Loudoun County, Virginia Board of Supervisors 1 Harrison Street, S.E., 5th Floor, P.O. Box 7000, Leesburg, VA 20177-7000 Telephone (703) 777-0204 Fax (703) 777-0421 www.loudoun.gov
BOARD WORK SESSION DULLES CORRIDOR METRORAIL PROJECT – PHASE II
Agenda
Board Room Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:00 P.M.
I. Call to Order - Chairman York
II. Information Items
1. Overview of Parking Demand Study – DESMAN Associates 2. Update from MWAA 3. Report on Financial History and Plan of Finance Assumptions and Strategies 4. Additional questions on RCLCO Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis
III. Adjourn
Please note:
This meeting will be held in the Board Room at the Loudoun County Government Center, located at 1 Harrison St, SE, First Floor, Leesburg, VA 20175.
Copies of agenda items are available in the County Administrator’s Office and also available on- line at http://www.loudoun.gov/bosdocuments. The Dulles Rail webpage for Loudoun County can be found at http://www.loudoun.gov/dullesrail. If you need assistance accessing this information contact County Administration, 703-777-0200.
If you require any type of reasonable accommodation, as a result of a physical, sensory, or mental disability, to participate in this meeting, please contact County Administration at (703) 777-0200. Three days notice is requested.
FM Assistive Listening System is available at the meeting.
Date of Meeting: May 16, 2012
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS INFORMATION ITEM
SUBJECT: Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project Briefing – Finance Meeting #1
ELECTION DISTRICTS: Countywide
STAFF CONTACTS: Tim Hemstreet, County Administrator Ben Mays, Deputy Director, Management & Financial Services Martina Williams, Management & Financial Services
BACKGROUND:
This work session is the fifth in the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project Briefing series that follows the initial introductory work session held on March 7, 2012, the WMATA work session held on April 17th, the Transportation/Transit work session held on May 3rd and the Robert Charles Lesser & Company’s Updated Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis work session held on May 15th. This is also the first of two planned work sessions that focus on the plan of finance of the Metrorail project with the intent of providing further information to the Board for its deliberations with respect to remaining in or “opting out” of the Project, per the Project Funding Agreement.
Tonight’s agenda includes several presentations: (1) DESMAN Associate’s overview of their Metrorail Parking Demand Study; (2) Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority’s update; (3) Department of Management & Financial Services’ report of the project’s financial history and the County’s plan of finance assumptions and strategies and (4) since time on the 15th was limited, staff will address any additional RCLCO questions.
Copies of the financial presentations will be distributed during the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. DESMAN Associates’ Metrorail Parking Demand Study 2. WMATA’s Compact 3. WMATA’s Capital Funding Agreement 4. WMATA’s Capital Needs Inventory 5. WMATA’s Vital Signs Report – A Scorecard of Metro’s Key Performance Indicators 6. Jack Robert’s Discussion of "Local Tax on Commercial & Industrial Property for Transportation Projects” 7. Responses to Supervisor Reid Questions Submitted April 25, 2012 8. Responses to Supervisor Williams Questions Submitted April 18, 2012 9. Responses to Supervisor Higgins Questions Submitted April 26, 2012 10. WMATA’s Complete Responses to Supervisor Reid, Williams and Higgins’ Questions
Attachment 1 A1-1 Attachment 1 A1-2
DESMAN ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PLANNERS PARKING CONSULTANTS RESTORATION ENGINEERS ASSOCIATES
MEMORANDUM
TO: Martina Williams, Department of Management & Financial Services Loudoun County
FROM: Chris Luz, DESMAN Associates
DATE: April 12, 2012
RE: Metrorail Parking Demand Study Route 606 and 772 Station Commuter Parking Demand Forecast Project 10‐11148‐3
DESMAN Associates (DESMAN) has been retained to prepare a parking demand analysis associated with the construction of three proposed Metrorail parking facilities in Loudoun County, Virginia. One garage is proposed at the Route 606 Station with 1,965 spaces and two garages at the Route 772 Station with 1,433 spaces on the north side of the Greenway and 1,540 spaces on the south side. The objective of the analysis is to assist Loudoun County in studying whether it can build and operate these garages with separate funding through a private sector partnership that would require no additional local tax funding.
Peak parking demand has been estimated based on a review of past studies and land use model forecasts and incorporation of the most recently available data.
Overview
The Toll Road Plan (TRP) adopted in 1995, first established location criteria, design, and development policies for potential high density mixed‐use transit nodes in the Dulles Greenway. The TRP identified the first two nodes as being located to the west of the Route 606 interchange and between the Route 607 and 772 interchanges. In 2001, the Revised General Plan and the Revised Countywide Transportation Plan were adopted refining the land development polices for a Transit‐Oriented Development (TOD) at the Route 772 Station area on both sides of the Greenway and a Transit Related Employment Centre (TREC) for the Route 606 Station area north of the Greenway. The TOD is planned as a pedestrian‐scale development with a mix of residential, commercial, public, and employment uses while the TREC, which does not include a residential component, is planned for concentrated compact employment uses. In 2002 the Planned Development – Transit Related Center (PD‐TRC) zoning district was amended implementing the policies of the Revised General Plan for the Route 772 Station. Subsequently, in 2003 the Planned Development – Transit Related Employment Center (PD‐TREC) zoning district was developed to implement the Plan policies for the Route 606 Station location.
110 E BROWARD BLVD. SUITE 1710 FT. LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 PHONE 954/315.3924 FAX 954/315-3899 [email protected] AttachmentNEW YORK CHICAGO 1 WASHINGTON, D.C. BOSTON CLEVELAND HARTFORD FT. LAUDERDALE A1-3DENVER DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
The County has approved three TOD projects for the Route 772 station area ensuring a dense, urban character with residential and pedestrian oriented urban amenities, unlike most other similarly positioned stations. While original plans for the rail project included only minimal parking at this station, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors later advocated for the existing parking allocations to be split between the north and south sides of the station.
The Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the full Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)1, was published in 2004, using the Northern Virginia Major Investment Study Model with inputs from the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) Round 6.3 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts representing year 2003, as well as future highway and transit networks, transit operating plans developed for the project and operating characteristics of the Dulles Toll Road.2
At the outset of the parking demand study both Loudoun County and DESMAN anticipated that detailed daily boardings projections – which are critical to forecasting parking demand ‐ would be available from Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) or Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) to supplement the limited summary daily boardings projection provided for year 2025 in Table 6.1‐4 of the FEIS. Unfortunately, after consulting with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, WMATA, the Dulles Rail Project Office and MWCOG, it was determined that additional boardings information was not available for use in this analysis. As a result, DESMAN developed proxy measures in order to develop its own forecasts for the planning timeline of 2018 through 2040. This is described in more detail in the next section.
Methodology for Estimating Parking Demand
As noted earlier, ridership forecasts for the Route 606 and Route 772 stations exist only for a single year (2025). These forecasts were developed in 2004, in part based on MWCOG Round 6.3 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts from 2003. MWCOG has developed several new forecasts since Round 6.3, with Round 8.0 representing the most current forecast. In addition, Loudoun County retained Robert Charles Lesser & Company (RCLCO study)3 to further refine the Round 8.0 forecast, particularly for the Route 606 and Route 772 Stations under the Phase II full LPA extension.
