 technology would not be ready for deployment 1.6.3 Options analysed
To meet the aforementioned route requirements, three options have been developed for analysis in this SOBC.
Option 1 – Conventional enhancements only: Achieving above 24 trains per hour with the use of conventional signalling is no longer possible without adding another more track. The area affected by this is between Chelmsford and Stratford and would require the construction of a 5th line to operate a tidal flow to accommodate extra trains. The 5th track option has been discarded in the Anglia Route Study as a non-viable option but is tested here as a counter factual argument only;
Option 2 – Conventional package with Digital: (passenger rolling stock fitment only);
Option 3 – Conventional package with Digital: (both passenger and freight rolling stock fitment).
All options include common conventional enhancements at London Liverpool Street, Witham, and Trowse Swing Bridge. Options 2 and 3 have been selected in parallel to allow the benefits of fitting all trains with ETCS against the benefits of fitting solely passenger trains to be sensitivity tested. Both of these options are variations of the system upgrade approach, which leverages the expenditure on both new rolling stock and infrastructure asset renewal. This gives rise to an opportunity to install a digital train control system to allow trains to run closer together on the existing lines, avoiding the need for the construction of a 5th line. It does not get rid of the requirement for physical enhancements at other locations but offers a less disruptive and lower cost package of interventions to meet long term demand.
Version 1.0 Page 23 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Subject to assurance Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure S12: Digital Railway options and scope
Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Output Capacity Static output Passenger peak 27tph & freight Passenger peak. 27tph & freight Passenger peak 27tph & freight growth growth growth
Performance Static output Static Output Performance improvements Performance improvements
Journey Time Static output Norwich in 90 Ipswich in 60 Norwich in 90 Ipswich in 60 Norwich in 90 Ipswich in 60
Asset Renewals Yes Yes Yes Yes
Isolated Traffic Management North London Line, Gospel Oak to North London Line, Gospel Oak to Barking, Colchester to Ipswich and Barking, Colchester to Ipswich and Felixstowe Felixstowe
Integrated Traffic Management London Liverpool Street to Colchester London Liverpool Street to Colchester and Stansted and Stansted
ETCS Level 2 with signals Stratford – Chelmsford
ETCS Level 2 no signals Stratford – Chelmsford*
Rolling Stock Fitment (ETCS & C-DAS) Passenger rolling stock All rolling stock
Liverpool Street Passenger Circulation Yes Yes Yes
Liverpool Street platforms Yes Yes Yes
Bow Junction Yes Yes Yes Yes
5th Track Shenfield to Chelmsford Yes
Witham Dynamic Loops Yes Yes Yes
Haughley Junction Doubling Yes – assumed funded by Strategic Yes – assumed funded by Strategic Yes – assumed funded by Strategic Yes – assumed funded by Strategic Freight Network (SFN) Freight Network (SFN) Freight Network (SFN) Freight Network (SFN)
Trowse Swing Bridge Doubling Yes Yes Yes
*includes a section with signals between Stratford and Romford, on the electric lines only, for driver training and to avoid the fitment of C2C rolling stock
Version 1.0 Page 24 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.7 Option benefits
Each of the digital options is expected to yield the following qualitative and quantitative benefits (there will be variance between the benefit resulting from Option 2 compared to Option 3).
1.7.1 Safety
Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) meets regulatory requirements (RSR 99). However, ETCS is subject to the test of ‘reasonable practicability’; with the procurement of new trains and the relative costs of re-signalling with ETCS compared with conventional signalling. As ETCS meets these conditions it is now reasonably practical, as part of an integrated programme, to install ETCS as the primary Train Protection System.
Improved safety for trackside workers: Network Rail has made a key commitment of zero fatalities or major injuries to the workforce by the end of CP5. Digital Railway could contribute significant safety improvements for trackside workers by revolutionising the way track access is controlled and potentially reducing the number of trackside assets requiring maintenance. Additionally, the Digital Railway technologies will transform the management of track possessions, facilitating a movement from manually controlled blockages and warning systems to automated warning systems and access controlled remotely from a trackside digital device. The safety benefits of this transformation are considered in the Track Worker Safe Access Strategy, written by Chief, Health, Safety and Quality Officer (CHS&QO) and approved by Network Rail’s Executive Committee in May 2016. This strategy identifies ways in which the risk profile of track workers being struck by a train can be reduced. It identified two systems that could be made possible by the package of Digital Railway technology (described below). As a result, Digital Railway will be a critical enabler of technology driven safety improvements across the network through delivery of the Track Worker Safe Access Strategy, helping to significantly reduce the risk of injury/fatalities to trackside workers:
o Traffic Management Protection System: a new high integrity protection system that removes human error failure modes, reliance on signallers and safety critical communications. This relies on the Traffic Management system explored as part of this SOBC;
o Strategic Signal Controlled Warning System (SCWS): a new high integrity, highly reliable warning system that can be deployed over whole lines of a route. This relies on integration with the real time train position information enabled by Digital Railway.
Automatic Train Protection: The Railway Safety Regulations 1999 requires all trains to operate with a train protection system and sets out the definition of an acceptable train protection system. TPWS as a system does not provide the same safety levels as ETCS; however it has proven to be an effective and cost effective solution reducing the GB train collision risk considerably. Compared to ETCS, TPWS has the following limitations:
o The system is not fail safe in design, (although the design simplicity, internal system monitoring and application design provides a high level of capability);
o The system is fitted only to high risk signals, significant speed restrictions and approaches to terminal station buffer stops;
Version 1.0 Page 25 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
o It cannot be optimised for every type of rolling stock and therefore does not provide 100% Signal Passed At Danger protection – even for passenger trains there can be ‘gaps’ in provided protection;
o In order not to impact driving styles aligned with the capability of passenger trains, the system is not optimised for freight.
The use of ETCS offers the opportunity to introduce new ways of working which take use the enhanced level of train protection to make faster and safer access to the infrastructure by workers on the track. The reduced time to take possession of the line for disruptive access could reduce the time workers are exposed to the track-side environment to carry out their activities.
Modern technology at level crossings to support Network Rail Initiatives: The mitigation measures contained within the system wide upgrade may improve level crossing safety.
1.7.2 Increase capacity
The options provide the capacity for up to 27 train paths per hour in the peak providing sufficient capacity to meet demand to 2029. For passenger operators, meeting this demand requirement will keep standing levels to a minimum and improve customer satisfaction. For freight operators, this will mean greater flexibility to meet demand from businesses across the wider UK.
In the Economic Case the capacity benefits will be assessed in a phased approach aligned to demand growth.
1.7.3 Performance on the Anglia Route
The core plan/re-plan function of Traffic Management enables a much faster response to delays, to find alternative routes for trains in a fast and effective manner. In turn, this offers the potential to reduce reactionary delays (a substantial portion of overall delay minutes) and improve performance on the route. Deploying Traffic Management on the Anglia Route will allow for better management of trains between the GEML and North London Line.
1.7.4 Performance across routes
Freight trains and open access operators cross multiple Route boundaries. There is an opportunity if Traffic Management is linked between Routes to manage this interface more effectively as signallers and controllers will have visibility of incidents across boundaries. This will enable more effective regulating decisions to be made thereby improving performance for services.
The scope of Traffic Management includes the cross-London lines which mean that it can be linked to all five Routes which radiate from London – including better freight connections between the Wessex Route, Anglia and other areas of the national network.
This would create a Traffic Management network increasing the scale effects of it as the interfaces can be managed more effectively by giving signallers and controllers forward look ahead. This would be enhanced if freight trains are fitted with C-DAS but are not entirely dependent on this.
In addition, Traffic Management also represents an opportunity to improve resilience, as alternative routes can be used to run trains in times of disruption. Using the new technology to easily identify and run trains across alternative paths offers an opportunity to further reduce the reactionary delays on the network.
Version 1.0 Page 26 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.7.5 Improve journey time Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60
The capacity provided by the digital and conventional packages of works enables additional trains to meet the Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 aspirations whilst maintaining the current levels of connectivity to intermediate stations with existing services. Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 is supported with better acceleration or rolling stock along with dwell times however ETCS will further help with flow.
1.7.6 Command, Control and Signalling Asset Renewal
The signalling asset condition will be improved by deployment of ETCS and, as a result, reliability, maintenance requirements and safety will all be improved. In the specific areas where the ETCS options will be deployed on the Anglia Route the requirement for renewal will be accelerated due to the improved signalling asset condition and, therefore, there is an increased cost.
1.7.7 Benefits to be explored in more detail at the next stage of development
There are a number of potential benefits of the digital technologies that should be explored further at the next stage of development to establish which can be realised in the initial deployment:
Customer information: Traffic Management will enable a greater level of granularity of customer information and a better forward view of the consequence of delay or service changes;
Opportunities for reductions in operating costs – for example ongoing Driver training costs: In-cab speed based signalling installed over a large area may reduce requirements for driver route knowledge and therefore driving training costs after the initial re-training costs;
Planning Rules: There are opportunities from planning rules changes, for example ETCS removes the need for approach control, to reduce journey times;
More Granular and Dynamic Timetabling: The national timetable is currently planned and managed in thirty second blocks, which is often too large to reflect incremental improvements in performance and realise associated benefits. Digital Railway may enable more granular timetable planning, allowing maximum benefits to be realised and passengers to receive the most efficient service possible. Traffic Management and C-DAS will enable the train service to be dynamically re-planned during perturbation and the result communicated to the drivers;
Greater operational flexibility: ETCS will introduce bi-direction capability on all lines. At the next stage of development the potential availability and reliability benefits should be assessed to see if additional infrastructure changes required to unlock this benefit in passenger service have a value for money case;
Maintenance costs: At this stage command, control and signalling maintenance costs are assumed to be neutral. This is because as some costs will go up (e.g. the need for specialist skills and maintaining signalling equipment on trains), others will go down (e.g. due to the reduced frequency of maintenance activities). However, there are opportunities to undertake faster and safer disruptive access. If realised this would result in greater productivity of all maintenance, enhancement and renewals activities and could result in substantial cost savings and a reduction in disruption to passengers and freight customers;
Version 1.0 Page 27 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Speed restrictions: There are opportunities to eliminate speed restrictions that are demanded by signal sighting and introduce more sophisticated differential speed limits between different types of train. Emergency speed restrictions will be able to be applied automatically without having to caution each driver. Marker boards for temporary speed restrictions will not have to be placed which avoids the need for staff to go lineside which has a safety and efficiency benefit;
Overspeeding – ETCS means that drivers will not be able to overspeed both during normal operations or when speed restrictions are applied. This is a benefit directly but also enables speed limits to be more closely defined in extent and impact on particular rolling stock.
The Economic Case will value a subset of these benefits and the benefits management methodology can be found in the Management Case.
1.8 Key Assumptions
In forming and assessing the options set out above, this SOBC has made the following assumptions.
1.8.1 Digital Programme enabling investments
There are a number of enabling projects to deliver Digital Railway. These costs are included in the Economic Case.
ETCS at the Melton Rail Innovation and Development Centre: 14 mile rail test track suitable for testing ETCS first in class;
ETCS First in Class: Passenger Trains;
Freight ETCS Programme.
1.8.2 Components of Traffic Management
The core component of Traffic Management consists of a plan/re-plan function. The options include allowances for enabling infrastructure for Connected Driver Advisory System (C-DAS) and Stock and Crew. The options also include fitting rolling stock with C-DAS equipment.
1.8.3 Passenger rolling stock assumptions
Digital deployment will require either retro-fitting rolling stock or ordering new stock with systems already enabled: The assumptions on unit numbers are set out below. These will inform the economic and financial analysis. Signals have been retained in all ETCS options between Romford and Stratford on the electric lines for driver training and to avoid the need to retrofit C2C units.
Figure S13: Rolling stock assumptions
Rolling stock assumptions No. of units
New Great Anglia units – assumed to be fitted from new or to come ETCS ready 169
Crossrail stock to be upgraded 65
Total units 234
Version 1.0 Page 28 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
For an ETCS no signals option all rolling stock must be fitted. It is assumed this would trigger the minimum negotiation volume of freight fitment (171 locomotive) and 56 on-track machines (OTM). This is a worst case scenario and at the next stage of development a more targeted fitment strategy needs to be developed with the Freight Operating Companies and heritage train operators.
It is DfT policy that in a new franchise, rolling stock will be required to be fitted with ETCS where this aligns with committed funded plans to deliver ETCS on the infrastructure. Therefore ETCS implementation would require future franchises to procure / lease ETCS fitted trains. As DfT let franchises do not cover all rolling stock, other rolling stock including Freight and Open Access Operators would require changes to Track Access Agreements between the operators and Network Rail to ensure that the rolling stock is fitted with ETCS, and that Network Rail would not be liable for the ETCS costs of these vehicles.
1.9 Dependant Schemes
The benefits of the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme are dependent on a number of schemes:
Current digital deployments (Thameslink, Crossrail Romford and Cardiff): The evidence for the benefit of digital technologies will be demonstrated by the existing deployments. Traffic management has not been deployed in a GB operating environment so evidence of its GB specific benefits will be confirmed from July 2018 and Thameslink’s commissioning of Traffic Management. Subsequent Digital Railway projects will also build upon the knowledge, skills and expertise that the current projects have developed. In addition, there are specific interface between Crossrail and Romford Traffic Management deployment on the Anglia Route;
Replacement of Greater Anglia rolling stock: The new franchise has ordered an entirely new fleet to be delivered by 2020. The introduction of these trains will increase seating capacity by around 9%. If these are fitted with ETCS in-cab signalling from manufacture this is a lower cost opportunity to fit the trains. This is an ongoing discussion between the DfT and Abellio Greater Anglia (AGA);
Remodelling of Bow Junction: Major works to remodel Bow Junction are expected to come to a close in March 2023 (as per the Enhancement Delivery Plan), to allow for an additional two train paths along the GEML. Bow Junction is a key dependency to increasing the train service on the GEML;
Crossrail: The Crossrail project is due to be completed at the end of 2019. Resulting from this project, an increased number of trains will service the inner GEML route between London Liverpool Street and Shenfield. This project will see that the number of inner GEML train services meets forecast demand;
Other Digital Railway schemes: The GEML Upgrade Programme business case is being developed as one of five route targeted business cases. Coordination across these route deployments will be needed to maximise efficiencies.
There are opportunities to design the overall Digital Railway Programme to align ETCS and Traffic Management deployments between Routes:
For ETCS and C-DAS the overlapping usage of passenger and freight rolling stock between Anglia and LNE means that there is a synergy between these two proposed schemes. This would share the costs of investment in fleet fitment. For the Southern
Version 1.0 Page 29 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
East Coast Main Line virtually all freight trains cross onto the Anglia Route and therefore would be share the cost if both Routes invested in ETCS infrastructure.
For Traffic Management there are synergies between its deployment in Anglia and interfaces with all five Routes that radiate from London. If these are deployed across Route boundaries the opportunities for managing the interaction with other Routes by having a look ahead and cross-boundary management of flows are considerable. This particularly applies to freight flows across London and between each of the Routes.
The approach to managing these dependencies is addressed in the Management Case.
1.9.1 Constraints
Constraints for the GEML Upgrade Programme include:
Skills, capability and resources: Success of the programme is reliant upon availability of resources with the required skills in both the programme team and on the Anglia route. Examples of key resources include those of the capability of the supply chain, driver and operator training and signalling testers;
Supply chain: the maturity of the UK supply chain for digital rail technologies and availability of other partners required for technology delivery and deployment may constrain the progress of the programme. However, analysis to date indicates that there is sufficient capacity in the supply chain.12 This will need to be examined in more detail at the next stage of development;
Disruption: The need to maintain a functional railway and minimise disruption to passengers will restrict the speed at which digital technologies can be deployed. This includes both the infrastructure and also the disruption of releasing trains to be retro-fitted;
Affordability and funding: The progression of Digital Railway is dependent on the availability of programme funding and affordability of technologies.
These issues are addressed in the Commercial and Management Cases.
1.10 Risks
The key risks associated with the options identified:
Figure S14: Risks associated with each option
Risk Mitigation
Greater Anglia rolling stock fitment not possible during Discussions ongoing with the DfT manufacture due to timescales passed for fitment; and franchisee – mitigation is to make the trains ETCS ready
The options do not align with the signalling renewals plans To be integrated and included in the and enhancement plans. Therefore disruptive access is Route’s Strategic Business Plan required which is not factored into the CP6 access plan;
Conventional upgrades required to support increased
12 Network Rail (2016), “Digital Railway Market Research Study”. Version 1.0 Page 30 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) capacity are not integrated with DR technologies;
ETCS does not provide the capability to deliver off peak journey time savings and freight output;
Complex interface with ‘as deployed’ digital systems on Crossrail and Essex Thameside; Further assessment in next stage of Lack of operational concept to enable detailed validation of development the capacity outcomes;
The full capability of DR technologies are not realised as planning systems cannot plan timetables to less than 30 second increments;
Traction power supply do not support train service uplift and Assumed that this will be addressed infrastructure changes; as part of a power supply upgrade associated with the introduction of new trains
Number of level crossings between London and Norwich and An allowance has been made but the proposed service increases require level crossing safety this needs to be investigated in risk mitigations; detail
Freight not being fitted will restrict benefits of ETCS roll out; Investigated the case for freight fitment to provide business case justification to seek funding
Risks resulting from uncertainty over costs and benefits. Cost uncertainty – the risk has been presented and it will need to be investigated in more detail before a final investment decision is made – this is as per the Memorandum of Understanding between Network Rail and the DfT
Benefits uncertainty - will be addressed by evaluation the actual performance of Thameslink, Crossrail and the Traffic Management 1st Deployments (Cardiff and Romford). This will provide evidence of the technology in a GB operating environment from 2018 onwards.
The approach to mitigating these risks is addressed in the Management Case.
Version 1.0 Page 31 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
1.11 Strategic Case Summary and Recommendations
To summarise the Strategic Case:
Demand is growing, and limited capacity and performance has the potential to act as a break on economic growth across the region;
There are a number of physical constraints on the Route which are preventing additional paths being added. In particular, headway restrictions between Chelmsford and London Liverpool Street;
The cost of physical intervention to add more track is likely to be prohibitive. ETCS offers a potential solution to deliver additional capacity whilst avoiding such schemes. The opportunity to deliver ETCS to the network is presented by the requirement for signalling renewals in CP6;
The delivery of Traffic Management on the route offers the potential to improve performance. This would reduce the reactionary delays faced by the route, and by improving the flow of traffic between the Anglia Route and other parts of the national network;
The Economic Case will provide more detail on the costs and benefits of these options.