The following is a discussion of the Round 6.3 population and land use assumptions used in the FEIS with a comparison of the Round 6.3 and Round 8.0 forecasts to the RCLCO study, which includes refinements made to the Round 8.0 forecasts. (For clarification, Round 6.3 includes
1 Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) includes the Phase 2 extension into Loudoun County and the Route 606 and 772 Stations. 2 Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project FEIS, Chapter 6. Transportation Effects, Section 6.1.1 Methodology. 2004. 3 Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Phase 2 Metrorail Extension to Loudoun County, RCLCO, April 2012.
Attachment 1 2 April 12,A1-4 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
forecasts through year 2030, while Round 8.0 and the RCLCO study data include forecasts through year 2040.)
Comparison of the Round 6.3 and Round 8.0 Forecasts to the RCLCO Study Refinements
The MWCOG transportation planning model (model) covers 22 jurisdictions comprised of Washington, DC, 12 cities and counties in Maryland and seven cities and counties in Virginia, including Loudoun County. Population and land use data is summarized within geographical areas referred to as traffic analysis zones (TAZs) for each jurisdiction. The Round 6.3 model incorporates 126 TAZs for Loudoun County that include the following data summarized in five year increments from 2000 through 2030: Number of Households; Household population; Group quarters population; Total employment; Industrial employment; Retail employment; Office employment; and Other employment.
The Round 8.0 model for Loudoun County includes a number of updates since the Round 6.3 model was prepared including a refinement of the TAZs from 126 to 282 zones. The overall geographic area covered by the TAZs in Loudoun County remained identical from Round 6.3 to 8.0. The Round 8.0 population and land use data is also summarized into five year increments from 2005 through 2040, rather than 2030 as in Round 6.3. The RCLCO study includes a more detailed approach specifically directed at how Loudoun County might grow as a result of the full LPA. The land use forecasts included in the RCLCO study used the same assumptions that Loudoun County used in the Round 8.0 forecast with the addition of taking into account the Route 28 Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezonings in the Route 28 corridor which were approved after the Round 8.0 forecasts were prepared4.
A comparative analysis was conducted for the Round 6.3 population and land use forecast, the Round 8.0 forecast and the RCLCO study forecasts to determine what changes had occurred in land use since the FEIS was prepared and if the change was significant relative to calculating station parking demand. The common basis for analysis was at the county level and therefore, a comparative analysis between the three data sets was conducted on a countywide basis.
There are two sets of data that are particularly important for comparative purposes in this study across the three forecasts: number of households and total employment. Table 1 provides a comparison of the number of households forecast by each data set countywide.
4 Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Phase 2 Metrorail Extension to Loudoun County, RCLCO, March 2012.
Attachment 1 3 April 12,A1-5 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Also included for reference is Loudoun County’s September 2011 forecast through 2040, which incorporates the U.S. Census Bureau data for 2010.
The RCLCO study identified household data annually from 2010 through 2040 for both the Round 8.0 data and for the refined RCLCO data5. Year 2018 was added to the tables listing boardings and parking demand since it is the estimated opening year for the Route 606 and 772 Stations (according to informal discussions with Loudoun County, Department of Management & Financial Services). As discussed, interim year data is not available for Round 6.3 and 8.0, but the RCLCO study does include annual forecasts, including year 2018 as shown in the following tables.
Table 1 – Household Forecasts
Year Source 2010 2011 2015 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Round 6.3 106,572 n/a 124,553 n/a 139,608 149,985 156,697 n/a n/a Round 8.0 102,331 n/a 112,669 n/a 127,409 141,848 150,209 154,978 158,299 RCLCO 104,583 106,591 121,101 131,504 137,588 146,826 152,911 157,600 160,234 Current Loudoun County 1 Forecasts 104,583 106,951 117,481 126,179 132,482 146,623 154,475 159,427 163,298 1 www.loudoun.gov/researchunit. "2000 ‐ 2040 Annual Series of Population, Households, and Housing Units," Loudoun County Department of Management and Financial Services, September 19, 2011. The 2010 figure matches U.S. Census Bureau decennial census data.
As opposed to the Round 8.0 data, the number of households included in the RCLCO study forecasts is higher than the Round 8.0 forecast and similar to the Round 6.3 forecast through year 2030. The RCLCO study anticipates more aggressive growth than Round 8.0 in the earlier years while the Round 8.0 anticipates more aggressive growth than the RCLCO in the later years. The current Loudoun County forecasts are lower than the RCLCO data until after year 2025 when the forecasts are slightly higher resulting in a higher forecast for the County in year 2040. The RCLCO study forecast 160,234 households in 2040 versus the County at 163,298 and Round 8.0 at 158,299 households.
The number of households projected by Round 6.3 (used in the FEIS) is close to the number forecasted by the RCLCO refinements and the Loudoun County Department of Management and Financial Services forecasts which reflect the most recent Census data. The Round 8.0 data does not correlate as well with Round 6.3, the RCLCO refinements or the current Loudoun County forecasts.
5 Exhibit II‐13, Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Phase 2 Metrorail Extension to Loudoun County, RCLCO, April 2012.
Attachment 1 4 April 12,A1-6 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Table 2 – Employment
Year Source 2010 2011 2015 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Round 6.3 137,083 n/a 166,214 n/a 195,338 224,453 253,575 n/a n/a Round 8.0 143,736 n/a 167,570 n/a 206,458 236,327 257,195 271,462 285,415 RCLCO 143,736 147,209 178,686 204,768 221,904 255,556 280,606 300,114 315,108
Table 2 lists the total employment from the Round 6.3 and Round 8.0 TAZs, as well as, the RCLCO study. Although insufficient information exists for DESMAN to quantify the differences in square footage of development, by type, between the Round 6.3 and Round 8.0 TAZs or the RCLCO study, it is apparent that the number of jobs has increased significantly in the RCLCO study forecasts. As shown, the differences between the Round 6.3 FEIS employment data and the RCLCO study data is 12,472 jobs in 2015 to 26,566 jobs in 2020, 31,103 in 2025 and 27,031 in 2030.
Based on the household and employment differences shown in Tables 1 and 2, the following conclusions can be made: The number of households in the RCLCO study and Round 6.3 data is similar through year 2030, the last year available for Round 6.3 data. At that time and through 2040, the number of households in the RCLCO study continue to grow but at a lower growth rate than preceding years; and The employment data for the RCLCO study is significantly greater than the Round 8.0 and the Round 6.3 data. The higher employment numbers in the RCLCO study data are interpreted herein, to result in attracting employees from outside the county. This would also potentially increase the number of passengers from outside the county using Metrorail to commute to jobs in the county. While this may increase ridership at the Route 606 and 772 Stations, it would have no impact on parking demand since the trips are inbound to the stations.
Proxy Methodology As discussed earlier, the detailed model assumptions used to develop the FEIS forecasts were not available for this analysis. As a result it was necessary to develop a proxy methodology for forecasting daily boardings using the data that was available. As a commuter transit link, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of daily boardings (83%) will be typically comprised of home‐based commute trips6 and will in turn be directly related to the number of households producing those home‐based work trips. As a result, a mathematical relationship can be drawn between number of households and boardings, and used to forecast boardings for other years.
6 Transit Ridership Trends and Markets, Table 4. Metrorail Trip Purpose, WMATA, 2009.
Attachment 1 5 April 12,A1-7 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Route 606 and 772 Station Boardings
As discussed earlier, the FEIS included only a single forecast year of boardings for the new stations, as excerpted in Table 3 below. Also shown is the total number of households in Loudoun County for year 2025 included in the Round 6.3 transportation model (used for the FEIS).
Table 3 ‐ Forecast Daily Station Boardings
Full LPA 2025 No. of Boardings per Station Boardings1 Households2 Household3 Route 606 4,485 149,985 0.030 Route 772 6,961 149,985 0.046
1 Dulles Corridor Rapid Transit Project FEIS, Chapter 6, Table 6.1‐4. 2 Round 6.3 MWCOG household data for 2025. 3 Ratios are rounded.
As discussed in the proxy methodology, a mathematical relationship was established between the number of station boardings and households as shown in the above table under “boardings per household”. The Route 606 (0.030) and the Route 772 (0.046) ratios were then applied to the annual household forecasts in the Round 6.3 data, Round 8.0 data and RCLCO study (shown in Table 1) to solve for average daily boardings for each station for opening year (RCLCO), 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 (RCLCO and Round 8.0) and 2040 (RCLCO and Round 8.0).
Table 4 ‐ Route 606 Station Estimated Boardings
Year Source1 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Round 6.3 n/a 4,175 4,485 4,686 n/a n/a Round 8.0 n/a 3,810 4,242 4,492 4,634 4,734 RCLCO 3,932 4,114 4,391 4,572 4,713 4,791
1 The boarding calculations are based on the actual mathematical calculations rather than the rounded ratios listed in Table 4.
Table 5 ‐ Route 772 Station Estimated Boardings
Year Source1 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Round 6.3 n/a 6,479 6,961 7,273 n/a n/a Round 8.0 n/a 5,913 6,583 6,971 7,193 7,347 RCLCO 6,103 6,386 6,814 7,097 7,314 7,437
1 The boarding calculations are based on the actual mathematical calculations rather than the rounded ratios listed in Table 4.
Attachment 1 6 April 12,A1-8 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
There is little difference in boardings between Round 6.3 and the RCLCO study for both Route 606 and Route 772 in 2020, 2025 and 2030, because the number of households is similar in both sets of data. The RCLCO study boardings continue to grow relative to the number of households resulting in 4,791 boardings in 2040 for Route 606 and 7,437 boardings for Route 772. While the 2025 data is similar to what was in the FEIS, the 2035 and 2040 forecasts in boardings for the RCLCO study data will provide a means to estimate the parking demand through the horizon year of 2040.
Metrorail Station Access
As discussed in the preceding section, Metrorail boardings are projected to increase over time as households come online. It would be expected that as boardings increase, parking demand would increase proportionately, but this is not necessarily the case. Driving and parking in a park‐and‐ride facility at a station is just one of several arrival modes which also include walk/bike, local bus service and kiss and ride (drop‐offs). The percentage of passengers who walk/bike to a station is related to the number of households within the TOD area and the level of service of the surrounding pedestrian and bicycle network. As the number of households increase in the TOD area, so does the potential to increase the percentage of passengers walking/biking to the station. Similarly, as the population grows in the areas served by local transit, the potential for passengers to ride the bus to the station also increases. These factors can shift passengers away from park‐and‐ride to an alternate mode of travel.
Little information was available in the FEIS on the various types of arrival modes, or changes in mode type, at the stations. As a result, DESMAN felt it was necessary to factor the parking demand calculations to reflect reasonable changes in mode arrival patterns over time. The factored parking demand is expressed as a parking ratio and is discussed in more detail later in this report. The parking ratio, as discussed herein, is the percentage of boarding passengers who use the station park‐and‐ride facility.
Attachment 1 7 April 12,A1-9 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
The parking ratios that were selected were based on several assumptions, including: The number of households in the Route 772 Station TOD will increase to nearly 9,000 households at full development capacity7; Loudoun County continues to plan and expand transit services per updates to the Loudoun County Transit Development Plan8; Commute costs remain relatively consistent with historic trends including programmed increases in toll road fares9; and Development consistency with the RCLCO study and the Revised General Plan.
A model was used to project parking demand incorporating the assumptions listed above by reducing the parking ratio, over time, to account for increased urbanization of Loudoun County and continued expansion of the local transit system.
Commuter Parking Demand
WMATA has collected data on parking occupancy and average daily boardings at Metrorail stations for 2010. The data has been summarized in a table in the appendix. The appendix table lists the station location, information as to where the location is on the line (depth), the WMATA line, whether the station was inside or outside the beltway, the average daily boardings for that station, the parking supply, occupancy of the spaces during the peak period and total number of spaces occupied. The parking occupancy is listed for both the month of January 2010 as well as the total year to date occupancy from July through January 2010.
Also shown is the parking ratio, which is calculated by dividing the number of occupied parking spaces (demand) by the number of average daily boardings at that station. The parking ratio represents the parking demand per passenger boarding and is the key factor that will be used to estimate parking demand for the Route 606 and 772 Stations.
The parking demand data is listed for January 2010 as well as the year‐to‐date total from July through January, which provides a seven month average. The average daily boardings represent May 2010 data. To better understand the boarding data and ensure it represented typical conditions, DESMAN conducted research to determine if the “average weekday” boardings data obtained from WMATA actually represented a typical weekday during a typical month (average annual weekday) or if the May data was atypical (higher or lower) than the average annual weekday. The most recent information obtained from WMATA for Metrorail monthly ridership indicates that from 2006 through 2009, the number of boardings for the
7 Market and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Phase 2 Metrorail Extension to Loudoun County, RCLCO, April 2012. 8 Loudoun County Transit Development Plan, Fiscal Years: 2012–2017, October, 2011. 9 MWAA, Official Statement Dulles Toll Road Revenue Bonds, Series 2009 (Dulles Metrorail and Capital Improvement Projects).
Attachment 1 8 AprilA1-10 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
month of May is within 0 to 3% of the average annual monthly boardings and as a result, was determined to be representative of an average condition10. As a result, the May boardings data and the seven month average parking occupancy data was considered typical and were used as is and not adjusted.
One of the noticeable characteristics in the data is that the parking ratio tends to be highest at the end line stations and lowest in the more urban and densely developed areas. The end of the line stations have a higher parking ratio associated with them because they are drawing not only from the area surrounding the station but also park‐and‐ride commuters from the regional and rural areas. (Terminus stations of the Metrorail system are known to have consistently high park‐and‐ride demand11). The more urban station locations typically have a lower parking ratio as a result of several factors including increased density of development, particularly residential development, a resultant higher percentage of passengers who walk/bike, and a higher level of transit service providing access to the station. At the end line stations, the parking ratios average about 40% with the highest at 47%. This translates to a parking demand of 40 spaces and 47 spaces, respectively, for every 100 boardings.
Based on a review by DESMAN of the station parking data along with the characteristics of the Route 606 and Route 772 Stations, a parking ratio of 47% was assumed for 2018 through 2020, stepping down to 43% by 2025 through 2030 and 40% by 2035 through 2040. The opening and year 2020 parking ratio (47%) is about the same as the highest end line station (47.3%) and assumes that in the first several years of operation that most Metrorail passengers will drive or share rides to the station. By year 2025 through 2030, the transit system serving the area is assumed to provide an increased level of service, the area becomes more urban, and passengers become more knowledgeable about their travel mode options, thereby reducing the parking ratio (43%) consistent with, but still somewhat higher than, the average for end line stations. Beginning in 2035 through 2040, it was assumed the transit systems serving the area becomes even more sophisticated, as do the Metrorail users, and that urbanization continues, thereby reducing the parking ratio to about the average (40%) of the end line stations. Tables 6 and 7 list the forecast boardings, the assumed parking ratios and resultant parking demand estimated for the Route 606 and 772 Stations.