Version 1.0 Page 32 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
2. Economic Case
2.1 Purpose
The Strategic Case has established the approach to identify the preferred option(s) to meet the business need.
The Economic Case has assessed the options, identifying their impacts, and value for money. The evidence and assumptions available have been presented; alongside key risks to the conclusions drawn from the analysis. It is expected that at the OBC and FBC stages the evidence, assumptions and methodology will be developed and updated. The SOBC Economic Case presents initial findings and presents indicative value for money of the options.
The economic appraisal contains information relevant to the financial case, such as the financial benefits of the scheme (revenue and operating cost impact). The Economic Case does not address the Commercial or Management Cases.
2.2 Approach
The value for money case has been developed in accordance with the DfT’s appraisal guidance, and the web-based transport analysis guidance of WebTAG, available at www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag. To assess value for money, the monetised impacts are summed to establish an initial benefit-cost ratio (BCR), which implies an initial value for money band (poor, low, medium, high or very high), see Figure E1. This band can then be adjusted to account for impacts where qualitative or quantitative, but not monetised, information is available. The appraisal has been undertaken over a 60 year period from 2024. All costs and benefits have been discounted to 2010 values by applying HM Treasury’s the Green Book social discount rate.
The costs in the BCR are the net costs to public sector funders (e.g. DfT). This typically includes capital and operating expenditure, less any revenues generated. Most train operating costs and fares revenue are assumed to accrue to government, because they will be reflected in future franchise bids or changes.
The benefits in the “standard” BCR of a rail scheme are those that can be quantified and valued in monetary terms in line with WebTAG guidance. This typically includes:
Time savings (user benefits): for current and new passengers as a result of improvements in service, valued using WebTAG’s “values of time” for business, commuter and leisure passengers. Improvements in service quality (e.g. higher service frequency, or reduced crowding due to increased train capacity) are converted to equivalent time savings;
Benefits of reducing road congestion (non-user benefits): as people shift to rail, including road user travel time (valued similarly to time for rail passengers); safety benefits (measured as fatalities & injuries avoided, with values reflecting both “human” and economic
costs); and some environmental benefits (e.g. tonnes of CO2 emissions avoided, valued using guidance from the Department of Energy & Climate Change);
Revenue: from more rail journeys and passengers.
Version 1.0 Page 33 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure E1: Value for money category for BCR (Benefit Cost Ratio) ranges
Value for money category BCR
Poor <1
Low 1-1.5
Medium 1.5-2
High 2-4
Very High >4
2.3 Appraisal Parameters
Figure E2: Parameters and approaches applied
Parameter Approach Source Data/guidance
Appraisal Period 60 years from 2024 WebTAG 3.5/Digital Rail Project Team
Price base 2010 Market Prices WebTAG 3.5
Discounting Discounted to 2010 based on HMT The Green Book/WebTAG 3.5 the social discount rate of 3.5% for 30 years and 3.0% thereafter
The initial results of the appraisal of the options have been presented as a high level PV (Present Value) of costs and benefits in Section 2.6.1 and at a more disaggregated level in a summary TEE (Transport Economic Efficiency) Table, Section 2.8.
2.4 Economic Options
The Strategic case has set out the detail of the options to be tested. In order to test the economic viability of these options, all costs and benefits are measured incremental to an assumed baseline, as described in detail in the Strategic Case. The base case and options relevant and assessed as part of the economic case are summarised as:
The base case:
o Assumes conventional signalling renewals in CP6 and CP7;
o Crossrail: Twelve trains of nine cars each and 205 meters in length will service the stations between (and including) Shenfield and London Liverpool Street Stations in the high peak hour. There will also be a service of 4tph between Gidea Park and Liverpool Street, as well as 12tph through the Crossrail Core.
o Greater Anglia franchise: Delivering new high capacity rolling stock which revises the timetable to 20 tph between Liverpool Street and Shenfield on the main lines. These changes will provide 9 per cent more seating capacity compared to today.
o Bow Junction: will provide capacity for an additional 2 trains between Southend Victoria and London Liverpool Street in the high peak and an additional train Version 1.0 Page 34 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
between London Liverpool Street and Chelmsford. The delivery of this scheme has been deferred to Control Period 6 following the Hendy Review.
o There are assumed an additional 3 services during the high peak hour that are enabled by the spare capacity in the timetable and the impact of committed enhancements at Bow Junction - yielding a total of 23tph
Option 1: Conventional enhancements only:
Costs
o Construction of a 5th line between Chelmsford and Stratford;
o conventional enhancements at London Liverpool Street, Witham and Trowse Swing Bridge; and
o operating costs of additional trains.
Benefits
o Incremental benefits of 23tph to 27tph over the three hour morning and three hour evening peak
Option 2: Conventional package with Digital (passenger fitment only)
Costs
o With conventional signals (therefore no conventional renewals costs avoided);
o conventional enhancements at London Liverpool Street, Witham and Trowse Swing Bridge;
o Passenger rolling stock train fitment;
o Traffic Management; and
o Operating costs associated with additional trains
o A share of network-wide Digital Railway costs – for example provision of a test track.
Benefits
o Incremental benefits of 23tph to 27tph over the three hour morning and three hour evening peak;
o Performance benefits associated with Traffic Management.
Option 3: Conventional package with Digital ETCS Level 2 without signals and extended Traffic Management (passenger and freight fitment)
o As Option 2 but without conventional signals; and
o Additional train fitment costs (freight and on-track machines).
Version 1.0 Page 35 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Option 3 Preferred: Conventional package with Digital ETCS Level 2 without signals and extended Traffic Management (passenger and freight fitment)
o As option 3 but with costs and benefits pushed back to better align with the base case renewals; and
o train fitment costs shared proportional to the train km (passenger) and tonne km (freight and on-track machines) within the option scope area
Option 4 : Traffic Management only
o Appraises the costs and benefits of Traffic Management only over a 30 year appraisal period
The options are described in detail in the Strategic Case.
2.5 Assumptions
This section contains key assumptions applied in the analysis. A complete list of assumptions and sources can be found in Appendix C.
2.5.1 Costs
The costs of the option are compared against the cost of the base case giving an incremental cost, against which the benefits are compared.
Infrastructure costs
Figure E3 summarises the categories within the infrastructure costs of the options.
Figure E3: Option infrastructure costs Category Description Comment/Sensitivity Digital Capex Railway control systems and associated works. Train Fitment Rolling stock fitment/ retro fitment Where conventional signals are (passenger and freight) of initial retained as part of the option, only lifecycle. those passenger rolling stock associated with an enhanced service are required to be fitted. Where the option assumes signals away (no conventional signals remain) then all rolling stock within the scope area is required to be fitted. This is a fixed cost that could be shared across a wider program. Additional Such as new platforms, junction enhancements layout enhancements etc that would be required to enable the benefits.
Version 1.0 Page 36 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Digital Possessions Costs associated with If there is alignment with the possessions required for Digital conventional renewals base case Capex. then the net change in this cost category would be zero. Digital Business Business change costs The central appraisal assumes all change associated. these fixed costs are incurred by the scheme. The programme case Digital Program costs Programme costs including items explores sharing of these costs. such as test tracks and programme management. Development costs of shared components only, for example standard reference designs. Level Crossing Level Crossing enhancements Upgrades required to deliver the output. Renewal of Digital Future renewal costs of the Capex infrastructure within the 60 year appraisal period. Train Fitment Future renewal costs of train These costs are not included in the Renewal fitment. economic appraisal as current DfT policy is that a new franchise will require new trains to be fitted with ETCS where it aligns with committed plans to deliver ETCS on the infrastructure. Conventional There are conventional signalling These cost saving are not applied to Signalling renewals renewals in the base case, and in options where conventional signals some of the options. Where there remain (Option 2). is less conventional signalling renewals required in the option; these are costs avoided. Level Crossing N/A renewals Network Rail Ops and CCS Maintenance included only, Ops not included because savings Maintenance variable track access charge used contained within baseline CCS as a proxy for increased costs of renewals work bank. running more trains. TOC Ops and Not included as a result of ETCS but Maintenance included for the cost of running extra trains. FOC Ops and Not included. Maintenance Traffic Management Costs associated with deployment of Traffic Management; isolated, interfaced or integrated. Traffic Management renewals
Version 1.0 Page 37 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Risk is removed and an Optimism bias of 66% is applied to the infrastructure capital costs. Maintenance and operating costs have a 41% Optimism Bias applied, as recommended by DfT’s WebTAG 3.5.9.
Efficiency
Early Contractor Involvement evidence (Appendix E) suggests that a committed programme of works can help drive fixed costs down. The digital infrastructure costs have assumed this within the core options; a sensitivity test removes this assumption.
Rolling stock operating costs
The trains consist of 5+5 or 10 car fixed formation suburban services. The options present costs associated with running 12 additional services over the morning peak and 12 additional services over the three hour evening peak. Each additional vehicle has the following costs assumed:
Annual leasing costs per vehicle;
Additional track maintenance associated per additional vehicle mile;
Additional EC4T (Electric Current 4 Traction);
Additional staff costs.
An Optimism bias of 41% is applied, as recommended by DfT’s WebTAG 3.5.9.
2.5.2 Benefits
Crowding benefits
The crowding benefits are calculated by modelling the change in passenger volumes and crowding levels that result from an increase of services.
Passenger demand figures were based on Abellio’s franchise forecast 2020 loadings levels for the 20 GEML morning high peak services into London Liverpool Street. Growth is assumed to be in line with the total demand profile from the franchise forecasts from 2020 to 2025. After 2025 the level of demand is forecast to grow by the background growth rates for GEML services into London Liverpool Street from the London and South East Market Study. Growth is capped after 20 years. The table below displays the growth rates used as well as those implied by the Franchise figures (relative to Green Book Census figures for 2016).
Figure E4: Peak passenger growth
Period 2016-2020 2020-2025 2025-2037 2037-2077
Peak passenger 5.7% 1.5% 1.4% 0.00% growth per annum
Source: Implied growth up to 2020. Franchise growth from 2020-25. Peak demand growth into London Liverpool Street, South East Market Study after 2025.
The base case assumes 3 additional services during the high peak hour that are enabled by the spare capacity in the timetable and the impact of committed enhancements at Bow Junction - Version 1.0 Page 38 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) yielding a total of 23tph. The 3 additional services were determined on the basis of being those that provided the greatest crowding relief benefits. They originate from Clacton, Southend Victoria, and Braintree and mirror the calling patterns of services from those locations in the franchise timetable.
In the Option scenario there are 4 additional services, giving a total of 27tph in the high peak hour. As before, the additional services were identified as those that best relieved crowding. They originate from Ipswich, Southminster, Clacton, and Norwich and also mirror the calling patterns from the franchise timetable.
The rolling stock in the base case and the Option is assumed to consist of the new stock proposed for the franchise from 2020. The trains consist of 5+5 or 10 car fixed formation suburban services (this includes the service from Norwich as it is a stopping service). The number of seats increases from approximately 19’800 in the Do minimum to 23’700 in the Option. Both scenarios use the same rolling stock and so the increases in capacity are attributed solely to an increase in the number of services from 23tph to 27tph.
Crowding conditions are estimated by applying a perceived journey time uplift corresponding to the level of crowding experienced by passengers. Reductions in the level of crowding give rise to perceived time savings benefits due to improved travelling conditions. The ARC crowding model13 estimates this benefit by summing the number of people travelling from each station and comparing it to the capacity of all services that call there.
Journey time benefits
Journey time benefits arise as a result of the service frequency increasing from 23tph to 27tph during the morning and evening high peaks and from 20tph to 24tph in the shoulder peaks.
This service frequency improvement leads to three sources of benefits: value of time savings, revenue impacts, and non-user benefits. Passenger value of time savings arise from the increased service frequency as travellers spend less time waiting at stations. In addition, more travellers will be drawn to use rail due to the reduced generalised journey times, and this leads to increased passenger revenue. The increase in rail users will also yield marginal external cost benefits for non-users as a result of externalities such as decreased road congestion.
Journey time impacts are modelled using the MOIRA passenger demand modelling tool. Timetable changes are input into MOIRA which then calculates the changes to journeys made on the network. This yields an estimate of the impact of journey time changes for the year modelled. We then grow this impact by the rate of passenger demand growth for GEML services into London Liverpool Street from the London and South East Market Study.
A scenario that considered changes on the high peak hour only was also tested as well as a scenario that included all day Norwich in 90 services. These alternatives provide options for stakeholders to consider but were not carried forward as they did not improve the value for money case of the preferred options.
Performance benefits
The performance impact is assumed all-day; Figure E5 presents the growth assumption used, growth is capped 20 years from the current year, as per WebTAG.
13 Developed by Network Rail’s Economic Analysis Team Version 1.0 Page 39 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure E5: Performance benefits passenger demand growth
Period 2016-2020 2020-2025 2025-2037 2037-2077
All-day passenger growth 5.7% 1.5% 1.1% 0.00%
Source: Implied growth anticipated by franchise up to 2020. Franchise growth from 2020-25. Weighted all day demand growth in the Anglia route, London and South East Market Study after 2025.
Traffic Management
Isolated and Interfaced Traffic Management is assumed to be deployed on the GEML covering the key areas the West Anglia Main Line, the North London Line and the Gospel Oak to Barking line.
The analysis assumes that Isolated and Interfaced Traffic Management would reduce the delay minutes within the Anglia area by 4% and 6% respectively. This is driven by the assumed impact Traffic Management has on the primary and reactionary delay on incidents in the area.
The geographical scope of the Traffic Management deployment then determines which services will be impacted by the assumed delay minute reduction. The delay minute reduction corresponds to an improvement in service reliability felt by passengers. This is then measured in terms of user benefits, increase in revenue and non-user benefits. This methodology is described in more detail in Appendix D.
2.6 Economic Options Analysis
Presentation of economic appraisal results for core options, a discussion of key risks to the results and sensitivity test results.
2.6.1 Summary of core options
Figure E6 summarises the results of the economic appraisal for each option. Option 1 is poor value for money. Option 2 and 3 are low value for money. Option 4 traffic management (appraised over 30 years) has a medium value for money case and Option 3 Preferred has a high value for money category. Option 3 Preferred shows that if costs can be better aligned with renewals and train fitment/programme costs shared more evenly across a wider programme then the case for ETCS Level 2 strengthens. Option 3 Preferred and 4 should be investigated further.
Version 1.0 Page 40 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure E6: Anglia: High level appraisal results PV (Present Values) Option 4 Option 2 Option 3 2010 prices and values Traffic Option 3 Option 1 (with (without 60 year appraisal Manageme Preferred signals) signals) unless stated nt Option 3 but with costs Traffic and benefits ETCS L2 ETCS L2 Conventional Managemen pushed back with without renewals with t only to align with Description convention conventional enhancement 30 year renewals al signals signals s appraisal and retained retained period train fitment costs shared. PV Benefits (£m) 956 1279 1279 177 1184 PV Revenue (£m) 382 499 499 82 439 PV Costs (£m) 2,002 1,712 1,464 180 911 NPV (Net Present (663) 67 315 79 713 Value) BCR 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.8 2.5 Value for money Poor Low Low Medium High category *BCR = Benefit Cost Ratio; Monetised benefits / (Costs-Revenue) It is noted that the Anglia Traffic Management costs appear to be higher than other equivalent projects and needs to be investigated further.
Version 1.0 Page 41 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
2.6.2 Key risks and uncertainty
Costs
Figure E7 presents the infrastructure cost elements of Option 2 and Option 3. Option 2 retains conventional signals, so there are no avoided costs assumed. Option 3 assumes conventional signals are removed so there are assumed renewals costs avoided relative to the base case. Both Options include Traffic Management.
Figure E7: Option 2 and Option 3 (with and without the retention of conventional signals) total infrastructure costs over 60 year appraisal period. Does not include operating costs associated with additional rolling stock, infrastructure cost comparison only.
Figure E7 presents shows ETCS capex is cheaper than conventional signalling renewals in Option 3 because there are conventional signalling renewals costs that are avoided, therefore decreasing the incremental cost of Option 3 in comparison with Option 2. The key difference in costs between the Option 2 and Option 3 is the train fitment cost assumption. All rolling stock within the scope area is required to be fitted under a signals away scenario. This could be offset by Whole Life Costs savings, which may only be possible in the without signals option. The differences between the “with” and “without” signals options should be explored further in the next stage of development. Traffic Management deployment, in both Option 2 and 3 has a similar cost.
All options include the total fixed costs of train fitment, business change and programme costs, presenting the costs associated with a standalone option. Were the scheme to be part of a wider program, such as those presented in the other Digital Railway SOBCs (Wessex and ECML) then there is opportunity for these costs to be shared.
The incremental costs, required to determine value for money, are dependent on assumptions made on both the base case and the total option costs. The compounded uncertainty of both could amplify the risk to the incremental cost estimate.
Version 1.0 Page 42 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
An optimism bias of 66% is intended to account for some uncertainty. However, this is a standard application of optimism bias, which may not fully reflect the novelty, complexity or ambition of the project.
Additional rolling stock operating costs
Figure E8 shows that operating costs associated with additional rolling stock are a significant part of the costs. These are estimated from high level assumptions and should be reviewed in more detail at the next stage of development.
Figure E8: Incremental costs and benefits over 60 year appraisal period. For Option 3 as an example.
There are opportunities to refine the service structure which could reduce the train operating costs but maintain most of the benefits. This will be explored further. 2.7 Benefits
Traffic Management benefits
Figure E8 presents the present value of benefits. Performance benefits associated with Traffic Management are a significant proportion of the total. There has been a lot of stakeholder and contractor involvement in the potential benefits of Traffic Management. The benefits are based on simulation models, theory and expert opinion. Scheme’s such as Romford and Thameslink will strengthen the evidence for the benefits of this technology.
Passenger growth
The crowding relief benefits are dependent on passenger demand growth. As with all forecasts, there is uncertainty in the demand growth assumptions applied. There are risks associated with whether these growth figures will actually be realised given the current economic and political
Version 1.0 Page 43 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) climate. This has been explored as a sensitivity in section 2.8.1. A sensitivity using the NMF growth forecasts will be undertaken but is not shown at present.
2.8 Summary TEE table of core options
Figure E9: Summary TEE table of core options (60 year appraisal period unless otherwise stated)
Results of socio-economic appraisal Option 4 Traffic 2010 prices and values Option 2 Option 3 Option 3 Preferred Management (30 Option 1 (with (without Push Back & Share year appraisal Anglia Digital Rail SOBC April 2017 signals) signals) Fitment Costs period)
£m PV £m PV £m PV £m PV £m PV Net benefits to consumers and private sector (plus tax impacts) Rail user reliability benefits 0.0 275.3 275.3 152.6 275.3 Rail user journey time benefits 287.0 287.0 287.0 0.0 256.5 Reduced Crowding benefits 222.8 222.8 222.8 0.0 197.6 Non user benefits - road decongestion 496.2 552.7 552.7 31.3 504.1
Non user benefits - noise, air quality, greenhouse gases & 28.1 33.2 33.2 2.8 30.2 accident benefits
Rail user and non user disruption disbenefits during 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 possessions Current TOC revenue benefits* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Current TOC operating costs** 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Indirect taxation impact on government -78.0 -92.1 -92.1 -10.0 -79.8
sub-total (a) 956.2 1279.0 1279.0 176.6 1183.8
Costs to government (broad transport budget)
01. Digital Capex (Railway control systems and associated 0.0 247.1 247.3 0.0 216.5 works) 02. Train fitment 4.5 70.2 374.8 6.4 7.2 03. Additional Enhancements 1211.3 241.4 240.0 0.0 209.8 04. Digital Possessions 0.0 61.1 40.8 13.4 0.0 05. Digital Business Change 0.0 36.9 36.9 12.1 32.2 06. Digital Program Costs 0.0 37.2 38.2 12.6 33.4 07. Level Crossing Upgrades 44.9 22.6 23.0 0.0 20.2 08. Renewal of Digital Capex 0.0 38.0 39.2 0.0 33.6 10. Conventional Signalling renewals 0.0 0.0 -475.7 0.0 -413.2 12. NR Ops and Maintenance 0.0 83.9 32.2 0.0 27.8 15. Traffic Management 0.0 119.8 119.8 119.8 119.8 16. Traffic Management renewals 0.0 12.7 12.7 9.7 12.7 Total Capex 1,260.6 970.8 723.0 175.3 294.7
Non user benefits - road infrastructure cost changes -1 -1 -1 0 -1
Revenue transfer* -382 -499 -499 -82 -439 NR operating costs and TOC operating costs transfer** 741.3 741.3 741.3 4.7 616.5
sub-total (b) 1,619 1,212 964 98 471
Net Present Value (NPV) (a-b) -662.7 67.2 315.0 78.7 712.8
Benefit Cost Ratio to Government (BCR) (a/b) 0.59 1.06 1.33 1.80 2.51
Commercial Benefit Cost Ratio (CBCR) ((d-e)/c) -0.29 -0.25 -0.33 0.44 -0.60
Notes: *Total revenue benefits = revenue benefits to private sector + 381.94 499.26 499.26 82.03 439.24 revenue transfer to government (d)
**Total change in operating costs = change in operating costs to private sector + change in operating cost transfer to 741.27 741.27 741.27 4.67 616.46 government (e) Present Values (PVs) are in 2010 market prices and are discounted to 2010 using Social Time Preference discount rates: see Table A.1. The appraisal is in accordance with the DfT's WebTAG appraisal guidance. Results are shown for the relevant option/scenario etc relative to the Base Case. For net benefits etc, benefits are shown as positive. For costs to government etc, costs are shown as positive. Commercial BCR is defined by Network Rail not by DfT/WebTAG.
This is a summary version of the TEE tables.
Version 1.0 Page 44 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
2.8.1 Summary of sensitivities
The key risks to the conclusions have been tested
Figure E10: High level economic appraisal results: sensitivity analysis
PV (Present Values) 2010 Option 3 Option 3 Option 3 Option 3 Sen 1 Option 3 Sen 2 Option 4 Sen 1 prices and values Preferred* Preferred Sen 1 Preferred Sen 2
Option 3 but push back costs and benefits to align Option 3 Option 3 but Option 4 but 15 Push back costs Share fitment Description with base case Preferred with low remove efficiency year appraisal and benefits only costs only renewals and passenger growth savings on costs period share fitment costs
PV Benefits (£m) 1184 1184 1279 1076 1184 80
PV Revenue (£m) 439 439 499 409 439 48
PV Costs (£m) 911 1,137 1,098 911 1,004 171
NPV (Net Present Value) 713 487 682 575 620 (31)
BCR** 2.5 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.1 0.7
Value for money category High Medium High High High Low *Presented here for comparison **BCR = Benefit Cost Ratio; Monetised benefits / (Costs-Revenue)
Version 1.0 Page 45 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Option 3 Sen 1 tests Option 3 by pushing back costs and benefits associated with ETCS Level 2 by five years to better align with route signalling renewal plans with no additional possession costs. This has the impact of changing the case for Option 3 from low to medium value for money.
Option 3 Sen 2 tests Option 3 by sharing freight fitment costs based on the proportion of tonne kms versus national tonne kms; and for passenger, based on train kms specific area of ETCS only versus franchise passenger train kms. These assumptions change the case for Option 3 from low to high value for money.
Option 3 Preferred Sen 1 is the Preferred Option but assumes low passenger demand growth. This has not impacted the value for money category. The low growth scenario currently assumes all day growth of 2.5 % per annum from 2016 to 2023 and 0.5% thereafter. Peak passenger growth is assumed to be 2.4% from 2016 to 2023 and 0.7% thereafter. Growth is capped at 2037.
Option 3 Preferred Sen 2 removes the efficiency saving in the Preferred Option cost (approximately 30%). This could represent either an increase in digital train control costs or improved efficiency in delivery of conventional signalling. This does not impact the value for money category.
Option 4 Sen 1 is the same as Option 4 but assumes a 15 year appraisal period. This changes option 4 to poor value for money test; Option 4 is sensitive to the appraisal period assumed.
2.8.2 The Adjusted BCR: Wider Economic Impacts
Wider economic impacts describe some of the externalised effects of schemes on the wider economy that are otherwise unaccounted for under conventional WebTAG appraisals.
This section provides high-level estimates of the wider economic impacts (WEIs) of [1] “static clustering” agglomeration effects as well as [2] output changes resulting from firms engaged in imperfect competition. The agglomeration impacts include labour market productivity effects from better matches of employees to jobs, technology and knowledge spill-overs resulting from interactions between workers and firms, and input market effects from suppliers effectively being closer together and making shared use of infrastructure. The output changes from imperfect competition reflect the impact on market distortions that lead firms to charge higher prices than their marginal costs of production.
The approach used to calculate the agglomeration impacts is based on an uplift ratio of agglomeration benefits to other user benefits from London stations. The uplift is calculated using the benefits taken from the OXERA 2016 report “The Economic Impact of Increased Rail Capacity”. In line with the approach used in the OXERA report, the WEIs included in the adjusted BCR calculations exclude tax wedge effects resulting from potential increases in the size of the labour force, due to the lack of compelling evidence in the literature on this subject. Although these labour force impacts are not included in the adjusted BCR they could later be added to the agglomeration and output change in imperfect competition benefits.
In addition to the adjusted BCR, this section also reports some high level estimates of GVA impacts and additional jobs created by the schemes by 2035. GVA estimates are calculated using the ratio of GVA to total conventional WebTAG benefits used in TfL’s 2015 “Crossrail 2: regional and national benefits" report. Job impacts are then derived based on the GVA estimate and the average GVA per job filled in 2015 for the UK provided by the ONS.
Version 1.0 Page 46 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure E11: Adjusted BCR, and GVA and Job impacts
Preferred Option TEE tables ANGLIA - Option 3 Preferred
Results of socio-economic appraisal No signals option with push back
Units £m PV
Benefits: sub-total (a) 1,184
Net Present Value (NPV) (a-b) 713
Initial BCR - Benefit Cost Ratio to Government (BCR) (a/b) 2.51
WEI Benefits - Output Change 83
WEI Benefits – Agglomeration 124
Adjusted BCR - Adjusted for WEIs (a+WEIs)/b 2.95
GVA impact (£m PV) * 2,400 to 7,100
Employment impact in 2035 (# of jobs)** 1,000 to 3,100
The GVA and job impact figures above are indicative only and are not used in the calculation of the initial or adjusted BCR. GVA and job impacts may not fully account for displacement from other areas and hence may overstate the national impact of the schemes. Furthermore, in some cases other factors unrelated to rail may be required to generate the additional economic and employment activity.
2.9 Conclusions
There is a value for money case to deploy ETCS Level 2 without retaining conventional signals and Traffic management on the Great East Main Line shown in Option 3 Preferred. If it is possible to better align the switch to ETCS with GEML’s renewal plans and if train fitment/programme costs can be shared across routes there is a strong case to take this option forward. On its own Option 3 cannot carry the full program and train fitment costs; which means it is not a suitable candidate to be first in a larger program but sharing train fitment costs alone without alignment produces a high value for money case.
Option conclusions
Enhancing the Great Eastern Main Line through conventional enhancements only with additional enhancement to achieve 27 tph in the peak output is poor value for money, nor a viable option:
Demonstrated by Option 1;
Retaining conventional signals alongside the ETCS Level 2 upgrade is low value for money:
Demonstrated by Option 2;
This assumes no savings in conventional signalling can be made as these would need to be retained and maintained in the future. Version 1.0 Page 47 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
ETCS Level 2 without conventional signals (signals away), on the GEML has only low value for money:
Demonstrated by Option 3;
If train fitment and programme costs can be shared with other routes then the case for ETCS level 2 without conventional signals (signals away) and traffic management can be strengthened. The case can be further strengthened by pushing back work to better align with conventional route renewal work making it a high value for money case.
Demonstrated by Option 3 Preferred;
There are potentially greater WLC (Whole Life Cost) savings not captured at this stage;
Traffic Management in isolation is medium value for money under the deployment scope assumed and a 30 year appraisal period
Demonstrated by Option 4.
Programme conclusions
As described in the Strategic case, the Programme Case considers a defined programme of work to help provide clarity, certainty, order, scale of deployment and a timeframe for implementation.
The Anglia SOBC demonstrates that this scheme would not be suitable to be first-in-program option. Option 3 valued benefits do not sufficiently outweigh the total costs, including all fixed costs that could be shared over a wider program. As demonstrated train sharing fitment and programme costs strengthens the business case for Option 3, along with better alignment with planned renewals which needs to be examined further.
Version 1.0 Page 48 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
2.10 Further appraisal assumptions
Figure E12: Further appraisal assumptions
Table A.1: Further appraisal assumptions Assumptions apply to central case unless stated. Further assumptions are in tables in main text. All years refer to financial years e.g. 2014 refers to 2014/15 F/Y. Assumption Value Source Comment General assumptions: Current year 2016 WebTAG Model base year 2016 WebTAG First year of benefits 2024 Project Team 100% of benefits realised from this year Benefits profile by year % of total 2024 100% Project Team 2083 100% Project Team Appraisal period (years) 60 Project Team The maximum is 60 years under WebTAG Price base year 2010 WebTAG (Unit A1.1, Values converted from Para 2.6.3) model base year to price base year using GDP deflator Base year for discounting 2010 WebTAG (Unit A1.1, Para 2.7.6) Discount rate (Social Time Preference 3.5% for 30 years from WebTAG (data-book- Rate) the current year and Summer-2016, Table 3.0% thereafter A1.1.1) & HM Treasury Green Book Unit of account Market prices WebTAG (Unit A1.1, 19% added to convert Para 2.5.2) factor prices to market prices Capital and operating cost assumptions: Changes in capital costs in real terms Not applied during appraisal period
Changes in operating costs costs in real Labour costs are DfT No other real terms terms during appraisal period assumed to increase in changes in operating real terms (relative to costs are assumed. GDP deflator) during appraisal period. Increases are c. 2% per annum between 2015 and end of appraisal period. Cost of TOC profit as percentage of any 8% DfT change in operating costs Optimism bias for: Capital costs 66% at GRIP stage 1 WebTAG (Unit A5.3, Optimism bias is not Table 3) applied to cost savings Operating costs 41% at GRIP stage 1 WebTAG (Unit A5.3, Optimism bias is not Table 3) applied to cost savings Passenger benefit-related assumptions Passenger demand growth Passenger set or all services 5.7% p.a.from 2016 to Based on LSE Market 2018, 1.5% p.a.from studies. Under the 2019 to 2025, 1.1% central scenario, growth p.a.from 2026 to 2036 is capped 20 years after and 0% thereafter. the current year, in accordance with WebTAG (Unit A5.3, Para 2.3.1).
Year in which underlying demand growth is 2036 WebTAG (Unit A5.3, This cap year also capped (20 years from current year) 3.3.1) applies to fare increases applied (see below) and any real terms cost increases applied (see above).
Version 1.0 Page 49 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Table A.1: Appraisal assumptions (continued) Values of time (VoT) by user type: All data are in market Business (work) users £16.21 per hour in 2010 WebTAG (data-book- prices prices November-2016 Commuters £9.95 per hour in 2010 forthcoming, Table prices A1.3.1) Others £4.54 per hour in 2010 prices "Rule of the half" 50% WebTAG (Unit A.1.3 Time savings applied to Para 2.1.6) new users at half the rate applied to existing users VoT growth (per annum) by user type:
Business (work) users GDP (real terms) per WebTAG (data-book- person Summer-2016 v1-6, Non-work GDP (real terms) per Annual Parameters) person (for 2010 onwards). Weighting for delays relative to in-vehicle Applied to economic i.e. journey time for economic benefits by user VoT benefits only - see type : below for weighting for Business (work) users 3.0 WebTAG (Unit A5.3, demand impacts Table 4) Non-work 3.0 WebTAG (Unit A5.3, Table 4) & PDFH (v5.0 Section B5.5) Weighting for delays relative to in-vehicle 3.0 PDFH v5.0 journey time for demand impacts:
Weighting for walk time relative to in- 2.0 PDFH vehicle journey time for demand impacts:
Average fare increases (% per annum 1.0% DfT advice above RPI) up to 2013 and from 2021. No increases applied after demand cap year (see above). Revenue growth also takes account of forecast increases in RPI relative to GDP deflator (until demand cap year), since appraisal uses GDP deflator to deflate prices to price base year. Reduction in car kms for 100% increase in 26% WebTAG (Unit A5.4, Same rate applied rail passenger kms (diversion rate), for Table 1) across GB external costs of car use MEC congestion benefits These allocations are Proportion allocated to work time 50% DfT also applied to Proportion allocated to commuting 25% DfT disruption disbenefits Proportion allocated to other 25% DfT Rail environmental costs as % of road 33% This is a conservative estimate of the relationship environmental costs (i.e. HGV MECs for between rail and road environmental costs. For noise, pollution and greenhouse gases) carbon emissions, for example, rail emissions are estimated at 24% of road emissions per tonne km (source: "Value and importance of rail freight", NR, 2010). The same proportion is applied throughout the appraisal period). Other assumptions TOC revenue and TOC operating cost transfer: If the TOC is publicly- During current franchise the following 50% Network Rail assumption owned all revenue is proportion of revenue and operating costs transferred to is assumed to be transferred to government during the government current franchise. Overall revenue and After current franchise expires the 100% Network Rail assumption operating cost transfer following proportion of revenue and assumptions are shown operating costs is assumed to be in the TEE tables. transferred to government
Network Rail operating costs All NR operating costs are treated as central government costs Indirect tax costs Various including WebTAG (Unit A5.3, 4.7 As a simplifying current fuel duty rates, and data-book-Summer- assumption, the share of resource costs of fuel 2016) petrol and diesel in total and average fuel car miles is assumed to efficiency, and forecast be 50%/50% throughout changes in these the appraisal period. No parameters over the electric car mileage is appraisal period assumed.
Version 1.0 Page 50 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3. Commercial Case
3.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Commercial Case is to outline the commercial strategy to implement the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme and demonstrate its viability. It describes the required goods and services at a high level and the market’s ability to meet these requirements within the commercial strategy. It also references the procurement structure and considers risk allocation between parties and implementation timescales.
It references the current market engagement and reports progress made in evaluating alternative delivery options and provides recommendations for a different approach to supplier relationship.
For this SOBC stage, the commercial strategy has been developed to a relatively high level; the detailed commercial structures will be further developed at Outline Business Case (OBC) stage.
3.2 Output Specification
3.2.1 Key products required to deliver the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme
The goods and services required to deliver the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme have been identified within the project’s Technical Options Report14. Initially the technologies delivered will focus on those currently available, with the option to develop into more advanced technologies as the programme matures. The core goods and services required for GEML include the following
supply chain offerings (described in Figure C1);
14 Available upon request Version 1.0 Page 51 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure C1: Goods and Services required to deliver the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme
3.2.2 Supply Chain Capability
The GB rail supply chain starts from a promising baseline to meet future demand. The growth in passenger and freight demand over the past decades has already built a strong and vibrant supply chain.
The Digital Railway Programme has commissioned external analysis on the current ability of the industry to deliver the goods and services required. Based on this analysis, it is possible to identify areas of strength and areas where additional intervention may be required.
Version 1.0 Page 52 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure C2: Areas of supply chain strength, and where additional development is required
Areas of Strength Areas for Development of Capabilities
Digital Railway represents a marginal The UK market for ETCS Infrastructure increase in planned Communication Systems may not be seen as attractive for Systems work: Digital Railway will represent investment due to the market size compared only a slight increase over the current to foreseen demand across Europe and may planned workbank. not elicit the required investment in capabilities by the existing supply chain in the UK: deployment of this capacity would be affected by loyalty to customers in other countries and the perceived relative attractiveness of the UK market.
The UK has strong cyber security skills in Few suppliers are able to provide Data parallel industries: whilst this is a new and Management Services across both expanding discipline, the UK’s experience in information technology and operating safety critical industries such as nuclear technology: the programme will have to power, defence and aerospace means that operate with a narrow supply base and develop the supply chain is well positioned for future a commercial approach to data management demand growth within rail services that reflects this
The UK has a mature supply chain for System Integration Services: suggesting that the programme will be well positioned to secure services
The UK has a mature supply chain for Programme Management Services: suggesting that the programme will be well positioned to secure services
Despite mature capability and capacity in the supply chain, change management activity requires further development and maturity across the rail industry to enable the successful delivery of the Digital Railway System; the Digital Railway Programme has many different complex aspects relating to different types of change activities. Effective delivery of change management activities by strong, capable change management professionals is critical to ensuring outcomes and benefits realisation.