Table 6 ‐ Route 606 Station Parking Demand Year 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Boardings 3,932 4,114 4,391 4,572 4,713 4,791 Parking Ratio 47% 47% 43% 43% 40% 40% Parking Demand (spaces) 1,848 1,934 1,888 1,966 1,885 1,917
10 http://www.wmata.com/pdfs/planning/Metrorail%20Metrobus%20Ridership%20By%20Month.pdf, Metrobus and Metrorail Average Monthly Boardings, WMATA, 3/4/2010. 11 Vienna Station Parking and Improvement Studies, WMATA, February, 2006.
Attachment 1 9 AprilA1-11 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Table 7 ‐ Route 772 Station Parking Demand Year 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Boardings 6,103 6,386 6,814 7,097 7,314 7,437 Parking Ratio 47% 47% 43% 43% 40% 40% Parking Demand (spaces) 2,869 3,001 2,930 3,052 2,926 2,975
Tables 6 and 7 represent the parking demand for the two stations (three garages) given the information currently available and based on the assumptions stated herein. The number of boardings for each station increases by about 22% through 2040 as Loudoun County continues to develop and the number of home‐based work trips increase. At the same time, the parking ratio decreases over time as travel options to the station other than park‐and‐ride become more viable and accessible. As shown in Table 6, the Route 606 Station estimated parking demand is relatively stable at just under 2,000 spaces. Like the Route 606 Station, the Route 772 Station parking demand is also relatively stable ranging from about 2,870 spaces to just over 3,050 spaces. Since Route 772 has both a north and a south station, each with its own garage, the parking demand would be split between the two stations.
The parking demand has been calculated by station for each year from 2018 through 2040 based on boardings and parking ratios and is shown in detail in Appendix Table 2, Annual Base Case Parking Demand. After the opening year (2018), the total parking demand (for both stations) varies from a low of 4,717 spaces to a high of 5,018 spaces in 2030. In comparison, the number of parking spaces proposed at the stations based on the FEIS12, includes 1,965 spaces in one garage at the Route 606 Station and 2,974 spaces in two garages at the Route 772 Station for a total of 4,939 spaces.
The parking demand projections calculated in this section will be referred to as the Base Case scenario. The Base Case parking demand projections were then adjusted to reflect changes anticipated in the trip costs for both Metrorail and auto commuters through 2040. This scenario is referred to as the Base Case Adjusted and represents the final parking demand projections. In addition, a sensitivity analysis was prepared to determine the impact of changes in parking prices on parking demand. The Base Case Adjusted and two pricing alternatives are discussed in the next section.
Parking Elasticity
The elasticity of parking at Metrorail stations is primarily a function of the travel cost to use Metrorail and the comparative travel cost to commute by auto or other mode. Logically, as travel costs for park‐and‐ride users of Metrorail increase, including parking rates, parking demand should decrease as some drivers shift to other modes as other commute options
12 Current proposed capacity of the garages as stated in the MOU under negotiation by the funding partners.
Attachment 1 10 AprilA1-12 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
become more financially viable. Conversely, as costs for commuting by auto increase, including gas prices or tolls, parking demand at the stations should increase as some people shift to Metrorail to avoid the increased cost. There are always multiple cost factors working against one another, such as increases in both parking rates and the cost of fuel, occurring simultaneously creating a push/pull phenomenon on demand that is difficult to forecast.
The primary purpose for evaluating elasticity in this study is to determine the sensitivity of station parking demand relative to changes in commute travel costs. Ultimately, the County’s goal is to ascertain not only the estimated parking demand for the Route 606 and 772 Stations, but more importantly, the potential revenue generation. An evaluation of elasticity in a financial feasibility pro forma would likely be conducted in a more detailed manner with variables adjusted to model a range of outcomes. The elasticity evaluation conducted herein is focused on obtaining a level of confidence that the projected parking demand is reasonable. This section of the report discusses an approach to determining the elasticity of parking relative to costs, including parking rates, at the Route 606 and Route 772 Stations.
While parking elasticity is relatively easy to understand, there is little research that provides applicable models for use in estimating the impact of pricing changes. The most commonly used and referenced elasticity model states that a 1% increase in commuter parking prices will decrease parking demand by 0.08%13. This will be referred to herein as the TRACE model and it indicates that parking is quite inelastic. As an example, if 2,000 cars are parked in a daily parking lot and the parking rate increases by 20%, from $5 to $6 per day, the demand would be expected to decrease by 1.6% or about 32 cars. More importantly, even though parking demand decreases by 32 parkers, the revenue generation increases dramatically. At $5 per day, 2,000 cars generate $10,000 per day, at $6 per day, 1,968 cars generate $11,808 per day, an increase of about 18% in daily revenue.
Although the TRACE model specifically refers to the price of station parking, the impact on parking demand cannot be measured in isolation at Metrorail stations since other costs are increasing at the same time. Therefore, to address this, the elasticity analysis conducted herein extrapolates the TRACE model to assume that a 1% increase in the daily costs to ride Metrorail reduces the parking demand by 0.08% and a 1% increase in the daily costs to commute by auto increases parking demand by 0.08%.
Base Case Adjusted Parking Demand
There are an unlimited number of scenarios and variables that could be evaluated in an elasticity analysis. The level of sophistication and accuracy of the analysis is intended to provide a level of confidence that if certain price changes occur, then, a related change in parking demand should also occur. Elasticity is by no means an exact science and consequently,
13 TRACE, 1999, Tables 32, 33.
Attachment 1 11 AprilA1-13 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
each analysis should be treated as an indicator of anticipated changes, trends and patterns in parking demand. The cost variables that are used represent the most current and accurate information available given the scope of services and objective of the analyses.
It can be argued that the Base Case parking demand estimates assume no impact from changes in travel costs related to commute options and only reflect increases in parking demand related to the growth in households. Therefore, the Base Case estimates were adjusted to account for increases in travel cost and to test the application of the TRACE elasticity model. Travel costs vary depending on the destination of the trip, longer trips use more fuel, and trips to downtown may pay more in tolls and for parking while other destinations may have fewer tolls and free parking. Since there are numerous potential trip purposes and destinations possible for passengers using the Route 606 and 772 Stations and since no trip origin/destination information was available for use in this analysis, DESMAN incorporated the following assumptions into the elasticity model: The station Base Case parking demand represents passengers who drive and park at the station for work‐related commute trips; ½ of the work‐related commute trips by Metrorail passengers were destined to Tysons Corner; and ½ of the work‐related commute trips by Metrorail passengers were destined to downtown Washington, DC.
There are many origin/destination trips that are possible along the Dulles Corridor and the assumption that ½ of the commuters travel from either Route 606 or 772 to Tysons Corner and ½ the commuters travel to DC is not intended to represent actual trip pairs, but to provide a basis to evaluate the elasticity of parking demand relative to price (cost).
Two cost tables were developed for the analysis and two elasticity analyses were prepared, one for trips to Tysons Corner, and the other to Washington, DC. The parking demand estimates resulting from the elasticity analyses were averaged to represent the final parking demand estimates, hereafter referred to as the Base Case Adjusted parking demand.
Table 8 lists the major variables comprising travel costs. Historic data was obtained for specific travel costs from 2005 through 2011 from various sources. As shown, travel costs have increased at varying annual rates ranging from 4.5% per year for downtown parking to 11.0% per year for the Greenway tolls. With the exception of the toll road rates, the average annual rate of increase was used to estimate the travel costs associated with commute trips to both Washington, DC and Tysons Corner for the analysis period, 2018 through 2040. Specific calculations were developed for projecting toll road costs and are discussed below.
Attachment 1 12 AprilA1-14 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Table 8 ‐ Historic Growth in Commute Trip Costs
Year Avg Annual 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Increase Metrorail Commuter Station Parking Rates1 $2.25 $2.25 $2.25 $2.75 $2.75 $3.25 $3.25 6.3% One‐way Max. Rail Fare2 $3.90 $3.90 $3.90 $4.50 $4.50 $4.60 $5.20 4.9%
Auto Commuter Fuel ($/gal)3 $2.35 $2.68 $2.86 $3.35 $2.44 $2.86 $3.63 7.5% Greenway Tolls4 $2.40 $2.70 $3.00 $4.00 $4.00 $4.50 $4.50 11.0% Dulles Tolls5 $0.75 $0.75 $0.75 $0.75 $0.75 $1.00 $1.25 8.9% 6 Downtown Parking $10.00 $10.30 $10.50 $10.85 $11.50 $12.25 $13.00 4.5% 1 http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/public_rr.cfm? 2 http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/Fare_History_06Jun11.pdf. Fare shown represents peak fare. 3 http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPM0_PTE_R1Y_DPG&f=A 4 E. Thomas Sines, Chief Executive Officer, Toll Road Investors Partnership II, L.P. 5 Draft Dulles Toll Road Traffic & Revenue Study Update, Table ES‐1, CDM Smith, January, 2012. 6 Collier International & DESMAN experience
Table 9 summarizes the projected travel costs for a commuter originating in Loudoun County destined to downtown DC. The travel costs listed in Table 8 for 2011 were adjusted using the annual rate of increase to obtain future year costs for 2018 through 2040. In the case of the Dulles tolls, the programmed future year tolls through 2040 were obtained from a study completed by CDM Smith for the MWAA14. The other exception is the annual rate of increase projected for the Greenway Toll Road (Greenway). The State Corporation Commission authorized annual toll increases between 2013 and 2020 at the greater of growth in CPI plus one percent, GDP growth, or 2.8%, with additional increases if necessary to offset more rapid growth in property taxes or to ensure that the Toll Road Investors Partnership II, L.P., owner of the Dulles Greenway, has sufficient revenues to achieve debt service coverage ratios15. As a result, DESMAN estimated the rate of increase for the Greenway tolls at 4.0% per year beginning in year 2012. The Greenway toll implemented in January 2012 for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour in the peak direction (which includes a 20% premium for congestion management) is $4.80. This rate was increased by 4.0% per year through 2040.
14 Draft Dulles Toll Road Traffic & Revenue Study Update, Table ES‐1, CDM Smith, January 2012. 15 http://dullesgreenway.com/future‐toll‐rates‐approved/. SCC Order #PUE‐2006‐00081, Dulles Greenway Future Toll Schedule.
Attachment 1 13 AprilA1-15 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Also listed is the approximate daily trip cost for a roundtrip Metrorail commute and an auto commuter to Washington, DC which for 2018 incorporates: the station parking fee ($5.00) plus the maximum peak ticket price for a roundtrip rail fare16 ($14.54) resulting in a daily trip cost of $19.54 for a Metrorail passenger; and the cost of three gallons of fuel ($18.06) plus the maximum roundtrip toll road fare ($20.15) in addition to the cost to park downtown ($17.66) for a total daily trip cost of $55.86 for an auto commuter.
Table 9 – Illustrative Commute Costs to Downtown DC17
Year Avg. Metrorail Commute 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Annual Station Parking Rates $5.00 $5.64 $7.67 $10.41 $14.15 $19.22 n/a Round Trip Max. Rail Fares $14.54 $16.02 $20.34 $25.86 $32.86 $41.76 n/a Approx. Daily Trip Cost $19.54 $21.66 $28.01 $36.27 $47.01 $60.98 5.3% Auto Commute Fuel Costs $18.06 $20.87 $29.95 $42.99 $61.70 $88.57 n/a Round Trip Greenway Tolls $12.15 $13.14 $15.98 $19.45 $23.66 $28.79 n/a Round Trip Dulles Tolls $8.00 $8.00 $10.00 $12.00 $14.00 $16.00 n/a Downtown Parking $17.66 $19.27 $23.98 $29.84 $37.13 $46.20 n/a Approx. Daily Trip Cost $55.86 $61.27 $79.91 $104.27 $136.49 $179.56 5.5%
Table 10 summarizes the projected travel costs for a commuter originating in Loudoun County destined to Tysons Corner rather than downtown DC. As before, the travel costs reflect the 2011 costs listed in Table 8, escalated to represent future years 2018 through 2040. Similarly, the exception is the costs for the toll roads which were modified as discussed previously. Also listed is the 2018 approximate daily trip cost for a roundtrip commute to Tysons Corner which includes: the station parking fee ($5.00) plus the cost of a roundtrip Metrorail maximum fare pass to Tysons Corner ($14.54) for a daily trip cost of $19.5418; and the cost for two gallons of fuel ($12.04) in addition to the maximum toll road fares ($20.15) for a total daily trip cost for an auto commuter $32.19. This is a lower cost than the DC trip by the cost for a gallon of fuel and the cost to park downtown.
16 http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/public_rr.cfm? , History of Metrorail Fare Increases, 2010. 17 Rates would be rounded to user‐friendly amounts for actual implementation, but herein reflect actual calculations. 18 The trip length from the Loudoun County stations to Tysons Corner exceeds 14 miles which results in the maximum rail fare.
Attachment 1 14 AprilA1-16 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
As discussed previously, the TRACE elasticity model is used to estimate changes in parking demand relative to the percent increase in one or more cost variables. Although the approximate daily trip costs are different for an auto commute trip to downtown DC and a trip to Tysons Corner, the annual rate of increase in costs is the same in both examples (5.5% per year). In both examples, the annual rate of increase for the auto commute costs is slightly higher than the rate of increase for the Metrorail commuter (at 5.3% per year). As a result, application of the TRACE model should result in a slight increase in parking demand over the Base Case. Table 10 ‐ Illustrative Commute Costs to Tysons Corner19
Year Avg. Metrorail Commute 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Annual Station Parking Rates $5.00 $5.64 $7.67 $10.41 $14.15 $19.22 n/a Round Trip Max. Rail Fares $14.54 $14.54 $20.34 $25.86 $32.86 $41.76 n/a Approx. Daily Trip Cost $19.54 $20.18 $28.01 $36.27 $47.01 $60.98 5.3% Auto Commute Fuel Costs $12.04 $13.91 $19.97 $28.66 $41.14 $59.04 n/a Round Trip Greenway Tolls $12.15 $13.14 $15.98 $19.45 $23.66 $28.79 n/a Round Trip Dulles Tolls $8.00 $8.00 $10.00 $12.00 $14.00 $16.00 n/a Downtown Parking $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 n/a Approx. Daily Trip Cost $32.19 $35.05 $45.95 $60.11 $78.80 $103.83 5.5%
The cost variables listed in Tables 9 and 10 were used in the TRACE model and applied to the Base Case parking demand to develop two sets of parking demand estimates, one for the DC scenario and one for the Tysons Corner scenario. The opening year for the station and first year of the parking demand estimates is 2018. Therefore, for each of the trip scenarios, the rate/cost structure in Tables 9 and 10 was considered in‐place in 2018 and the impact of cost increases was calculated for each of the following years from 2019 through 2040. Finally, the two sets of parking demand estimates were then averaged to reflect the assumption that ½ the trips are to downtown DC and ½ the trips are to Tysons Corner. The resultant parking demand is the Base Case Adjusted parking demand and represents the final parking demand estimates for this study.