Following engagement with the supply chain there is confidence that there is capacity in the market to deliver the projects. However the UK will be a smaller market than Europe, so will have to work hard at creating an attractive market to compete for available resources.
The identified development areas can be mitigated by a commitment to digital signalling from government and Department for Transport, which would be underwritten by a clear and consistent pipeline of projects to enable suppliers to invest in building capabilities. This has been repeatedly stated as essential during engagement with the supply chain.
With regards to data management, the programme is engaging with the supplier base in an active way and will use contract strategy that gives long term commitment to ensure availability of resources in a narrow arena.
Version 1.0 Page 53 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.3 Procurement Strategy
3.3.1 Objectives Commercial Strategy
The Commercial Strategy for Digital Railway projects has the following objectives:
Safe: Does not impact the safe and reliable running of the railways;
Value for Money (VfM): (Delivery) Model achieves Value for Money through appropriate risk allocation and performance incentives;
Deliverable: Confidence that it can enable delivery of the required outcomes to required timelines and adheres to relevant policies and legislation (or provides a path to changed policies / legislation);
Affordable: Chosen deliverable model needs to be affordable in the industry over time;
Risk Allocation: Model must not import risks into the rail industry for which it is not funded;
Align to RSG strategy: Model aligns to RSG strategy and leads to UK skills development and improved export capabilities.
3.3.2 Procurement strategy approach
Industry has been heavily involved in developing a procurement strategy which meets the needs of Government, the Anglia route and associated operators, Digital Railway Programme and the supply chain. Value for money is at the heart of this strategy, and will be achieved through:
Collaborative engagement supported by transparent and effective risk identification, with risks jointly identified and valued – and only transferred where appropriate;
Innovation incentives at all stages of the development and deployment process;
Reducing abortive activity and re-work;
Incorporating ‘ability to build’ throughout the development process rather than as an after- thought;
Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) and a collaborative approach, developing into a long-term commercial relationship.
3.4 Sourcing Options
3.4.1 Commercial Models
Traditionally, the clearly defined role of the Infrastructure Manager (IM) for all asset types has been to perform design, specification, procurement and delivery tasks, which are outsourced to the supply chain where appropriate, but still within overall control of the IM.
This is different to the provision of on-board equipment, which is routinely outsourced as part of in today’s world is typically outsourced by train operators as part of rolling stock provision.
Version 1.0 Page 54 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
The business cases benefits have been derived in an as-is world and are not assuming changes to franchises.
The programme has engaged extensively with the supply chain to investigate the appetite for an innovative and collaborative based approach via an Early Contractor Involvement work stream (ECI), Industry Roundtables, Case studies and a series of Supply Chain workshops. Appetite exists in the Supply Chain for a more innovative delivery approach, especially where the potential exists for achieving better value for money. Some of the key observations from the supply chain, on how they could better support the design, implementation and operation of a Digital Railway, are detailed below:
Procurement of a whole life solution by a 3rd party, not just design and build ,but including planned and reactive maintenance ranging to potential operation over the life of the asset;
o Design, Test and Routine Maintenance should be included with the main contract as design and test are fundamentally linked. Needs to be included to allow for innovation, effective risk transfer as part of VfM, and reduced interface risk. Planned maintenance should be included as the supplier is the expert on their technology and therefore can manage this this better;
o Reactive maintenance should also be included in the contract. This allows effective transfer of WLC risk and would incentivise innovation to reduce maintenance requirements and therefore support VfM and innovation.
Appropriate allocation of risk where suppliers commit to a whole-life cost;
Output/outcome based specifications and contracts, allowing innovative solutions;
Longer term strategic partnerships with earlier contractor involvement, clearer pipelines of work of a sufficient volume to encourage market innovation and supply chain investment in R&D, Skills and training;
Where the activity is ‘business as usual’ for Network Rail (i.e. the operation of the network, for which Network Rail is ultimately responsible as the license holder), Network Rail is best placed to continue to perform this activity, especially where there are safety or operational interface implications.
This would typically lead to contract lengths matching the life of the asset, ranging 25-30 years.
The programme will explore all commercial delivery models to OBC and is engaging with the supply chain and other stakeholders. For OBC this workstream will deliver examples and recommendations.
Version 1.0 Page 55 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.4.2 Financing
The programme also recognises that there are multiple options to fund or finance the design, implementation and operation of Digital Railway assets, and has identified the high level models in the table below. These will be studied in more detail, and recommendations made, within the OBC.
Figure C3: Evaluation of potential commercial models
Type Strong Points Weak Points
VfM through low finance costs, assets No new funds, potential loss of Publicly remain public, flexibility in operations, efficiency through no private sector Financed legislation exists skills introduced, limited risk transfer
Aligns design, construction and Approval required as novel/contentious, Build - operating risk, Introduction of private only limited risk transfer, public Operate – sector skills so more efficient delivery, ownership, so no reduction of funding Transfer no asset transfer burden, no revenue stream from outset; (BOT) assets will need to be ringfenced and risks appropriately allocated
Increased risk transfer (design, Novel/contentious, more complex and construction, finance and operating) therefore time consuming to set up, Design – which promotes whole life cost contract management required Build – approach, attracts private finance Finance –
Operate
(DBFO)
Design – Increased risk transfer; private finance, Novel/contentious, more complex and Build – availability payment incentivises quality therefore time consuming to set up, Operate – contract management required, no Transfer existing legislation (DBOT)
Design – Full risk transfer, reduced funding Novel/contentious, complex Build – burden to government, efficient delivery arrangement with many interfaces, Maintain – through private sector skills, potentially assets no longer public, may not be Finance off-balance sheet politically acceptable, requires new (DBMF) legislation
VfM through low finance costs, assets No new funds, potential loss of remain public, flexibility in operations, efficiency through no private sector Full legislation exists skills introduced, limited risk transfer Concession
Version 1.0 Page 56 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
The programme will explore different funding models to OBC and has initiated a separate workstream that focuses on exploring third party financing options and models. This workstream will lead to worked up examples and recommendations at OBC stage.
3.4.3 Client Model
The programme has considered the approach to clienting, taking into account recent similar workshops held with the DfT. When considering who should be appointed as the procurement lead, the following observations can be made at this early stage - these will be developed further through the OBC:
Network Rail is the traditional procurement lead for rail projects; they therefore have the capability and skills;
Operators have limited experience and would likely require a longer lead time and would need to obtain capability, which would impact on scheme programme requirements;
DfT also has limited experience, but could second a team from Network Rail or build capability in another way;
A third party would also take longer as there will need to be a contractual arrangement in place Additionally, there is very little precedent for procurement led by a third party;
The client model can vary based upon the chosen economic option and Route dynamics; ETCS has many more interfaces with the live railway, so Network Rail is the best procurement lead, whereas for Traffic Management, with a limited number of interfaces, a different approach could be considered. Procurement leads other than Network Rail will likely require more time to complete the projects and will have to depend on Network Rail resources to deal with the operational interfaces.
3.4.4 Packaging Options
The Digital Railway programme has developed a proposed commercial & delivery model to support the OBC and SOBC documents which has been developed in consultation with a wide range of internal & external stakeholders including suppliers, representatives from the TOC/FOC community and Rail Delivery Group, Infrastructure Projects (IP) and Route Services (RS) representatives, Railway Industry Association (RIA) and others over a large number (between 10 and 20) engagement events. An example outlining a packaging approach is included below.
The programme acknowledges the various packaging options that exist, and recognises that the mix and quantum of the required goods may vary depending on the packaging option selected as per the Economic Case. This will be further explored through the production lifecycle of the OBC. The developed model has the flexibility to cover all options.
There are varying packaging options ranging from single supplier turnkey solution to hub and spoke. The expected most viable option is included in Figure C4 in this section, however the optimum packaging will depend on the selected option. Proposed packaging for selected option will be developed as part of the OBC.
The proposed model balances existing commitments and constraints regarding existing commitments, for example the ongoing First in Class (FiC) programme cab-fitment programme, the
Version 1.0 Page 57 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) relationship between digital systems and other conventional route programmes of work, benefits of making commitments to the supply chain to deliver best value and the benefits of directly engaging with specialist suppliers in each market sector.
The model includes the core digital elements, as well as the non-digital (turquoise bubble in the middle) for the route specific requirements such as level crossing changes and track design, as well as the larger, enabling, conventional enhancements such as station development in the green bubble.
3.5 Pricing Framework and Charging Mechanisms
Figure C4: Packaging approach
Detailed commercial mechanisms are to be developed during development of the OBC. These will contain inclusion of early contractor engagement and a collaborative approach. An example of a likely 3 stage contracting model approach is included in Section 3.8.
A range of pricing frameworks have been identified and considered, ranging from “Cost Plus” to fixed price to target cost and output based. The latter two options incentivise the supply chain to deliver to agreed costs and the programme is leaning towards a target cost mechanism. The exact mechanism will be developed for OBC.
Version 1.0 Page 58 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.6 Risk Allocation and Transfer
3.6.1 Key Commercial Risk, Allocation and Transfer
Through workshops held with the DfT and industry representatives, the following commercial risks for all elements of the Digital Railway have been identified, summarised in Figure C5. Depending on the chosen commercial delivery model, where Network Rail is mentioned in the table, this can be read as Network Rail/TOC/Other, depending on who leads procurement.
The figure also proposes an allocation for the risks, based on the principle that risks should be borne by the party best placed to do so, generally as they are in a position to manage and mitigate them. Risk transfer to other parties, such as Train Operators will be considered at OBC.
Early conclusions from these workshops are detailed below:
During early consultations and workshops, the supply chain indicated they would be willing to take on key elements of the technology and performance risks;
A move to contracting on an outcome-based, whole asset life basis inevitably supports a transfer of construction, maintenance and delivery risk to the supply chain. The risk premium applied through doing this will need further analysing as the OBC is developed;
Construction and delivery risk during construction phase are best placed with the supply chain as they are best positioned to manage these;
Other risks are best placed with Network Rail due to its position and ability to influence the risk;
It will be vital to build a collaborative, long-term relationship with joint incentivisation to achieve risk reduction or mitigation rather than merely transfer of risks.
Version 1.0 Page 59 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure C5: Commercial Risks and proposed allocation
Risk Intended Allocation Rationale
Operational Supplier – Suppliers indicated that they Supplier can best understand and manage Performance are best placed as they understand their performance of their systems, and it will technology and its performance. Could incentivise them. consider a shared element to promote collaborative behaviour – especially where Network Rail staff operate
Installation and Supplier – Envisaged that target price Supplier can best manage performance of their testing mechanism would be used. systems, and will incentivise them. costs/Delays in installation or testing
Maintenance Routine: Supplier – intended that Supplier can best manage this through design of costs supplier will give fixed price maintenance system and maintenance works within a based on specification. specification, and gives them whole life incentives. But Network Rail can best manage specification Major: Network Rail if outside contract change. scope.
Finance costs Supplier (where privately financed) For privately financed schemes, private sector expected to fix the finance cost as part of pricing Network Rail (if publically financed) or (i.e. price would not change post contract award pre-contract award for potential movements in finance cost). However Network Rail would take risk on movements before the final price is agreed.
Integration risk Shared – contracts will set expectations Network Rail to manage the design, process and (trackside, in- of compatibility and testing requirements the specifications so that integration of existing cab systems, to ensure this. If the specifications are not assets, track and in-cab can take place. The existing correctly to achieve this integration, this suppliers then take the risk on delivering these systems) would be Network Rail’s responsibility. specifications and ensuring proper testing to achieve compatibility takes place.
Change in Network Rail The supplier is not able to manage changes in specifications specifications; risk transfer would therefore not provide VfM.
Demand risk DfT – the changes in revenues will have The supplier is not in a position to effectively to be taken into account in the franchise manage demand, as capacity increase will not just change process. There will be no direct be down to Digital Railway enhancements and link between revenue impact and timetabling, ticket prices, etc. will have an impact. payments to supplier. Therefore trying to force the supplier to take this risk is unlikely to deliver VfM.
Passenger Shared – Supplier penalties for greater Supplier can best manage performance of disruption (both disruption than anticipated due to their installation, and penalties will incentivise them. But during and after failure to deliver (e.g. Sch. 8 payments, they cannot manage increased disruption due to installation) economic impact) changes caused by Network Rail/TOC (e.g. because of change to telecoms, etc.). Also promotes collaborative behaviours.
Operating costs Network Rail – Network Rail will Operator is unable to manage these costs, and undertake operations and therefore costs therefore it is unlikely to be VfM to force them to it incurs will their risk (unless caused by a take significant risk on them. fault with supplied systems).
Technology Network Rail To be arranged contractually - what happens if the obsolescence contract is ended prematurely.
Version 1.0 Page 60 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.7 Human Resource issues including TUPE
The roll-out of Digital Railway will require different skill-sets in future to operate and maintain the railway. This will affect people who work in the railway in different ways, partly depending on the chosen commercial delivery model. Resulting TUPE issues will be considered at OBC.
Significant complexities exist within each of the stakeholder groups affected by the programme, including the number of legacy employment contracts in effect. As a result, the effect on individuals within each of the groups is unlikely to be uniform. The Management Case outlines the development of a people strategy to address these issues, including training provision and a strategy for engagement with trades unions.
3.8 Implementation (Contract) Timescales
The diagram in this section outlines an example Contracting Approach applicable to a structure where Network Rail is the lead procurer. It provides indicative timescales, but these will vary depending on the chosen commercial delivery model. Whilst this shows the 3 stage model for the core digital elements the same approach could be for the other elements omitting stage 3 where it is not intended that the supply chain has an ongoing maintenance input.
The model in Section 3.9 outlines which elements would be included.
Figure C6: Contracting approach
ANTICIPATED CONTRACT Supplier Selection Stage 1 Professional INPUTS: NATIONAL DR OJEU PQQ ITT ETCS/TM/CDAS SPECIFICATION Services DEFINED AND DEVELOPED Contract
OUTPUT INITIAL NEGOTIATION DEVELOPMENT TO ESTABLISH SCOPE, SCHEDULE & RISK
INPUTS: AREA & Stage 2 ROUTE ASSESSMENT Works Contract TO DETERMINE LOCAL RISK / SCOPE Appoint COST PLUS Suppliers ARRANGEMENTS OUTPUT: DETAILED DEVELOPMENT & Stage 3 DEPLOYMENT In-Life Service, Maintenance and Tech Development Contract
Agree Schedule of INCENTIVISED TARGET Cost Components Set Target Cost COST CONTRACT OUTPUT: IN-LIFE SUPPORT, MAINTENANCE & SYSTEM UPDATES
SCHEDULE OF RATES Agreed WITH PERFORMANCE Schedule of Rates BASED PROFIT INCENTIVE
3.9 Service support
The Service Support Model will depend on the chosen economic option, delivery model as well as procurement model. Whilst a detailed support model is to be developed alongside the detailed procurement model during the OBC process, an example model where Network Rail leads the procurement is provided in Figure C7.
Version 1.0 Page 61 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
The figure shows the constituent parts of Digital Railway projects and the “In-Life Support Delivery” box outlines the proposed maintenance and support regimes. It is currently envisaged that the core
Figure C7: In-Life Support and Maintenance
digital elements will be supported via the supply chain and subject to individual maintenance contracts. The rationale behind this is incentivisation of the supply chain to provide the contracted business outcomes as they will be paid on an availability and performance basis.
For other elements existing support and maintenance contracts are in place and the Digital Railway additions will only constitute a marginal element of the overall asset base. The Digital Railway elements will therefore be included in the existing maintenance and support contracts to achieve better commercial outcomes through economies of scale.
3.10 Contract Management Approach
Whilst a detailed contract management approach is to be developed alongside the detailed procurement model during the OBC process, a likely example model is provided in Section 3.4.3.
Version 1.0 Page 62 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.11 Best Value
The question of how the commercial approach is intended to deliver value for money is intrinsically linked to the areas above. As outlined in section 3.3.2, achieving the best value for money is at the heart of the selection process and guides procurement decisions.
A programme wide ECI (Early Contractor Involvement) scenario has been undertaken with the aim of informing a preferred commercial delivery strategy that will drive down costs through teaming between the customer and supply chain.
The core output of the work identified key target areas that will have a significant impact on the cost of developing and deploying a Digital Railway solution, and where possible quantify the potential saving and recommendations as to how the benefit can be realised.
ECI WS2 report15 has identified eight opportunities relating to the causal factors that collectively could deliver a transformational reduction in the unit rate for DR deployment:
Economies of learning brought about by continuity of work;
Economies of scale delivering volume savings and efficiency gains;
Adoption of a ‘thin client’ Digital Railway delivery model to put the supply chain close to the customer eliminating waste and leveraging the supplier’s return on experience;
Investing in development of Digital Railway skills and Competencies by providing the commitment that will provide the confidence to enable the supply chain to invest and reverse the industry skills drain to drive up performance and quality;
Leverage digital technologies to dramatically improve the quality of base infrastructure data which could avoid costly rework.
Collaborate with the supply chain to develop a clear and implementable Digital Railway System definition and reference design.
Provide the scale of opportunity to enable the supply chain to invest in Design and Test Automation alongside a modular design concept.
Appropriate delivery methodology, including incentivisation and whole life based procurement.
The ECI WS2 report indicates that with a joined up programme of procurement, these opportunities could significantly contribute to providing a unit rate cost reduction of between 23% and 42% by the end of a six-year period compared with prevailing CP5 tender prices. As this reduction can only be achieved by delivering the Digital Railway element as a programme, it highlights the significance of considering the Digital Railway Programme as a whole when procuring, rather than making incremental investment decisions.
A price reduction of 30% has been included in the SOBC estimates for the CP6 schemes. Further cost reductions for schemes delivered in CP7 and beyond are therefore possible, subject to achievement of the strategic objectives.
15 Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) Cost Reduction Findings Report, November 2016 Version 1.0 Page 63 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
3.11.1 Conclusion and recommendations
Based upon active engagement with the supply chain and benchmarking exercises, to obtain best Commercial Value, it is recommended that the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme is:
Is aligned with the wider route investment programmes to maximise the scheme’s benefits;
Contains a System Integration element to ensure all parts of the package are compatible with the rest of the Route’s assets and systems;
Is developed and delivered in close, early and collaborative relationship with the Supply Chain, which would benefit job and skills development as well as allow the programme to achieve the forecasted Unit Rate savings;
Commercial delivery models should be further investigated for OBC.
Version 1.0 Page 64 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
4. Financial Case
4.1 Purpose
The Financial Case concentrates on the affordability of the proposal, its funding arrangements and technical accounting issues (value for money is scrutinised in the Economic Case). It presents the financial profile of the different options and the effect of the proposed deal on the DfT’s budgets and accounts. In the GEML Upgrade Programme SOBC the total incremental option costs are included, but the focus is on acquiring funding for the Outline Business Case (OBC) stage.
For GEML, this will involve: a review of what costs are contained within the Digital Railway analysis; a breakdown by Control Period of the spending profiles of the options, as well as the high-level breakdown in the Appendix B: Costs; a review of multiple sources of funding for financing the main option; and a description of possible sources.
4.2 Budget Profile
The Financial Case describes the net funding requirements of the preferred economic options. This is contained in Figure F2.
Figure F1: Preferred economic options
Options Description
Option 3 Digital approach - TM & ETCS Level 2 no signals with 3hr peak capacity increase, push costs back and shared freight fitment costs (preferred economic option)
Option 4 Traffic management (preferred economic option)
Figure F2: Net Funding Requirement Anglia Options (2016-2064)
Figure F2 shows the net funding requirement (net vs base) and total cost for the preferred Economic options. The net funding amounts represent the additional funding required above that which would be required to fund the base case as described in the Strategic Case. Please note that these figures are indicative point estimates and should be read in conjunction with the Economic Case, which highlights the impact of actual costs not aligning with these point estimates.
The costs in the net funding requirements table (Figure F2) are based upon traditional procurement and delivery. This means that the costs could vary, depending on the chosen delivery method. The implications of alternative delivery models and utilising third party financing will be explored to OBC.
Sensitivities have also been explored in the Financial Case. Figure F3 explores the consequences of the options cost reducing or increasing by 20%.
Version 1.0 Page 65 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure F3: Sensitivity of GEML Upgrade Programme Cumulative Funding Requirement (2016-2064)
Figure F3 indicates the following:
As ETCS represents an incremental cost, its case is strengthened when aligned to asset renewals;
Specifically for Anglia, synergies could be achieved when combining the Digital Railway Route Upgrade with the East Coast Main Line project as the freight fitment costs could be shared. This will lead to significantly reduced fitment costs and therefore a reduced incremental funding requirement for the Anglia Route as observed in option 3;
The Traffic Management Option (Option 4) is substantially delivered in CP6 and requires limited incremental funding after that. Although Traffic Management still represents an incremental cost, it delivers performance benefits that justify the incremental funding requirement.
4.3 Cost estimate
The estimates are prepared on an Industry level and therefore include not only Network Rail costs, but also includes the TOCs, FOCs and ROSCO’s spend of deploying Digital Railway in the Route. The cost estimates have been prepared on a first deployment basis, assuming delivery of a programme of 3 projects in CP6-7 – 2019-2029. They therefore contain a cost premium which is anticipated to reduce over time due to a learning effect within the Industry as well as a changed procurement approach. See the Commercial Case for more about anticipated future cost development.
See the assumptions log16 for more detail on the cost estimates and what is included in the estimates. Significantly, the estimates exclude:
OPEX benefits related to introduction of ETCS;
Risk and Contingency: Optimism Bias is applied instead to counter any optimism that may have materialised within the initial cost estimates for the Programme;
Elements subject to a separate business case.
4.4 Benchmarking
Benchmarking has been undertaken with respect to GB central interlocking and ETCS Level 2 control against current known costs incurred within Denmark and Norway. These Scandinavian Programmes have been identified as the main source for comparison because they are the only
16 Available on request Version 1.0 Page 66 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) national programmes with full replacement of central signalling systems and a full range of recently tendered prices. The benchmarking process has been extensive and includes ECI outcomes as well as specialist reports commissioned by the Digital Railway Programme. The reports, which have been shared with the Department for Transport and Infrastructure and Projects Authority, contain the following key points:
Central signalling and Traffic Management systems are the main cost drivers, driving also the indirect costs which are derived as percentages;
Prices have been derived from an “early deployment” project. Along the learning curve, lower prices can be expected. ;
The indirect costs in percent are comparable to Denmark and Norway. Via the percentages, the indirect cost estimate fluctuates with the direct cost estimate. Review of the contract / procurement strategy might reveal more opportunities for larger lots, better economies of scale, and sustained competition.
The above confirms that there is value in considering the Digital Railway roll-out as a programme of works, rather than incremental investment decisions. A programme will allow for better economies of scale and will ensure that items such as fixed programme costs are spread over a larger number of projects.
4.5 Budget/Funding Arrangements
The SOBC only requests funding to further develop the project for the OBC. At OBC stage there will be a funding proposal which will consider the full investment and answer the wider funding questions and methods. The OBC will also explore the potential for third party funding and / or public / private financing.
The Digital Railway Programme is working with the Routes to decide how they include the forecasted expenditure in their Route plans. The December 2016 programme level OBC was used to provide input into the Initial Industry Advice (IIA) and the Programme was included in the IIA at £3-5 billion, but this was not split out per project / Route. The ultimate CP6 funding requirement will depend on how many schemes are taken forward for development and delivery in CP6.
The Digital Railway Programme anticipates that planned conventional re-signalling spend will be change controlled to fund renewal via digital means in the areas where these will be delivered in CP6 / 7. The Programme will work with the planning community to mitigate abortive costs and rework by planning the change from conventional to digital renewal in a timely manner.
4.6 Funding Arrangements
Funding arrangements will depend on the chosen commercial delivery model. The funding arrangement will therefore be developed at OBC. Although at this early stage traditional funding sources have been assumed for costing purposes, the potential for third party financing (contributions) is highlighted.
There is a separate workstream exploring third party financing and this will deliver recommendations for OBC.
Version 1.0 Page 67 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
In the National Outline Business Case for Digital Railway17 the various ways of sourcing funding have been described; the pros and cons of these are summarised in Figure F4.
Figure F4: Evaluation of possible funding sources
4.6.1 Budget Mitigating Actions
The required funding for rolling out GEML Upgrade Programme could potentially be reduced as elements could be included in schemes that are already funded. Due to the 5 year funding cycle, this would only be applicable for those schemes already planned for delivery in CP5 & 6.
The conventional signalling renewal spend is considered funded and would simply be repurposed (change controlled) for digital resignalling schemes.
Additionally, an element, namely Traffic Management and C-DAS of the GEML Upgrade Programme business case is considered for funding via the recently announced National
17 OBC Digital Railway, Network Rail, December 2016 Version 1.0 Page 68 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Productivity Improvement Fund (NPIF). If this part of the project is funded via the NPIF, the required funding for the GEML upgrade will exclude the parts funded elsewhere and reduce by that amount. The Digital Railway Programme is working with DfT to develop the SOBC for the NPIF options.
4.6.2 Third Party Contributions
Once the Route plans have been developed further, Third Party financing contributions will be considered. Whilst this is an avenue that the Programme is exploring through a variety of consultations and working groups, at this early stage there have only been discussions that would require further development before the contributions could be considered.
The potential for private funding style contributions will depend on the chosen commercial delivery model; this will be explored further for the OBC.
4.6.3 Financial authority points
As part of the next phase of the programme, the next tranche of funding is needed to get the programme towards an Outline Business Case – a stage which would indicate a preferred detailed option and method of procurement which broadly corresponds to GRIP stage three of eight. For more detail on GRIP please refer to the Management Case.
The recent DR ECI work has identified benefits from adopting a ‘thin client’ approach and engaging the supply chain early in the lifecycle under an outcome-based contract. The Route are supportive of such a strategy, but it is recognise it will cause the project development phase to look quite different to what the industry is used to, requiring initial investment authority for just the early development phase (GRIP1/2) covering outcome definition and procurement activities. Therefore the first authority request will progress towards completing to OBC to identify the most efficiency and economical strategy to develop and then procure the scheme. With respect to the Memorandum of Understanding between the DfT and NR, this Commit to Develop request will be aligned to the NR investment authority request.
4.6.4 Funding to next authority point
This SOBC focusses on acquiring the required development funding to reach OBC stage. As per the paragraph above this equates to approximately GRIP 3. Based on analysis of completed projects, the required development is commonly between 10 and 15% of the total project costs. Sufficient development funding will be essential for delivery per plan in future control periods.
However, to achieve the Thin Client aspirations, early development funding of £10 to 20 million will be required. This number will need to be further refined post-SOBC. The programme will therefore work with the Route to put a development plan in place post-SOBC and will provide an updated number in the summer.
4.7 Balance Sheet
The impact on Network Rail’s balance sheet will depend on the funding and financing mechanism that is eventually selected. It is anticipated that even if Digital Railway is delivered via a Public Private Partnership (PPP) for example, it will remain on the Government’s balance sheet due to the required control over critical assets such as the railway.
The high level accounting implications for Network Rail and Public Accounts have been established, both for the status quo as well as in a situation where there may be private investment. The accounting implications are only subject to change when Digital Railway, or an element of it, is to be funded or financed privately. The remainder of funding provided, along with the recognition of expenditure and asset investment, will be accounted in accordance with current practices. These Version 1.0 Page 69 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) are based on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Whole of Government accounting.
The private funding / element would be treated as third party funded work, which is included in the internal Network Rail results at fair value (similar to renewals), but it tends to get excluded upon consolidation for the regulatory accounts (provides information on Network Rail’s performance on a regulatory basis and prepared according to ORR guidelines) and for reporting up to the DfT. 4.8 Conclusions and recommendations
The analysis of the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme SOBC supports the following indicative conclusions:
Work should continue with DfT to develop the NPIF option for the Traffic Management / C- DAS element of the Anglia Route case;
Traffic Management alone or a scenario where Traffic Management is combined with an ETCS programme that is able to achieve synergies with other Digital Railway projects and can off-set part of the freight fitment costs, could represent a viable financial investment for the Anglia Route. This will require further investigation;
Private Funding and Financing solutions should be investigated further for the OBC.
Version 1.0 Page 70 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5. Management Case
5.1 Introduction and Objectives
The rail industry has experience of delivering large and complicated programmes, but there have been few truly industry wide change programmes on the scale of the Digital Railway Programme.
The Digital Railway Programme is therefore preparing for safe, timely and efficient delivery of the preferred option, through:
Understanding its purpose, what is required to deliver that purpose, and the benefits delivery will provide;
Following an approved and tested project management methodology, including planning for incorporation of lessons learned from the National Audit Office’s review of Great Western Route Modernisation18, ‘Lessons from major rail infrastructure programmes’19 and from early digital deployments during CP5;
Allocating responsibilities to accountable parties within an industry-wide operating structure;
Considering the full range of industry expertise available, and involving it at an early stage (as discussed in the Commercial Case);
Preparing to deliver using an incremental “phased” approach.
The GEML Upgrade Programme’s key deliverables are set out in Appendix H.
The economic case has set out the benefits that are anticipated through delivery of the preferred option at the Routes programme level. Furthermore it has been set out strategically, for the wider rail network and for GB plc.
This management case describes the methodology for ensuring these benefits are realised.
5.1.1 Project Management Objectives The principal objective of project management is that the Route delivers the recommended upgrade with industry-wide input.
Project management objectives for reaching Outline Business Case (OBC) phase will be to:
Develop the overall programme of work for the preferred option, developing increased clarity and certainty whilst reducing risk;
Prepare a proposal for the funder which outlines the whole programme with a plan, protocol and cost for the next stage of work.
After the OBC, for the Final Business Case phase (FBC), the project management goals will be to:
18 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/modernising-the-great-western-railway/ ‘Modernising the Great Western railway’, National Audit Office, 9 November 2016 19 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/lessons-from-major-rail-infrastructure-programmes/ ‘Lessons from major rail infrastructure programmes’, National Audit Office, 24 October 2014 Version 1.0 Page 71 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Design all elements of the rail service change proposed.
Plan, cost and undertake all pre-contract activities to deliver the service change.
At project delivery, project management should implement the integrated project as per the contract and closing down the project should be done in agreement with all clients, having confirmed delivery as agreed and recording any lessons learned to share with the rest of the DRP.
5.1.2 Project Management Methodologies The Digital Railway Programme team is setting the vision and providing oversight and support for Anglia Route’s delivery of the project, including business case development.
The use of a project lifecycle and governance framework, Governance for Railway Investment Projects (GRIP), will enable management and control of the project to meet project management objectives. This framework is designed to be applicable both at an individual project level e.g. for each new technology being introduced and for the overall programme to deploy a Digital Railway in the Route. GRIP has been developed to provide a tailored version of PRINCE2 suitable for the rail industry.
Previous large investment programmes have been limited in at least one of the following factors:
Impact on operating principles and model;
Multiple Route deployment;
Deployment over multiple control periods;
Stakeholders from all parts of the industry.
Thus it has been more effective to plan and deliver these investments via a single body with little need for industry–wide change programmes. This approach is not possible for Digital Railway. Digital Railway will require a new level of cross-industry collaboration to deliver the programme successfully. To manage the expected level of business change effectively, the project is being developed in line with the MSP4NR (Managing Successful Programmes for Network Rail) framework, which is a recognised industry best practice approach to managing business change programmes.
MSP4NR processes are being used to identify the necessary roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for this project as set out below. The roles for the development of the business cases have been shared between the Route and the Digital Railway Programme team which includes industry stakeholders. Broader stakeholder engagement, including with the people most directly impacted by expected changes to operating principles and models, is also discussed in more detail below. For a programme as large and complex as Digital Railway it should be noted that there is no template approach to applying HMT’s ‘Green Book’ decision point framework. Indeed, putting together a plan to move through these decision points is a key ongoing activity for the Digital Railway programme. GRIP is a tool for delivering projects and programmes, and so will not precisely align to the decision point framework for government (which focuses on giving funders confidence to invest in a programme which delivers the outputs they may wish to buy). The Digital Railway programme contains many projects which will be at different GRIP stages as key programme-level decision points are reached.
Version 1.0 Page 72 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.2 Programme/Project Dependencies
Key dependencies are dependent of Greater Anglia rolling stock, other digital deployments, conventional enabling enhancements and conventional re-signalling plans, as described in the Strategic Case. As a cross-industry programme, the range of dependencies for Digital Railway is broad and complex, including funding, franchising and supply chain capability. A full dependencies log for this project will be developed in the next phase.
Interdependencies will be managed principally through (i) development in the OBC phase of Workstreams to assess Digital Railway’s potential requirements of other projects and business areas and (ii) involvement of key stakeholders in programme and project governance to oversee deconflicting dependent projects.
The Periodic Review for Control Period 6 (PR18) will, for the first time, exclude enhancement funding, to allow for funding decisions to be made for each project when its development has reached an appropriate level of maturity. Since digital deployment is so dependent on enabling conventional enhancements and on signalling renewal plans (where conventional works’ funding is recommended to be repurposed to digital), existing scheme governance and change controls will need to be revised to ensure overall planning and funding remains compatible with recommended digital options.
As set out in the Finance case, estimates covering both Network Rail’s Route-specific and programme-wide (e.g. technology testing and strategy development) digital deployment costs have been held in the Digital Railway Programme’s element of Network Rail’s overall business plan during development of this SOBC and have thus been excluded from the Route’s business plan, However, beyond the SOBC, it is intended that Network Rail’s direct deployment and associated scheme development costs will be included in the route’s Strategic Business Plan which will form part of Network Rail’s submission for PR18. The Digital Railway Programme has been working with the relevant planning communities to effect this transition post-SOBC.
5.3 Programme/Project Governance, Organisation Structure and Roles
5.3.1 Digital Railway Programme Structure The programme is being structured on a “thin Client” basis, providing expertise and coordination only where it is appropriate and value-generating to do so.
The programme team is operating three central elements:
Strategy and Business Case Development – analysing the issues that the railway currently faces, what capabilities Digital Railway could deploy to remedy the issues, and developing business cases to justify the cost of change; all in conjunction with the routes and broader industry;
Programme Management Office – managing the plan, risks, interdependencies and national interfaces at an enterprise level. Monitor benefit realisation across multiple locations;
Technical Authority - ensuring that the technologies developed are compatible, safe and of a standard that will generate benefits.
Version 1.0 Page 73 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.3.2 Programme governance The programme is applying governance in three key ways:
In line with the Memorandum of Understanding process between the DfT and Network Rail.
Through utilisation of an Advisory Group.
At a project level, through the Route Steering Board (governance currently under consideration)
The relationship between these governing bodies is illustrated below.
Figure M1: Digital Railway governance charts
Notes: Digital Railway Steering Board is a Network Rail internal body The London North East & East Midlands Operations Working Group is a legacy working group from the ETCS East Coast Programme No Capacity Working Group for the Western Route took place as the SOBC problem statement is primarily focused on performance issues
This governance structure is intended to enable shared learning to make sure that benefits can be achieved across the various routes planning digital deployments in CP6 and other routes that may deploy these technologies in the future. In this way, DRP can be used as a source of common information and specialist knowledge for devolved routes to deliver the infrastructure capabilities their customers need.
We are also aware of ongoing discussions with the DfT which may lead to further development of their governance of Digital Railway outcomes in the coming months.
Version 1.0 Page 74 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.3.3 The Memorandum of Understanding Network Rail and the Department for Transport agreed the governance that applies to Network Rail initiatives within a memorandum of understanding, signed on 23 March 2016.
The process for governance, and the various stages of approval, including review of this SOBC, is outlined in the chart below alongside the MSP4NR and GRIP methodologies for programme management.
Figure M2: Governance and approvals process for the Digital Railway Programme
5.3.4 The Advisory Group The Digital Railway Programme has established an Advisory Group, which meets monthly to provide leadership to support and challenge the direction and performance of the programme both internally and externally. It is chaired by Mark Carne and attended by Digital Railway leadership, Managing Director of London Underground and London Rail, and representatives from Train Operator Companies (TOCs), Freight Operating Companies (FOCs), Rail Delivery Group (RDG), Department for Transport, Office of Rail and Road (ORR) and Crossrail.
The Advisory Group uses cross industry expertise to make decisions on behalf of industry and NR, and it has the authority to resolve critical programme actions/issues that are escalated by the NR Steering Group.
5.3.5 The Route Steering Board The Route Steering Board was established for strategic decision making to bring together a range of stakeholders, including train operators, the Department for Transport and senior planners to review technical outputs of the Digital Railway Programme.
Version 1.0 Page 75 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
The Route Steering Board represents a cross industry view:
, Route Managing Director, Network Rail (Anglia Route).