Table 11 shows a slight increase in parking demand for the Base Case Adjusted which was expected since the annual rate of increase in costs for the auto commute were slightly higher than for the Metrorail commute. However, the difference in parking demand between the Base Case to the Base Case Adjusted is nominal when considered within the rigors of this analysis. The similarity in the two sets of estimates does indicate that the continuation of past trends and future anticipated increases in travel cost associated both Metrorail and auto commuters is not expected to significantly change the parking demand.
19 Ibid.
Attachment 1 15 AprilA1-17 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Table 11 ‐ Parking Demand and Elasticity
Year Scenario 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Base Case 4,717 4,935 4,818 5,018 4,811 4,891 Base Case Adjusted 4,717 4,930 4,821 5,032 4,843 4,947
Since the individual contribution of each cost component is included in the TRACE model methodology, a single cost item, such as parking rates can be modified and the impact on parking demand measured. To help bracket and illustrate the relative inelasticity of parking demand relative to parking pricing, two pricing alternatives were tested. A “low end” increase of 3% per year in parking rates was tested along with a “high end” increase in parking rates of 15% per year as compared to the 6.3% per year increase used in the Base Case Adjusted scenario. All other cost components increases were included as listed in the cost tables.
Alternative 1 – Increase Parking Rates by 3% per year A 3% annual increase in parking rates was modeled to represent the “low end” of a parking rate increase near or at about the same rate as inflation. This alternative was included to illustrate the change in parking demand and the impact on revenue. A 3% per year increase in daily parking rates was applied the year after opening and results in a 2020 parking rate of about $5.30, a 2025 rate of just over $6.00, a 2030 rate of just over $7.00, a 2035 rate of about $8.25 and a daily parking rate of about $9.50 in 2040. The cost for auto commuters was maintained at the rates established in the Base Case Adjusted scenario.
Table 12 ‐ Alternative 1; Increase Metrorail Station Parking Rates by 3% per year
Year Avg. Annual Metrorail Commute 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Rate of Increase Station Parking Rates $5.00 $5.29 $6.15 $7.12 $8.26 $9.56 3.0% Round Trip Max. Rail Fares $14.54 $16.02 $20.54 $25.86 $32.86 $41.78 4.9%
Approx. Daily Trip Cost $19.54 $21.31 $26.49 $32.98 $41.12 $51.34 4.5%
As an outcome of the decrease in parking rates from 6.4% to 3%, the daily trip cost also decreases as does the daily trip costs annual increase in rates. The annual rate of increase is now 4.5% rather than the 5.3% in the Base Case Adjusted scenario. The auto commute annual rate of increase remains the same as the Base Case Adjusted scenario at 5.7%.
According to the TRACE model, as the relative cost for the Metrorail commute decreases, the parking demand would be expected to increase as more riders are attracted to the system. As shown in Table 13, the net result is a modeled increase in parking demand for 2040 by about 65 spaces (compared to the Base Case Adjusted). The changes in demand due to the application of the TRACE model cannot be ascertained from the information in the tables. The calculation of
Attachment 1 16 AprilA1-18 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
the elasticity has several parts associated with it. The reduction in demand due to increases in rate only applies to users already in the system who choose to find a new mode of travel other than driving to and parking at the station. New parking demand generated by increases in ridership is assumed as electing to enter the system and pay the prevailing rate.
Table 13 ‐ Alternative 1; Parking Demand Estimates
Year Scenario 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Base Case Adjusted 4,717 4,930 4,821 5,032 4,843 4,947 Alternative 1 ‐ 3% 4,717 4,936 4,843 5,070 4,894 5,012
Alternative 2 – Increase Parking Rates by 15% per year While parking rates could increase in any given year by 15% or more, it is highly unlikely to assume rates would increase by 15% every year until 2040. However, it is modeled herein to illustrate the relative inelasticity of parking demand and the theoretical impact on revenue in an extreme condition. This alternative provides the high end of the “bracketed” conditions as an illustrative example to test the market’s reaction to the rate increases, measured in parking demand. A 15% per year increase in daily parking rates was applied the year after opening and result in a 2020 rate of about $6.60, a 2025 rate of about $13.30, a 2030 rate of about $26.70, a 2035 rate of about $53.70 and a daily parking rate of about $108.00 in 2040. Table 14 also provides a summary of the parking rates used in this alternative.
To simplify the analysis, the 15% annual increase in parking rates also assumes that the costs for the Metrorail and auto commuter are adjusted annually based on the preceding cost tables. In addition, since the difference in the annual rate of increase between the trip costs for downtown DC and Tysons Corner was determined insignificant, it was arbitrarily assumed that the elasticity analysis incorporates the cost for the downtown DC trip rather than the Tysons Corner trip. The results of evaluation would be nearly exact if the Tysons Corner trip costs were used instead.
Table 14 – For Illustrative Purposes Alternative 2; Increase Metrorail Station Parking Rates by 15% per year
Year Avg. Metrorail Commute 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Annual Station Parking Rates $5.00 $6.60 $13.28 $26.70 $53.71 $108.03 15.0% Round Trip Max. Rail Fare $14.54 $16.02 $20.34 $25.86 $32.86 $41.78 4.9% Approx. Daily Trip Cost $19.54 $22.62 $33.62 $52.56 $86.57 $149.81 9.7%
As an outcome of the parking rate increase to 15% per year, the daily trip cost and the rate of increase for the daily trip costs increases significantly. The annual rate of increase is now 9.7% rather than the 5.3% in the Base Case Adjusted scenario or 4.3% in Alternative 1. According to
Attachment 1 17 AprilA1-19 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
the TRACE model, as the cost for the Metrorail commuter increase relative to the auto commute, the parking demand should decrease. As shown in Table 15, the net result is a modeled decrease in parking demand for 2040 by about 334 spaces or by about 7% (compared to the Base Case Adjusted). So even though the parking rate increases from $5.00 to about $108.00, the demand only changes by 7%.
Table 15 ‐ Parking Demand Estimates
Year Scenario 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Base Case Adjusted 4,717 4,930 4,821 5,032 4,843 4,947 Alternative 1 ‐ 3% 4,717 4,936 4,843 5,070 4,894 5,012 Alternative 2 ‐ 15% 4,717 4,912 4,747 4,886 4,608 4,613
Table 16 was prepared to show the relative differences in parking revenue associated with changes in the parking rates. A financial feasibility proforma analysis would incorporate a detailed revenue generation model, but for purposes of this study, a simple comparative model was used. The annual revenue (in 000’s) shown in Table 16 was calculated by multiplying the daily parking rate by the Base Case Adjusted parking demand and adjusted to represent annual revenue.