, Route Sponsor, Network Rail (Anglia Route).
, Director, Route Asset Management, Network Operations, Anglia Route.
, Network Rail (Network Strategy and Capacity Planning).
, Department for Transport.
, Abellio Greater Anglia.
Digital Railway Technical Specialists.
To date, the RSB have signed off and endorsed:
Remit.
Problem Statement.
Route Options.
Assumptions
Economic recommendations and conclusions
In the next phase, the Anglia Route, the Digital Railway Programme team, and other key stakeholders will agree their more detailed roles, responsibilities and working relationships reflecting the number of projects likely to be progressed in CP6. They will also decide the best balance of local ownership versus central co-ordination and oversight, clarifying how the ‘thin client’ approach should work in practice.
5.4 Programme/Project Plan
A high level plan has been developed (see Appendix H), working backwards from project delivery by the end of CP6, facilitating an initial assessment of the impact of dependencies and constraints on delivery in the timeframe and allowing alignment with the programme deployment strategy. This plan has been developed for costing purposes only, and does not take fully into account the time needed for decision making following the completion of this SOBC and the development up to the GRIP 3 option selection. As a result, the programme plan will be revised as part of the package of activities to reach OBC, when the programme will have a more detailed understanding of the timeframe for delivery in CP6 or 7.
5.4.1 Deployment at a programme level The deployment strategy of the Digital Railway Programme will be phased between the present day and the end of CP6/mid-CP7. Initially, digital technologies will be deployed on selected candidates in CP6 and 7 as set out in the diagram in Appendix H. Traffic Management is recommended for implementation in CP6. ETCS deployment is recommended for CP7-8, although if it is deployed on South West in CP6 the sharing of freight train costs with Anglia for cross-boundary freight flows will materially improve the case for earlier Anglia signals away options. Options to align Anglia and ECML ETCS deployment are recommended for exploring in the next stage of development.
Version 1.0 Page 76 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.4.2 Industry is working together to deliver this project Delivery of Digital Railway, and generation of realisable benefits, requires the industry to work together; using individual accountabilities and expertise to deliver the best value for money solution. The chart below outlines a sample of the participants groups.
Figure M3: A sample of the groups involved in the Digital Railway Programme
The roles of these participants are explored in more detail in Appendix I.
Supplier development activities are discussed in more detail in the Commercial case.
5.4.3 Project planning beyond this SOBC Anglia Route will form a project team to take this project forward following approval of this SOBC and the outcome of proposals for use of the £450m allocated from the National Productivity Improvement Fund at the 2016 Autumn Statement. The project will draw on technical experience and advice from the Digital Railway Programme and wider stakeholders, including in relation to the Digital Railway Programme’s detailed strategies for safety and for cyber security.
The project team will reflect on lessons learned (see benefits management methodology below) and examine existing processes, including within the well proven GRIP framework, to assess how they may best be evolved to meet the challenges of the proposed changes.
Version 1.0 Page 77 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.5 Communications and Stakeholder Management
Within the SOBC function, the programme has a dedicated communications and stakeholder engagement team and their role is shown as Appendix J.
A people strategy is under development that looks to include a national level trade union engagement strategy.
Stakeholder engagement and the people strategy will be developed beyond this SOBC with the balance between project- and programme-level responsibilities agreed according to the ‘thin client’ framework described in Section 6.3 above.
This will include an emphasis on high quality communications with the DfT passenger services team to maintain alignment over the coming years, during a potential period of great change in operation of train services on the Anglia Route, particularly given the upcoming fleet changes.
5.5.1 Trade Union Engagement In October 2016 a Joint Working Group was established for Network Rail operations that includes Network Rail Routes and the central team, as well as TSSA and RMT. In December 2016 a similar strategy for Network Rail Maintenance with RMT, TSSA and Unite was agreed with the National Maintenance Council. Rail Delivery Group lead on Digital Railway briefings to the Trade Unions, recognised by TOCs and FOCs. Personal updates to Union Executive Groups have also been offered by Digital Railway, and the first discussion with the RMT executives will go ahead in April 2017. These discussions will include all of the products, training and possible changes to working for people working with these new tools.
5.5.2 Training A training strategy for all products is currently being developed jointly with Rail Delivery Group. Key papers on a simulator strategy and an academic industry development strategy will be presented to the Programme Control Board by May 2017.
The overall strategy covering all these areas will be finalised by the end of June 2017. 5.6 Programme/Project Reporting
As set out in Section 6.4.3 above, working relationships, roles, accountabilities and project management processes for Anglia Route and the Digital Railway Programme team, and other key stakeholders will be developed and agreed in detail following the outcome of this SOBC and allocation of the £450m proposed for testing signalling technology from the NPIF.
5.7 Implementation of Work Streams
In the next phase, the project team described in 6.4.3 above will lead the development of workstreams for execution of the project. The indicative deployment approach shown in Appendix H sets out potential workstreams.
A key innovation for the project will be to seek a more collaborative approach with suppliers, moving from a traditional client/supplier relationship to a more service based framework. The workstreams will also need to take account of interdependent enhancement and renewal activities that currently run in parallel, where some revisions to governance may be necessary to manage coherency and dependency more effectively and efficiently.
Version 1.0 Page 78 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.8 Key Issues for Implementation
The Digital Railway programme is part of a cross-industry change programme, facing significant challenges issues and constraints, of which the key elements are described in the Strategic case.
An issues log will be developed further as part of the next phase, along with a review of governance to engage with stakeholders most effectively to deal with the issues.
5.9 Contract Management
Contract management is addressed in the Commercial Case.
5.10 Risk Management Strategy
5.10.1 Programme and project approach
The discipline of risk management forms part of the Digital Railway Programme Management Office (PMO) and will be part of Anglia route’s project team responsibilities with the balance of responsibilities to be agreed as set out in Section 6.4.3 above.
The Digital Railway PMO has developed a suite of documents to communicate the approach adopted to implement the discipline of risk management across the programme. The risk management remit in particular (following the guidance contained within ISO 31000) sets out for instance the process, tools, vocabulary and reporting requirements to be implemented by each of the projects which form the programme.
The PMO central risk management team sets the minimum standard for risk management, provides resources to support the implementation of risk management by individual projects including reporting and the escalation of risks for decision making and assurance processes.
The major Digital Railway Programme level issues and risks are outlined in the Strategic case.
5.10.2 Portfolio management
Following the assessment of each of the five SOBCs being prepared by the Digital Railway Programme, consideration will be given to the balance of contributions each SOBC makes to the overall portfolio on three measures:
Value;
Strategic alignment;
Constraints / risk.
This is described further in the portfolio management diagram below. Exploration of the best strategic fit between the SOBCs can then feed into the development of an integrated programme to take account of the constraints to delivery across the network.
Version 1.0 Page 79 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure M4: Portfolio management approach
5.11 Benefits Management and Evaluation Realisation Plan
5.11.1 The blueprint – defining how the programme will deliver to enable benefits The programme’s blueprint document is provided within the supplementary documents. The purpose of this blueprint document is to provide a single source that explains how the vision and objectives of the Digital Railway Programme will be achieved to realise benefits for passenger and freight users of the railway.
The blueprint sets out the current state and targeted Digital Railway states of the railway expected from the transformation of digital train control systems and operations, and defines the high level capabilities and associated maturity levels that are required to achieve each of these states/outcomes. Each state represents a ‘step-change’ in the digitisation of the railway, and the benefits realised in return for the Investment committed.
This blueprint document is a high level articulation of the required capabilities to achieve the proposed transformation of digital train control systems, and should not be used as a replacement for more detailed analysis of capability maturity requirements. These are set out in the enterprise architecture documentation (available on request) which underpins the programme’s approach to develop a ‘systems of systems’ view that ensures coherence across the multiple industry partners.
Version 1.0 Page 80 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.11.2 The benefits management strategy – how the project will realise benefits For each case robust evidence will need to be available in the Final Business Case and is recommended for the Outline Business Case. Specifically, for each of the 2 identified schemes:
1. A methodology will need to be developed to demonstrate the cause-and-effect relationship between new Traffic Management (at specific geographies on the Anglia route) and train service improvements on the Route. Given the limited evidence available to date it will be important to validate the performance benefits of Traffic Management against real events with the Traffic Management elements alone being the only variables
2. A methodology will be needed to further explore the feasibility of the capacity options, including to align ETCS deployment on Anglia and on ECML South
The project’s draft Benefits Management Strategy has been drawn up by the programme, and is available on request.
This benefits management strategy sets out how benefits are managed and the framework within which realisation will be achieved for this project, including roles and responsibilities within a MSP4NR-aligned RACI. The strategy ensures that a risk based approach to benefits realisation is being followed. This is part of the benefits management lifecycle shown over the page:
Figure M5: MSP4NR phases
This document will be revised following consideration and approval of this Strategic Outline Business Case, and therefore reflects the project’s thinking at this identify stage.
5.11.3 Applying lessons learned The Digital Railway Programme , as part of its thin Client role, is identifying lessons learned from a number of sources so that they can be reflected in its support to the routes during and post-SOBC.
Version 1.0 Page 81 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
These sources include the National Audit Office’s review of Great Western Route Modernisation20 and its ‘Lessons from major rail infrastructure programmes’21 which focus particularly on recommendations concerning economic analysis and programme governance. Digital Railway is also testing implementation before delivery to learn lessons by allowing systems to be introduced, tested and refined on targeted Sections of the network before rolling out the technologies on a larger scale across the network. This testing covers both individual Digital Railway systems, and integrated packages of systems. Traffic Management on GB railway comes in three forms: an operation decision support tool and as interfaced or integrated Traffic Management, with each being a more advanced version of the previous one. Each of these versions is being deployed on the railway and will inform an assessment of the costs, benefits and application of each version.
Cardiff Rail Operating Centre: Deploys operation decision support tool within current operating practices and adapts roles and ways of working to the new system;
Romford Rail Operating Centre: Deploys integrated Traffic Management and tests the roles and ways of working to complement the new system;
Thameslink: Deploys integrated Traffic Management to facilitate an enhanced timetable of cross-London services from 2018, and ATO over ETCS level 2 to deliver infrastructure capable of 24 train paths per hour (tpph) through its ‘core’ at peak times. ETCS level 2 functionality has been demonstrated at Cambrian and on test track at ENIF, the ERTMS National Integration Facility. ETCS Level 2 v.360 is the latest version mandated by the EU for use on European Railways and has been enshrined in UK law by the Rail Regulations, specifically Interoperability Regulations. It will therefore be the version deployed by Digital Railway. Prior to deployment, the element of the system to be housed on the train is to be tested by connecting the system at ENIF with an ETCS fitted train on the Melton test track at Network Rail’s Rail Innovation and Development Centre (RIDC) and conduct 1,000 miles of testing. These early deployment sites are providing valuable lessons learned across the nine levers of change identified by Digital Railway (see below for further details). For example:
Cost estimations of systems and their implementation;
How to avoid interoperability issues when procuring Traffic Management;
Running of trains using ETCS including detailed learning on specific features such as the settings required trains run in a low track adhesion environment;
Training required to provide staff with the knowledge needed for operation of Traffic Management to the expected levels of reliability;
Criticality of leadership and business readiness activity to support deployment including current constraints on implementation in the Routes.
20 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/modernising-the-great-western-railway/ ‘Modernising the Great Western railway’, National Audit Office, 9 November 2016 21 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/lessons-from-major-rail-infrastructure-programmes/ ‘Lessons from major rail infrastructure programmes’, National Audit Office, 24 October 2014 Version 1.0 Page 82 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.11.4 Developing new capabilities will require effective business change, supported by an industry readiness toolkit The installation of Digital train control and signalling will result in the alteration of many operating processes and procedures. These changes represent one of the biggest opportunities and, at the same time, if not properly addressed, give rise to significant risks to delivering the benefits of a Digital Railway. Using these technical solutions, enabled by business change, to achieve the identified outcomes will therefore require the rail network to expand and enhance its capabilities beyond their current state. The scale and breadth of the industry means that current capabilities vary from organisation to organisation across the country. This breadth also means that different stakeholders face a range of different challenges on their Section of the network, and have a number of different aspirations for their businesses or business units. Balancing these current capabilities will require an agile approach – both to technology and to associated business and process change. To enable effective business change across the industry, nine levers have been developed based on industry consultation – setting out the changes that must be made to achieve the level of capabilities required. Figure M6: Nine levers of change
A toolkit is being developed by the Digital Railway Programme to enable consistent and efficient deployment of integrated and interoperable Digital Railway solutions, whilst allowing for route- specific configurations.
The toolkit will support the industry, including with:
Manuals and instructions supporting the operation of a Digital Railway
Developing, Designing and Delivering of the Digital Railway Business Change:
o Scheme Management – project management, engineering and system management, procurement, Safety & Assurance etc.
Version 1.0 Page 83 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
o For the Digital Railway System (including people change), template and standard Digital Railway:
. Requirements
. Concept Designs
. Detailed Designs
o Guidance and instruction for:
. Installation/Build/Deployment of the Business Change
. Testing and Commissioning of the Business Change
. Placing in to Operational Use
o Guidance and instruction on built infrastructure:
. Operational and inspection interventions;
. Introduction of ‘Smart Technologies’;
. Renewal and maintenance interventions
. Major enhancements and/or new infrastructure;
. Asset management related competencies, capabilities and/or business processes.
Manuals and instructions supporting the operation of a Digital Railway
The toolkit is currently under development and will encompass both specific products aligned to each of the levers such as design specifications and standards and also traditional change management tools such as change assessments and benefits realisation plans. After the toolkit has been informed by the early deployment schemes, it can be customised by Anglia Route to balance delivery of Digital Railway with other considerations such as planned conventional schemes, funding availability and their local change agenda. This approach is designed to allow a degree of consistency across different regions, whilst allowing the programme to be agile based on the specific challenges and aspirations of different organisations. Once the Route team has customised the toolkit to meet its intended outputs, they will also be responsible for producing the necessary change impact assessment – and delivering the change via their Change Management Office. 5.12 Programme/Project Review and Evaluation
5.12.1 The Digital Railway Approach Digital Railway Business Case activity has been reviewed and assessed regularly, both at a high level by the Route Steering Board and at a working level through working groups and third party review (e.g. Network Rail Infrastructure Projects), and complies with the Network Rail approach to business assurance. The programme has implemented the three lines of defence approach, which provides multiple levels of business intervention. The quality of documentation and analysis Version 1.0 Page 84 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) is fundamental for the success of the business case development and the measures listed below are in place to make sure there is both transparency and rigour in all associated undertakings.
In the first instance that the Business Case team is required to undertake self-assessment (‘first line defence’), establishing the review of activities and outputs against pre-defined requirements. The most critical of these requirements are captured as milestones and are reported against within the period management report.
The second line of defence provides the opportunity for review of the business unit by external peer organisations. The programme can establish peers from other similar groups within Network Rail and industry partners, or organisations with specialist expertise eg. IUK, who may be retained to conduct expert reviews, of part or all of the business case activity.
The third line of defence is undertaken by the Network Rail internal audit team, or if requested by the DfT sponsoring group. The OGC Gateway Review process is one of the established frameworks in place which may deliver review and assessment; however review remits may be bespoke to requirements.
All programme-level assurance review activities are captured within the DR assurance plan, which is reviewed on a quarterly basis by the leadership team. Any deficiencies or improvement requirements identified are captured and tracked to close-out, within the Digital Railway combined improvement plan.
5.12.2 Project review and evaluation The project team described above will work with the programme business case team to undertake the first line defence described above.
5.12.3 The Integrated Assurance and Approvals Plan (IAAP) The programme has completed an IAAP for submission of this SOBC (available on request).
This IAAP outlines the assurance and approval stages that this document is subject to, and has been agreed through ongoing dialogue with DfT. Subject to approval of this SOBC, the programme will develop a revised IAAP as the first step of preparing for an Outline Business Case at GRIP 3.
5.13 Contingency Plan
The programme has developed programme-wide contingencies, included within the Strategy Document. At this stage, the route’s contingency plan would be to revert to the ‘do minimum’ option from the economic case.
At later stages of project development more detailed strategies will be developed by the project team to cater for issues arising during deployment, such as late deployment of technologies or commissioning.
Version 1.0 Page 85 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
5.14 Recommendations
The management case recommends the following next steps are taken:
5.14.1 Making a ‘thin client’ approach a reality The Anglia Route and the Digital Railway Programme should adopt a “thin client”22 approach moving forward, to agree in detail the roles, responsibilities and working relationships required to balance local ownership with central co-ordination and oversight.
5.14.2 Inform scheme development through lessons learned capture
The Digital Railway Programme should use the deployment of Traffic Management on Romford and Cardiff to inform all future deployments of this technology. The team should continue to liaise with the Thameslink Programme to capture learning on ATO over ETCS level 2 and Traffic Management . The programme should also progress the testing of ATO and ETCS L2 at RIDC. 5.14.3 Project management process innovation The project team should examine existing processes, with the GRIP framework, to assess how they may best be adapted to changes to signalling and control technology and the way industry operates.
Innovative funding arrangements, as discussed in the Financial case above, would also be likely to require process change and potentially, impact on workstream arrangements. This evolution and innovation will be developed and consulted in collaboration with key stakeholders through project- and programme-level governance in the next phase of the project. 5.14.4 Evolution of existing change controls
Enhancement and resignalling scheme governance and change controls will need to be revised to ensure overall planning and funding remains compatible with recommended digital options.
22 A “thin client” approach refers to a structure whereby the Programme will operate as a central hub that will draw on services and expertise of other industry bodies. Version 1.0 Page 86 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix A – Relationship between this SOBC and the wider Digital Railway Programme
The Digital Railway Programme has formed a deployment strategy which was devised to align to demand, performance challenges23, renewals and franchise opportunities. It consists of three main groups of projects which span over the short, medium and long term. These are set out in Figure A1 below. Figure A1: Digital Railway deployment strategy
NOW : Independent DR system MID TERM : Integrated DR System LONG TERM : Integrated Next application on committed Deployment Generation DR System projects Deployment Select candidates (5 x SOBCs & • Thameslink TPU, ELL…) for digital railway Longer term strategy based largely • Crossrail technology with the best value on asset condition to complete the • Romford and Cardiff 1st Traffic business case aligning: network (asset renewal whole life Management deployments • Asset condition cost saving business case) within • National enabling projects – • Safety the notional asset life of command, ETCS in-cab fitment project, • Demand control and signalling Telecoms, FICs & Test • Performance facilities • Rolling stock and franchise This will not attempt to align all • Specific TOC franchise alignment factors as beyond the early 2030s commitments to fit ETCS, • Constraints of resources, and HS2 there are no firm CDAS and ATO affordability, risk etc… timescales with which to integrate • A clear deployment plan linked but gives a long-term direction of to renewals and This will : travel, sequence and commitment Enhancements Pipeline for • Deliver best value Long term (Integrated Next • Detailed and fully integrate plan Assumed therefore that in The timing of Generation System) to give supply chain and subsequent funding cycles end point will deployment. stakeholder confidence candidates would again be depend on many • Endorsement and Funding for • Invest and undertake changes to prioritised by value factors and deployment of new realise cost savings constraints – the technologies. • Build Local and National Flexible longer term strategy could aim is to • Identification of system capability & skills in DR to also take advantage of new express a integrator become BAU technologies as they are developed sequence to but with change control CP5 (to 2019) CP6 to mid-CP7 (2019 to c.2027) give long-term confidence NPIF £450m helps in closing the gap from today to the mid-term End CP6 (2024) to the long term
Fleet Fit for both Passenger and Freight
Development of new technologies may change the deployment strategy As part of the Digital Railway Programme, this SOBC for the GEML Upgrade Programme is focused on meeting the demand challenges on the GEML and branches (and performance challenges across the whole Anglia Route). It is one of five candidate schemes exploring best value for money for integrated deployment in the medium term (2019 to 2027). It was selected for further analysis for two reasons:
Demand growth: The demand forecast and resulting crowding for passengers on the Great Eastern Main Line outer services;
Rolling Stock opportunity: The orders for new trains by Greater Anglia and Crossrail are an opportunity for the introduction of in cab-signalling systems. This GEML Upgrade Programme will be considered as a standalone investment and as part of a wider Digital Railway Programme to understand the impact of scale on value. Two scenarios will be tested, assuming that the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme is the first project:
23 Performance is measured (and assessed) by the Rail Industry in a number of ways (see Economic Case). In general, the term refers to the how late services are compared to the expected timetable. Version 1.0 Page 87 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Scenario 1 - A programme of one: All fixed costs (e.g. system design and development) and development cost applied to the Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme;
Scenario 2 - A national programme: Fixed and development costs shared over a National Programme with full economies of scale. NB – as the two schemes are distinct from each other, rolling stock costs will not flex due to the variance of the number of schemes.
The strength of the value for money recommendation will be greatest if there is a value for money case for this SOBC under scenario 1, where this proposed scheme stands on its own merits – rather than as dependant on a wider programme of work being procured.
While it may be the case that this SOBC may be the only scheme progressed, it is recognised that the value for money will be greater as a greater number of schemes are taken forward.
Benefits of a Digital Railway Programme
The programme level involvement presents real benefits across the business cases and future projects to:
Significantly contribute to improvements to cost efficiency of command, control and signalling by 23% to 42%24 (see Commercial Case);
Drive consistency in the application and operation of digital technology and actively building knowledge and expertise in order to maximise the network benefit;
Select and deliver (or support delivery of) the right schemes at the right times;
Undertake enabling activities and national projects supporting deployments;
Manage dependencies across the schemes;
Enable the underpinning network-wide changes such as telecoms upgrades;
Realise maximum benefits across the schemes;
Effectively manage risks and delivery quality;
Supports the development of resources required as part of the Digital Railway Programme;
Develop Great Britain’s expertise, to support Britain’s industrial strategy and export opportunities.
24 Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) Cost Reduction Findings Report, November 2016 Version 1.0 Page 88 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix B – Costs
Figure A2: Total incremental cost across all years (CP5- CP19)
OPTIONS ANALYSIS Digital approach – Traffic management Traffic Management & ETCS Level 2 no signals with 3hr peak capacity increase, push costs back and shared freight fitment costs
OPTION 3 4
£’m £’m
Capital -246 403
Running costs- main headings
Maintenance 1,128 -
VTAC 253 -
Leasing 4,511 -
Others 1,379 116
Total Opex 7,272 116
TOTAL 7,026 519
Figure A3: Funding breakdown per option25
25 The majority of the TOC costs relate to costs for additional trains to utilise the additional capacity Version 1.0 Page 89 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix C – Capacity Analysis Summary
Background This appendix describes the process by which the capacity assumptions were formed for the Strategic Outline Business Case. The conclusions were based on previous analysis from the Route Study and Digital Railway modelling work. Workshops were held between Digital Railway, Anglia Route, Capacity Planning, Strategic Planning and the RDG. The workshops reviewed previous analysis to assess where digital solutions would be relevant to solving the capacity challenges set out in the Anglia Problem Statement - primarily the need to meet demand by providing capacity for 27tph peak GEML services, and the aspiration for Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 services all day.
Summary of Previous Anglia analysis The conclusions from a number of reports were used as an input to the SOBC process: Anglia Route Study – March 2016: o Anglia LTPP – Great Eastern Main Line Capacity Report (2015); o Bow Junction Capacity Review - May 2014. Digital Railway Programme: o Report of Simulation and Results Analysis on the Great Eastern Mainline – July 2016.
Baseline Figure A4 shows services that form the base line. Figure A4: Services forming the base line
Service Service Level
GEML outer Peak 20 tph GA 2020 proposal
Crossrail Peak 16 tph (including 4 tph to London Liverpool Street)
Freight 1 Class 4, 1 Class 6 off peak
C2C Weekend services from Essex Thameside to London Liverpool Street via Forest Gate Junction and Stratford
Bow Junction is planned for delivery in CP6, providing additional crossings to allow main line services to access the electric lines on the approach to London Liverpool Street. The original analysis for Bow Junction was based on the current 22 tph GEML timetable, and it was assumed to unlock an additional 2 paths to the Southend line. No further analysis has been undertaken to date with the new 20 tph Greater Anglia franchise timetable proposal. It is assumed that Bow Junction will continue to unlock 2 paths. In addition, due to the fact the Greater Anglia 2020 proposal reduces the current service from 22 tph to 20 tph, one further path is possible without other interventions.
Version 1.0 Page 90 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Assumptions Figure A5 shows assumptions that have been made. Figure A5: Assumptions Assumption
The infrastructure required to operate the new Greater Anglia rolling stock will be delivered by the time the rolling stock is introduced.
The proposed new station with running loops (offering possible turnback facilities) at Chelmsford Beaulieu Park has been excluded from the analysis as it is a non-committed third party scheme.
The 27tph outer suburban services will operate on the main lines between Shenfield and Stratford. Running outer services on the electric lines would be at the expense of journey time and may introduce operational risks to Crossrail.
Train Planning systems will be capable of more granular planning e.g. at least 15 second intervals.
Economic valuation of the train service output assumed the following train services:
Baseline 23 tph (assumes Bow Junction) – Greater Anglia 20tph timetable plus additional services from Southend, Clacton and Braintree;
27tph – baseline plus additional services from Ipswich, Norwich, Southminster and Clacton.
Constraints Figure A6 below outlines the key constraints that need to be resolved to enable 27tph and journey time aspirations. Figure A6: Constraints to be resolved to enable 27tph and journey time aspirations
Location Constraint Solution Source of assumption
London Passenger circulation - Options being developed by Anglia Route Study Liverpool capacity for passengers separate business case. Noted as Street exiting / entering platforms, a dependency. vertical circulation from the concourse is very constrained.
London Platform capacity for more Two additional 12 car platforms (at Anglia Route Study Liverpool than 25tph. 21m) are required for 27 tph. Street
Stratford Trains arriving on the The station is constrained by Digital Railway Report station Down cannot arrive at conventional signalling, ETCS of Simulation and PL10 when another Down Level 2 would remove the need for Results Analysis on the service is leaving PL 10A approach control. Great Eastern Mainline without approach control, reducing platform capability and efficiency.
Version 1.0 Page 91 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Stratford Passenger circulation - TfL are completing a review of Network Strategy and station Stratford is a key Stratford pedestrian flows. The Capacity Planning interchange between rail, results from this analysis will feed underground and DLR into the next stage of services, the numbers of development. interchange is expected to increase once Crossrail opens.
Access to the In the up direction there Traffic Management could assist Anglia Route Study North London are no regulation points with managing the flow of trains Line between Colchester and and making regulation decisions, the North London Line, providing a view on the impact of Freight Network Study freight trains cross from the wider network. the electric lines to the North London Line at Maryland East Crossovers. Digital Railway Report This presents a of Simulation and performance risk. Results Analysis on the Great Eastern Mainline
Stratford – The Planning headway is 2 5th track between Chelmsford and Anglia Route Study Chelmsford minutes, this limits Stratford to increase track practical capacity to 24- capacity. 25tph. The Route Study th Digital Railway Report concluded 27tph would Alternative to 5 track is ETCS of Simulation and require 90s planning Level 2 headway or an additional Results Analysis on the line. Initial modelling work concluded Great Eastern Mainline that a 90s technical headway is achievable Chelmsford – Stratford
Witham – 2-track section of railway Dynamic Loop – allows fast trains Anglia Route Study Colchester with a mixture of traffic with to overtake slower trains. The slow and fast trains. speed differential between trains over this section is too large to be Digital Railway Report resolved with a digital train control of Simulation and solution. Results Analysis on the Great Eastern Mainline
Haughley Crossing moves between Doubling of Haughley Junction is a Anglia Route Study Junction trains to Norwich and cross deferred CP5 SFN scheme. country / freight trains Physical constraint, time taken for trains to clear the single line.
Trowse Swing Single line on the Doubling of the single line. Anglia Route Study Bridge approach to Norwich limits Physical constraint, time taken for capacity to 12tph, (6tph in trains to clear the single line and each direction). The single therefore cannot be solved by a line limits flexibility and the digital train control solution. timetable is built around it.
To achieve Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 without reducing current levels of connectivity additional Norwich-Ipswich-Liverpool Street services are required throughout the day. The Route Study concluded that resolving the constraints at Stratford-Chelmsford, Witham to Colchester,
Version 1.0 Page 92 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Haughley Junction and Trowse Swing Bridge would provide capacity for Norwich in 90 and Ipswich in 60 trains.
Further Work Required at the Next Stage of Development Figure A7 lists the further work that would be required during the next stage of development to validate the conclusions made in the capacity workstream. Figure A7: Further work to be remitted during the next stage of development
Further Work Required Rationale
Develop a concept of operation for digital It is not possible to assess the capacity impact of digital solutions and assess how this will change technology without train planning rules which reflect the current operational rules and train planning concept of operation. rules
Develop a more granular approach to train Capacity Planning is already considered opportunities to planning to realise the full capability of the improve train planning approach. digital train control system including ETCS, ATO, Traffic Management and Connected Driver Advisory Systems For the claimed capacity benefits on the Anglia Route to be fully realise from the digital systems the train planning approach needs to be more granular e.g. at least planning to 15 second intervals.
The extent of changes required meeting business needs, the feasibility of changes and their business case needs to be established.
The impact on data, interfaces, process and the necessary business change must also be assessed.
Review of Route Study capacity analysis More detailed timetable development / capacity analysis assessment of 27tph with new 20tph baseline is required to validate the high level conclusions made and updated demand analysis with the new baseline and train service assumptions for the additional trains.
Off peak analysis Validation of the assumption that off peak capacity for freight demand and Norwich in 90, Ipswich in 60.
Validation of capacity for ETCS moves before and after the peak with off peak service.
Assessment of ETCS level 2 on freight headways.
Version 1.0 Page 93 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Traffic Management and C-DAS impact on The ability of C-DAS and Traffic Management to manage capacity the flow of traffic at key locations e.g. regulation of freight onto/off the North London Line to the GEML should be assessed in more detail. This needs to consider the extent to which greater levels of capacity utilisation can be robustly achieved.
Pedestrian capacity analysis at Stratford and The impact on crowding at the busiest stations on the London Liverpool Street Route needs to be assessed in order to establish the impact on dwell times as well as the pedestrian capacity at the stations themselves.
Develop specific opportunities offered by Develop options to test the feasibility of opportunities digital train control which digital train control gives rise to, for example, journey time as a result of removing buffer time, greater extent of bi-di working etc.
Create concept train plans as an output of all To value capacity at the next stage of development a of the above concept train plans are required to demonstrate: (a) feasibility; and (b) as an input in to economic analysis.
Version 1.0 Page 94 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix D – Performance Methodology Introduction In this section we describe the methodology and assumptions used in determining the delay minute benefits appraisal of Traffic Management to the rail network. These percentage reductions are being fed into the Digital Railway performance model.
Primary and Secondary Research
Previous estimates and evidence bases for the performance impact of Traffic Management have been detailed in: SSL Model Office Reactionary Delay study findings – November 2013; Traffic Management Systems Business Case - August 2015; Traffic Management Business Case, Early Contractor Involvement (ECI), Findings Report – December 2016. These vary widely and have been questioned as to their accuracy, and consequently an updated approach has been implemented. A key outcome of this updated approach is that it provides an enhancement from previous work and a platform upon which the upcoming Traffic Management trials can be assessed as to delivering realistic performance benefits.
It was found that the current performance percentage reductions in the ECI report haven’t been developed since the August 2015 business case and therefore we attempted to consult further from the following subject matter experts on their appropriateness: Network Rail, Route Performance Managers; Senior Performance Analyst, National Performance Team; Romford ROC Programme Management; Traffic Management Programme Team, Digital Railway; Traffic Management Demonstration. Background
Primary delays are caused by a range of events that occur with varying degrees of predictability. Network Rail responds accordingly with established procedures. Whatever the reason for primary delay, when a line becomes blocked or speed restrictions are enforced, ramifications are soon felt on an increasing number of train paths and eventually on a far wider geographical area. This knock-on effect, known as reactionary delay, is responsible for an ever growing percentage of total delay.
Version 1.0 Page 95 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Figure A8: Delay affecting Passenger Trains
The chain of events caused by a blocked line is currently mitigated by the existing arrangement of signallers and controllers which remains very much a manual process, prone to inefficiency. Automating this is at the heart of Traffic Management System hence step changes in reactionary delay performance are expected. Reactionary delay is the core benefit that Traffic Management System aims to capitalise on but it is also expected to reduce primary delay in timetable planning errors. Traffic Management System has the ability to forecast many hours ahead of time to identify errors in the timetable plan.
The SSL Model Office Reactionary Delay study used an across the board estimated reduction in reactionary delay of 20%. This was since used as a working assumption and something which could be varied. It did have a basis in benchmarking and scenario testing work.
Performance Impact Estimation
This analysis involved utilisation of a large amount of data assessed at an appropriate level of detail. A more detailed appraisal would be difficult to implement in order to appraise the success of the technology.
Please note, these delay reductions do not include performance benefits associated with integration of Stock and Crew systems or C-DAS and therefore are a prudent estimation of the total performance benefits of Traffic Management.
Key updates to the benefit percentages include: A. Utilise a bottom-approach propagated from the Romford and Anglia deployment teams with most benefit reductions in reactionary delay; B. Reduce the level of performance benefit due to timetable planning errors; C. Remove all primary delay benefits; D. Maintain the method defined during the National Deployment Traffic Management Scoping in a cleaner format.
Version 1.0 Page 96 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
A. Utilise the bottom-approach propagated from the Romford and Anglia deployment teams.
Anglia Route and the Romford Programme Team have propagated a ‘bottom up’ approach with a reduction in reactionary delay only. The benefits were based on interim isolated deployment at Upminster in lieu of a fully integrated and staff migration to Romford ROC in 2018.
The bottom up approach gave a reactionary delay benefit reduction of 6% per year, very similar to the ECI findings in reactionary delay benefits, ND code group A-C. The National Deployment (ND) Code group were defined during the National Deployment Traffic Management scoping with the three framework Traffic Management suppliers Hitachi, SSL and Thales, see table below for description. We believe Traffic Management will not affect some incidents more than others and therefore applied the reductions in ND Code Group A-C to the other groups, apart from Group F.
Figure A9: National Deployment Delay Attribution Code Grouping
ND Code Description Delay Categories Group
A Delays Many Trains at a location 100s (except for 110A & B), 200s, 300s, 400s, 503, 504, 505, 506
B Delays 1 Train (mostly fleet faults) All 700s except for 701G, 501C
C Delays Many Trains at across a wide area (weather events) 110A & B
D Network Rail Ops Signalling Delay 501A
E Network Rail Ops Control Delay 501B
F Timetable Planning 502A
G Sub-Threshold 601
H Freight Terminal/Yard Delay 701G
I No Significant Affect 501 D, 502 C, 602, 902
B. Reduce the anticipated performance benefit due to timetable planning errors.
ND Code Group F is Timetable Planning. The ECI report states Traffic Management will eliminate errors in the Working Timetable due to better information being fed back to timetable planners on clashes in the plan. However, nearly all the services in the timetable are now “locked in” through rights and SLCs in the franchises. The majority of the conflicts can only be removed by taking trains out, which Network Rail cannot do and the TOCs are reluctant to do due to a baseline of existing services.
We accept a certain level of reduction due to planner mistakes but we do not believe we will attain the high level of performance benefits in the original scoping work.
Version 1.0 Page 97 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
C. Remove all primary delay benefits
Traffic Management will not prevent incidents occurring but help managing the incident when it occurs. Therefore the performance benefit will be on reactionary delay.
A certain level of 502A primary delay will be removed due to timetable planning error before the day starts but the majority of delay will be reactionary delay, with the capability to managing the incident.
Figure A10: Primary Delay Reduction
Primary Delay Reduction (%) ND Code Isol. I/face Intg’d Group Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F 20 20 20 30 30 30 30 30 30 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reactionary Delay Reduction (%) ND Code Isol. I/face Intg’d Group Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High A 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 B 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 C 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 D 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 E 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 F 20 20 20 30 30 30 30 30 30 G 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 H 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12 I 2.5 5 7.5 3.5 7 10.5 4 8 12
Next Steps
The forthcoming 1st deployment of Traffic Management in 2017 and into 2018 will provide the opportunity to solidify these performance benefits against actual empirical evidence rather than opinion. Therefore we recommend the following next steps:
Work with Anglia, South East and Wales Route performance teams to develop a structured before and after data capture;
Continue to investigate the possibility of using data from the training simulator in Romford; Modify delay minute appraisal following 1st deployment.