Table 16 ‐ Illustrative Annual Revenue Generation (000’s)
Year Scenario 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Base Case Adjusted $5,226 $6,174 $8,203 $11,634 $15,210 $21,108 Alternative 1 ‐ 3% $5,226 $5,802 $6,600 $8,009 $8,964 $10,641 Alternative 2 ‐ 15% $5,226 $7,198 $13,992 $28,968 $54,946 $110,639
The revenue generation in 2018 is the same since the three scenarios assume the same starting point in the opening year. The Base Case Adjusted scenario assumes that parking rates continue to increase at 6.4% per year through 2040. Alternative 1 includes the revenue impact of a 3% increase in parking rates through 2040 and Alternative 2 represents the modeled revenue as a result of a 15% per year increase in parking rates. Because parking demand is so highly inelastic, the modeled revenue is far more a function of the rates charged for parking and less a function of elasticity. The annual rate increase assumed for parking in the Base Case Adjusted scenario is more representative of a practical application than either Alternative 1 or 2. Alternative 1 illustrates that setting the annual increase in parking rates at 3% (rather than 6.3% in the Base Case Adjusted), would result in a nominal increase in the parking demand for year 2040 compared to the Base Case Adjusted. However, the most significant impact is that the revenue generated is less than ½ of the Base Case Adjusted scenario in year 2040.
Attachment 1 18 AprilA1-20 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Alternative 2 illustrates that in the extreme case of increasing rates at 15% per year or roughly doubling the parking rates every three to four years, the predicted decrease in parking demand is about 7% in year 2040. Once again, the most significant impact is that the parking revenue would be expected to increase significantly from a hypothetical value of about $21,000 to over $110,000. In summary, parking demand is highly inelastic and market driven rate increases will provide an opportunity for significant revenue increases with little impact on parking demand.
Competing Parking Facilities
The parking demand estimates herein assume that Metrorail passengers drive to either the Route 606 or 772 Stations, park in one of the station garages and ride the train to work. However, this may not be a valid assumption. The potential could exist for a competing parking facility to capture a portion of the station parking demand by providing a more attractive alternative. Since the station garages will be located in the most convenient sites relative to the station the only other factor that could attract parkers to another facility is lower cost. Understanding the risk of competition is important as it relates directly to properly sizing a garage and more importantly, analyzing the ability of a garage to generate revenue.
The first question to address is whether current zoning regulations allow the development or operation of commuter parking within the inner or outer core of either station area. To determine this, the Revised 1993 Loudoun County Zoning Ordinance was reviewed. The County has been proactively planning the Route 606 and 772 Station areas for over a decade. Three developments (Moorefield Station, Loudoun Station, and Dulles Parkway Center II) proximate to the Route 772 Station have received zoning approval to the Planned Development –Transit Related Center (PD‐TRC) zoning district. To date, the County has not received any rezoning requests for the Planned Development – Transit Related Employment Center (PD‐TREC) zoning district. The inner and outer core for both the Route 772 and 606 Station locations is established through the approval of a Concept Development Plan.
Based on DESMAN’s review of the ordinance and from discussions with County staff, commuter parking facilities are only permitted within the outer core of the PD‐TRC zoning district by special exception. Additionally, commuter parking facilities within the outer core of the PD‐TRC zoning district must either be structured or planned to be structured. Commuter parking facilities, structured or surface are permitted by special exception within the Transit Supportive Area (TSA) of the PD‐TRC zoning district as well. Park‐and‐ride (commuter parking) facilities are permitted by SPEX in the outer core of PD‐TREC.
It should be noted that parking facilities are permitted in other zoning districts, such as PD‐CC‐ SC or PD‐OP which are located proximate to the stations. So there is a possibility that commuter parking could be developed on land parcels that have not been rezoned into the PD‐ TRC or PD‐TREC zoning districts. It is likely that commuter parking in this instance would be
Attachment 1 19 AprilA1-21 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
limited to smaller lots and as an interim use and not have a significant impact on the park‐and‐ ride station demand.
Conclusion
DESMAN has prepared an estimate of parking demand for the Route 606 and 772 Stations in Loudoun County. The parking demand estimates were based on the number of boarding passengers listed for the two stations reported in the FEIS for year 2025. Unfortunately, after consulting with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, WMATA, the Dulles Rail Project Office and MWCOG, it was determined that additional boardings information was not available for use in this analysis. As a result, DESMAN developed proxy measures in order to develop its own forecasts. DESMAN projected boardings for the planning timeline, 2018 through 2040, based on number of households contained in the RCLCO study. Year 2018 was considered the opening year for the two stations.
Once boardings were projected through 2040, DESMAN used a series of parking ratios representing the number of parking spaces occupied divided by the number of boarding passengers to estimate parking demand. The station boarding and parking demand data was obtained from WMATA for various stations and varied from over 47% at the end line stations to less than 20% for stations located in highly urbanized areas. DESMAN multiplied the projected annual boardings by the parking ratios shown in Table 17 to estimate peak daily parking demand.
Table 17 ‐ Parking Demand Calculations
Year 2018 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Projected Boardings Route 606 Station 3,932 4,114 4,391 4,572 4,713 4,791 Route 772 Station 6,103 6,386 6,814 7,097 7,314 7,437 Total 10,036 10,500 11,205 11,669 12,027 12,228
Parking Ratio 47% 47% 43% 43% 40% 40% Base Case Parking Demand Route 606 Station 1,848 1,934 1,888 1,966 1,885 1,917 Route 772 Station 2,869 3,001 2,930 3,052 2,926 2,975 Total 4,717 4,935 4,818 5,018 4,811 4,891 Base Case Adjusted Parking Demand Route 606 Station 1,848 1,932 1,889 1,972 1,898 1,938 Route 772 Station 2,869 2,998 2,932 3,060 2,945 3,008 Total 4,717 4,930 4,821 5,032 4,843 4,947
Attachment 1 20 AprilA1-22 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Table 17 summarizes intermediate year projections for passenger boardings, the parking ratio used to calculate parking demand and an initial estimate of parking demand, referred to as the Base Case scenario. Also shown in the table is an estimate of the parking demand adjusted to reflect changes in commute travel costs (Base Case Adjusted). The Base Case Adjusted reflects commute costs associated for both Metrorail and auto commuters assuming a continuation of historic trends and rate adjustments from 2005 through 2011 and incorporation of data obtained on future toll road charges for the Dulles tolls. The Base Case Adjustment also reflects the relative inelasticity of parking as predicted by the TRACE model, defined as a 1% increase in parking demand will reduce parking demand by 0.08% (less than 1/10th of a percent).
FEIS Proposed Parking Garages Loudoun County identified three proposed garages at the stations including a 1,965 space garage at the Route 606 Station, and two garages totaling 2,974 spaces at the Route 772 Station for a total of 4,939 spaces in three garages as listed in below in Table 18.
Table 18 ‐ FEIS Parking Garages
No. of 2030 Parking Surplus/ Percent of Location Spaces Demand (Shortfall) Demand Met Route 606 Station 1,965 1,972 (7) 99.7% Route 772 Station ‐ North 1,434 1,530 (96) 93.7% Route 772 Station ‐ South 1,540 1,530 10 100.6% Total 4,939 5,032 (93) 98.1%
The parking demand listed in Table 18 is for 2030 and represents the highest parking demand estimated throughout the planning term. The estimated parking demand for all other years remain within 5% of the 2030 estimate with the exception of the opening year, which is about 8% less. When the proposed garages are compared to the 2030 estimates, there is an estimated shortfall in the supply of about 2%. However, given the methodology, objectives and the 28 year framework of this parking study, it is the finding of DESMAN that the three garages as proposed are adequately sized to accommodate the peak daily parking demand estimated for the Route 606 and Route 772 Stations in the Base Case Adjusted scenario.