Version 1.0 Page 98 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix E – Early Contractor Involvement (ECI)
As part of the Digital Railway ECI (Digital Railway Early Contractor Involvement) Programme the Digital Railway Team and some selected suppliers were asked to consider: ‘What can we do as a team (‘good customer’ and supply chain) to reduce costs, within a future Digital Railway Programme?’ [ECI WS2]26 International market analysis was used to identify three interdependent causal factors that explain the variances between the UK and overseas Digital Railway value chains: Scale of commitment;
The UK rail industry environment;
Technical innovation. The work also identified key target areas that will have a significant impact on the cost of developing and deploying a Digital Railway solution, and where possible quantify the potential saving and recommendations as to how the benefit can be realised. ECI WS227 has identified eight opportunities relating to the above causal factors: Economies of learning brought about by continuity of work;
Economies of scale delivering volume savings and efficiency gains;
Adoption of a ‘thin client’ Digital Railway delivery model to put the supply chain close to the customer eliminating waste and leveraging the suppliers’ return on experience;
Investing in development of Digital Railway skills and competencies by providing commitment, giving the supply chain confidence to invest and reverse the industry skills drain to drive up performance and quality;
Leverage digital technologies to dramatically improve the quality of base infrastructure data;
Collaborate with the supply chain to develop a clear and implementable Digital Railway system definition and reference design;
Provide the scale of opportunity to enable the supply chain to invest in Design and Test Automation alongside a modular design concept;
Deployment methodology.
Collectively these opportunities could deliver a transformational reduction in the unit rate for Digital Railway deployment of between 23% and 42% within a six-year period.28 Scale of Commitment
A key finding from the ECI work to date includes a comment on the opportunity to create an environment in which the industry can have a transformational impact on the value chain to drive
26 Network Rail (2016) “Early Contractor Involvement Cost Reduction Findings Report” Version 0.20 p3 27 Ibid p3 28 Network Rail (2016) “Early Contractor Involvement Cost Reduction Findings Report” Version 0.20 p3 Version 1.0 Page 99 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) down Digital Railway costs. This could be achieved in part by creating a standalone committed programme of work extending beyond the conventional renewals five-year funding cycle. The supply chain has identified that across Europe the cost of ETCS Level 2 signalling reduces significantly as the scale of commitment from the Infrastructure Manager to the supply industry increases. There is a point, the minimum efficient scale, after which additional savings from increasing scale start to diminish. The ECI WS2 analysis has highlighted current UK ETCS deployments to be an order of magnitude under the minimum efficient scale as highlighted in Figure A18.29 Please see the ‘ECI Cost Reduction Report’,30 available from the Digital Railway Programme team, for a continued discussion.
Figure A11: Economies of scale for UK ETCS deployment
Efficient scale
E - Maturity C I - Competition R
P Market - Contracts Factors - Client org - Track access - Approvals Market Price
Reduces with volume & scale
Typical UK Minimum η SCALE Signalling Signalling Procurement Procurement
29 Ibid p9 30 Ibid Version 1.0 Page 100 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix F – Economic Appraisal Assurance Statement Introduction
This document is a reflection on the assurance of the April 2017 Digital Rail SOBCs. The Economic Case has identified key risks to the analysis, communicating the impact of these risks with sensitivity tests. This report re-iterates these issues at a more general level, and considers sources of uncertainty and risk at a project and governance level. Further work should be prioritised to where the most risk and uncertainty has been identified and this should inform an analysis assurance strategy going forward.
At the SOBC stage the analysis is supporting a decision to continue development of the options. The quality assurance of the analysis has not followed a formal, bespoke process but has incorporated aspects of the Network Rail Economic Analysis Team’s approach. Given the early stage of analysis this is considered an appropriate level, providing enough confidence that there are no significant errors in the process that would alter the conclusions or recommendations. The analysis has communicated risks and uncertainty clearly, highlighting key areas that require greater focus at the next stage to ensure a robust analytical assurance strategy. In summary:
What worked well:
Stakeholder engagement with NR Routes and DfT;
Knowledge sharing and learning;
Risk and uncertainty identified and communicated.
Where there is uncertainty:
Assumptions made on costs of new technology both in and of itself and relative to the baseline of conventional signalling operations, maintenance and renewals;
Benefits of new technology;
Transparency of cost estimation and consistency across options.
The biggest risks:
The comparative cost analysis: base case costs (renewals) versus option costs;
Quantum of analysis required simultaneously;
Insufficient time for appropriate sense-checking of costs;
Insufficient time for thorough independent review.
Figure A12: Key risks and mitigating actions
Key risk Action
Cost comparison against the baseline Baseline renewals costs to be reviewed once the Statement of Funds Available is published and Version 1.0 Page 101 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
reflected in Route signalling workbanks
Further work to understand the cost drivers of conventional signalling
Cost uncertainty within digital options Focus on understanding whole life cycle costs (OPEX, CAPEX, maintenance and renewals) and important variables such as the retention of signalling – greater level of engineering development, work with supply chain and use international examples to benchmark
Options tested to align with renewals Sensitivities present a crude alignment with renewals cycle – this needs to be developed in detail by the Route asset management teams
Benefits uncertainty Test benefits at the earliest opportunity following commencement of operation of first deployments – Thameslink, Romford and Cardiff
Modelling
The analysis has used business critical models, used regularly by Network Rail’s Economic Analysis team and registered as part of DfT’s business critical analytical models. Those used as part of the Digital Rail SOBC include:
Discounted cash flow (DCF) appraisal template (Excel);
Crowding template (Excel);
MOIRA model for passenger train data and analysis.
A bespoke model to estimate the performance benefit has also been developed. As a new model, this has not yet been shared with the DfT but follows webTAG and PDFH guidance in generating the outputs.
For the bespoke performance model, clients, stakeholders and subject matter experts were also involved in development of the methodology. The methodology, assumptions and data used are communicated and recorded throughout the process.
All models used and made by Network Rail’s Economic Analysis Team are subject to the team’s Quality Assurance Framework. They are tested throughout development and peer reviewed, with any risks and issues escalated in a timely and transparent manner.
Inputs, assumptions and evidence
The quality of the analysis is dependent on the quality of the inputs. With increasing quantum and complexity, management of the inputs and their supporting assumptions and evidence is increasingly challenging.
In each case, the risk to the conclusion of the analysis is amplified with the required comparison against a base case. The base case cost assumption and the option cost assumption have not followed a consistent approach and have been developed independently, this allows for a greater
Version 1.0 Page 102 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC) likelihood of discrepancy in assumptions. This is identified as the biggest risk to the analysis – which is dependent on a suitable understanding of the incremental cost of the options.
Lines of communication that allow greater transparency and opportunity to feedback understanding and implication are required to enable for effective challenge and collaboration. It is critical that enough time is put in the programme to allow for this.
It is recommended that there is an Analytical Assurance Framework set up for the OBC development. This will set out not only the way in which evidence is managed, shared and assured but also the people process that is required to achieve this.
Project Level assurance
The analysts have worked closely with clients and stakeholders allowing good communication on purpose, assumptions and key risks.
Time limitations have not allowed a linear approach to finalised analysis and review. The review processes has been iterative and piece-meal; with component parts of the analysis reviewed via the Economic Analysis Team review process. This provides enough confidence that there are no significant errors in the process that would alter the conclusions or recommendations. Best practice has been sufficiently followed.
Time has not allowed the complete package of inputs, analysis, models, outputs and conclusions to be reviewed as a whole by an independent reviewer. This has been noted as key risk, and sufficient time should be allocated for this process at the next stage of development.
Governing the process
The majority of the schemes that NR delivers are funded by government. An Economic Advisor within the DfT’s Rail Analysis Team has been a contact throughout the analysis development. The role was established to ensure the methodology and analysis was developing to meet the DfT’s expectations. At the next, OBC, stage this role should also act as a lead assurer for the investment project, and the governance arrangements should be set out clearly from the start of the process.
Version 1.0 Page 103 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix G – Digital Railway Technology
What is in scope? 1ETCS Infrastructure Systems ► Outline design, detailed design and implementation of works for ETCS lineside
systems; ► This includes ETCS control systems, Radio Block Centres, signalling inter-lockings, balises and the management of interfaces between the component parts.
What is in scope? 2 ETCS On-board systems & retro- ► Design, installation and commissioning fitment services works for both ‘First in Class’ (FiC) and production fitment to each distinct train class for both passenger and freight vehicles; ► Includes on-board supply and fitment of ETCS and associated equipment (tachographs, radar, European Vital Computer units, Driver Machine Interfaces for both passenger and freight).
What is in scope?
► Outline design, detailed design and implementation of works for both new 3 Communications Systems Global System for Mobile Communications-Railway (GSM-R) base- stations (infills) and upgrades to existing GSM-R base-stations; ► Outline design, detailed design and implementation of works for both new Fixed Telecommunication Network (FTNx) infrastructure and modifications to existing. Version 1.0 Page 104 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
What is in scope? 4 Traffic Management Systems ► Traffic Management Systems (Traffic Management System) and the interface to the Connected Driver Advisory Systems (C-DAS); ► Traffic Management is a system which supports signallers to manage the flow of trains across the network. It maximises
network performance by allowing trains to run together as effectively as possible; ► C-DAS is an in-cab decisions support tool that provides drivers with the information they need at the right time.
What is in scope? 5 Data Management Services ► Data acquisition, validation, storage, processing, management, change control, analysis and provision to all system requirements to support the implementation and operation of the Digital Railway.
What is in scope? 6 Cybersecurity Systems and ► Protection of data and the overall Digital Services Railway system from unauthorised access or modification.
What is in scope?
► Specialist services in support of Network Rail operating as the Systems Integrator Systems Integration Services 7 during the deployment of the Digital Railway plan; ► Specialist services include design of overall system, requirements management, technical integration and analysis and planning of the various systems within the Digital Railway.
Version 1.0 Page 105 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
What is in scope?
► Specialist services in support of 8 Programme Management Network Rail operating as the Programme Manager during the deployment of the Digital Railway plan; ► Services include programme, commercial, risk and planning support of the overall works and services and systems required.
What is in scope? Business Change and Readiness ► Business engagement with key 9 stakeholders and leaders at various levels on the Digital Railway capability requirements; ► Business readiness; identifying the effort required to be ready for the Digital Railway solution; ► Business adoption; sustaining the improved performance of the railway system through business adoption strategies.
Version 1.0 Page 106 of 112 Issued: 02 March 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000025
Great Eastern Man Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix H – Indicative deployment approach
Legend
GEML Option 3 - Digital Package Level Crossings Stations, Track & Junctions Traffic Management Rolling Stock x xxx xxxxxx xxx Date Accurate Configuration State with Freight Fitment xxx Timetable + Benefits CC&S Traction Power & Telecoms x xxx xxxxxx xxx Date TBC Activity/Milestone This plan has been developed for xxx costing purposes only, and does not 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2014 2015 2026 take fully into account the time J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D needed for decision making following AGA - Last New Train Retrofit 169 x 2 Cabs fitted with Retrofit 169 x 2 Cabs fitted with Start AGA Franchise AGA - Design Freeze New Trains AGA - Final Design New Trains (Bombardier and Stadler) C-DAS ETCS End AGA Franchise - 92.9% PPM the completion of this SOBC and the Oct-16 Mar-17 Jun-17 Jan-20 Oct-21 Jul-22 Oct-25 development up to the GRIP 3 option Rolling Stock selection. As a result, the AGA - Decision on Fitment New Trains (late) Elizabeth Line - First New Train AGA - First New Train Elizabeth Line - Last New Train All freight fitted with C-DAS All freight fitted with ETCS programme plan will be revised as Feb-17 May-17 Jan-19 Jan-20 Oct-21 Dec-22 part of the package of activities to OHLE upgrades to Gidea Park GEML Traction Power Supply Fixed (wireline) Telecoms Trowse Bridge Traction Supply completed Upgrade Start on site Network Changes Complete Complete reach OBC, when the programme Jan-16 Nov-16 Jan-21 May-23 will have a more detailed Traction Power & Telecoms GEML Traction Power Supply GEML Traction Power Supply Uplift of GSM-R Telecoms understanding of the timeframe for Upgrade GRIP 4 Completion Upgrade Complete Network Complete Jun-16 Mar-19 Jul-22 delivery in CP6 or 7.
Isolated TM from Liverpool St to Unified Voice Platform Changes Isolated TM Colchester to TM options considered Chelmsford Isolated TM on WAML Lines Complete Ipswich plus Branches Jan-16 Sep-20 Sep-21 Jul-22 Sep-23
Traffic Management Integrated TM Liverpool Street TM Contracts Awarded Isolated TM on North London Integrated TM Stratford to Gidea area and Gidea Park to Integrated TM on WAML Lines Line Park Chelmsford Mar-18 Mar-21 Jul-22 May-23 Mar-24
Haughley and Stowmarket RRIs Crossrail LS IECC B Upgrade modified - Haughley junction Liverpool Street SSI data Smartlock Stratford 1 and 2 Norwich RRI modified - Trowse Smartlock Shenfield Relock - No Complete and LXs modified - additional platforms Relock Electric Lines - Underlay Swing Bridge signals Jan-16 Mar-21 Dec-21 Jul-22 May-23 May-23
CC&S Crossrail LS IECC C Upgrade Witham and Kelvedon SSI data Smartlock Stratford 1 and 2 Data Complete modified - dynamic loop and LXs Manningtree RRI modified - LXs Claydon RRI modified - LXs Modified Main Lines - No signals Diss RRI modified - LXs Feb-17 Sep-21 May-22 Mar-23 May-23 Mar-24
CP5 CP6 CP7 Y3-CP8 C T1 T2 B1 B2T3 B3 B4 Digital Railway Development Technical Options Assumed Contract Award
2 x additional platforms Double Track Trowse Swing Double Track Haughley Junction Liverpool Street Bridge Mar-21 Dec-21 May-23
Stations, Track & Junctions Passing loops extension north of New Beaulieu (Park) Station Witham (Dynamic loop) completed Sep-21 Dec-21
B2: ETCS L2 Underlay + Integ'd Start Elizabeth Line Services T1: New GEML off-peak Norwich B1: Isolated TM improved TM improved capacity & B3: ETCS L2 No signals improved Liverpool Street to Shenfield in 90 Timetable *1 performance performance capacity Dec-18 May-19 Sep-20 Jul-22 May-23
Timetable + Benefits
Extend Elizabeth Line Service T2: New GEML peak Norwich in T3: Driver Training Section B3: New GEML 27tph Timetable B4: Isolated TM Colchester SB from Shenfield to Paddington 90 Timetable *2 Available improved performance May-19 Dec-19 Jul-22 May-23 Sep-23
Footpath crossing closure Footpath crossing closure Review Completed Haughley Upgrade 1 x LX Completed Claydon Upgrade 1 x LX May-18 Mar-21 Jan-22 Mar-23
Level Crossings
Stowmarket Upgrade 1 x LX Kelvedon Upgrade 1 x LX Manningtree Upgrade 1 x LX Diss Upgrade 9 x LX
Mar-21 Sep-21 May-22 Mar-24 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D 2014 2015 2026 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Rev Date Description Name Signed Date Project: Digital Railway Development Technical Options 1.2 16/03/17 Added contract award milestone Author Saad Butt 17/03/17 Title: GEML Option 3 - Digital Package with Freight Fitment Drawing generated by WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff SI:D3 Roadmap Tool 1.1 10/03/17 Internal Review comments captured Checker Alison Danahay 17/03/17 Doc No: 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000008 1 23/02/17 Baseline for internal review Approver Dan Holder 17/03/17 Sheet: 1 of 1 Status: Final
Version 1.0 Page 107 of 112 Issued: 27 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix I – Stakeholder map
Digital Railway Programme Government & Regions • Industry sponsorship to ensure business cases for deployment of digital • Provide challenge to the programme’s proposals via Governance train control systems are identified, funded, prioritised and deliver whole life structure benefits; • Provide direct funding to Network Rail and facilitate potential 3rd • Industry change strategies to ensure that an industry operating model is in party revenue sources place to optimise the use and extract the full benefits of new technology and • Providing the systems leadership through an enterprise architecture and • Set the strategy and vision for GB’s railway national systems authority for digital train control and operations. • Provide ultimate accountability for the passenger experience
Routes (Network Rail) Rail Safety and Standards Board • Engage key stakeholders at programme-level and continue their involvement at Candidate Scheme level • Work alongside industry partners to deliver early digital schemes (e.g., Thameslink upgrades and Traffic Management improvements at Romford and Cardiff • Act as industry facilitator for rail upgrades • Bring expertise from leading rail infrastructure renewals Rail Franchisees and • Provide funding (with an arms-length governance arrangement) • Carry out development and maintenance work on Digital Railway infrastructure assets Owning Groups • Develop and test technologies including ETCS Level 3, COMPASS and ATO • Bring together its members to ensure cross-industry buy-in and support for the Digital Railway programme • Provide support to the industry in developing the case for digital Transport for London railway • Provide insight into urban infrastructure demand, supply • Represent the operators that will deliver new services to and development strategies customers deployed under the Digital Railway programme • Provide input on passenger flow through existing networks • Understand railway operations, constraints and incentives under franchising programme • Provide devolution input GB Railway • Invest in technologies to harness future opportunities • Protecting commercial and economic interests for industry Supply Chain • Provide operational data for analysis future programme projects • Engage with the programme through the Digital Railway’s Early Contractor Involvement (ECI) programme • Devise innovative and cost-effective solutions to the Digital Railway programme Trades Unions • Workforce engagement to support the development of the railway for • Help demonstrate the case for the Digital Railway programme the future • Bring together the relevant parts of the supply chain through the Rail Supply Group • Facilitate a fundamental change to the way industry works with the supply chain to bring down the forecasted costs of digital technologies including the cost of maintaining and operating train control systems on the railway Office of Rail and Road Freight Industry • Provide industry regulation input • Protect interest of freight operators and therefore private sector revenue streams through • Provide infrastructure usage data for demand analysis access charges • Protecting commercial and economic interests for industry and freight forwarding • Provide operational data for analysis future programme projects NB: This is only a sample of those involved in the digital railway programme
N.B. This is only a sample of those involved in the Digital Railway Programme
Version 1.0 Page 108 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix J – Communications and Stakeholder team approach
Version 1.0 Page 109 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Version 1.0 Page 110 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Version 1.0 Page 111 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300
Great Eastern Main Line Upgrade Programme (SOBC)
Appendix K – Options and problem statement
Version 1.0 Page 112 of 112 Issued: 28 April 2017 00SOBC-NWR-REP-MPM-000300