Attachment 1 21 AprilA1-23 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Appendix Tables
22 April 2, 2012 Attachment 1 A1-24 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Appendix Table 1 – WMATA Data May 2010 YTD FY 20104
No. of Parking Avg Wkday Peak Spaces Parking Metro Station Depth 1 Line State Spaces 3 Boardings2 Occupancy3 Occupied Ratio Branch Ave. 1 Green MD 3,072 6,868 99.5% 3,057 44.5% Glenmont 1 RED MD 1,781 5,857 92.6% 1,649 28.2% Greenbelt 1 Green MD 3,399 7,294 89.6% 3,046 41.8% Largo Town Center 1 Blue MD 2,200 5,283 90.4% 1,989 37.6% New Carrollton 1 Orange MD 3,519 10,287 93.8% 3,301 32.1% Shady Grove 1 RED MD 5,745 13,945 91.7% 5,268 37.8% College Park 2 Green MD 1,820 4,720 66.4% 1,208 25.6% Landover 2 Orange MD 1,866 2,570 57.1% 1,065 41.5% Morgan Boulevard 2 Blue MD 608 1,674 92.5% 562 33.6% Rockville 2 RED MD 524 4,927 102.9% 539 10.9% Suitland 2 Green MD 1,890 6,668 86.5% 1,635 24.5% Wheaton 2 RED MD 977 4,543 48.2% 471 10.4% Addison Rd. 3 Blue MD 1,268 3,759 60.3% 765 20.3% Cheverly 3 Orange MD 500 1,571 92.7% 464 29.5% Forest Glen 3 RED MD 596 2,366 95.3% 568 24.0% Twinbrook 3 RED MD 1,097 4,587 74.2% 814 17.7% Franconia/Springfield 1 Blue VA 5,069 9,665 90.1% 4,567 47.3% Huntington 1 Yellow VA 3,617 8,760 84.6% 3,060 34.9% Vienna 1 Orange VA 5,169 13,987 101.0% 5,221 37.3% Dun Loring 2 Orange VA 1,326 5,371 103.6% 1,374 25.6% Van Dorn St. 2 Blue VA 361 3,792 110.8% 400 10.5% West Falls Church 3 Orange VA 2,009 10,836 98.0% 1,969 18.2% 1 Last stop on line = 1, Second to last stop on line = (2) and third to last stop on line = 3 2 http://www.wmata.com/pdfs/planning/FY11_Rail_Ridership_By_Station.pdf 3 http://www.scribd.com/doc/31302774/Parking‐Occupancy‐Jan‐2010, WMATA Parking Facility Usage, January, 2010. 4 YTD FY2010 is a monthly average for a partial year from July 2009 through January 2010.
Attachment 1 23 AprilA1-25 12, 2012 DESMAN A S S O C I A T E S ______
Appendix Table 2 – Annual Base Case Parking Demand Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Number of Households1 131,504 134,672 137,588 140,139 142,193 143,946 145,447 146,826 148,111 149,373 150,640 151,819 152,911 153,918 154,906 155,877 156,775 157,600 158,333 159,021 159,579 159,960 160,234
Number of Boardings2 Route 606 Boardings 3,932 4,027 4,114 4,191 4,252 4,304 4,349 4,391 4,429 4,467 4,505 4,540 4,572 4,603 4,632 4,661 4,688 4,713 4,735 4,755 4,772 4,783 4,791 Route 772 Boardings 6,103 6,250 6,386 6,504 6,599 6,681 6,750 6,814 6,874 6,933 6,991 7,046 7,097 7,144 7,189 7,234 7,276 7,314 7,348 7,380 7,406 7,424 7,437 Total Boardings 10,036 10,277 10,500 10,695 10,851 10,985 11,100 11,205 11,303 11,399 11,496 11,586 11,669 11,746 11,822 11,896 11,964 12,027 12,083 12,136 12,178 12,207 12,228
Parking Ratio 47% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% 44% 43% 43% 43% 43% 43% 43% 42% 42% 41% 41% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%
Base Case Parking Demand Route 606 Pking 1,848 1,893 1,934 1,928 1,913 1,894 1,914 1,888 1,904 1,921 1,937 1,952 1,966 1,933 1,946 1,911 1,922 1,885 1,894 1,902 1,909 1,913 1,917 Route 772 Pking 2,869 2,938 3,001 2,992 2,970 2,940 2,970 2,930 2,956 2,981 3,006 3,030 3,052 3,000 3,020 2,966 2,983 2,926 2,939 2,952 2,963 2,970 2,975 Total 4,717 4,830 4,935 4,920 4,883 4,833 4,884 4,818 4,860 4,902 4,943 4,982 5,018 4,933 4,965 4,877 4,905 4,811 4,833 4,854 4,871 4,883 4,891 1 Number of Household taken from RCLCO Study. 2 Number of boardings calculated by multiplying households by 0.030 for Route 606 or 0.046 for Route 772.
Appendix Table 3 – Base Case Adjusted Parking Demand Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Base Case Adjusted Parking Demand Route 606 Station 1,848 1,892 1,932 1,925 1,910 1,896 1,915 1,889 1,905 1,921 1,943 1,958 1,972 1,939 1,952 1,922 1,934 1,898 1,907 1,917 1,928 1,934 1,938 Route 772 Station 2,869 2,936 2,998 2,987 2,964 2,943 2,973 2,932 2,957 2,982 3,015 3,038 3,060 3,010 3,030 2,983 3,001 2,945 2,960 2,975 2,992 3,001 3,008 Total 4,717 4,828 4,930 4,912 4,874 4,839 4,888 4,821 4,862 4,903 4,958 4,996 5,032 4,949 4,982 4,905 4,935 4,843 4,868 4,891 4,920 4,935 4,947
24 April 2, 2012 Attachment 1 A1-26 FOREWORD
The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (“WMATA”), created effective February 20, 1967, is an interstate compact agency and, by the terms of its enabling legislation, an agency and instrumentality of the Signatories: the District of Columbia, State of Maryland, and Commonwealth of Virginia. WMATA was created by the Signatories to plan, develop, finance and caused to be operated a comprehensive mass transit system for the Washington Metropolitan Area. This volume includes the provisions of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact (“WMATA Compact”), followed by Congresses’ consent legislation, a history of the WMATA Compact adoption and amendments, and notes covering prior WMATA Compact language.
Congress provided its consent to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact as Title III of the previously adopted Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact (“Transit Regulation Compact”). See, “Consent Legislation.” Generally, references in the WMATA Compact to “this Title,” mean Title III (i.e. WMATA Compact). References to “this Compact,” on the other hand, mean either the Transit Regulation Compact as a whole (e.g. Section 59: “as granted by Titles I and II of this Compact”), or the WMATA Compact (e.g. Section 76(e): “in accordance with Section 62(c) and (d) of this Compact”), depending on context.
As of this publication, the WMATA Compact has been amended seven times. “Compact History,” outlines the history of the WMATA Compact from adoption through amendment, with citations and a cross-reference table.
“Notes” contains WMATA Compact language prior to amendment. The Notes section also addresses substantive discrepancies in WMATA Compact language between the Signatories. Over the course of amending the Compact, discrepancies have developed among the versions of the WMATA Compact published by the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. Substantive discrepancies between the Signatories are ineffective, and are not included in the WMATA Compact provisions herein. Instead, the substantive discrepancies are presented in Notes. In contrast, minor discrepancies do not preclude Congress from giving its consent. In this volume, minor discrepancies between the Signatories (e.g. non-substantive punctuation) have been resolved in favor of the majority of the Signatories, except where necessary to remain stylistically consistent (e.g. capitalization).
CITATION
In the District of Columbia, the WMATA Compact is cited as D.C. Code § 9-1107.1; in Maryland as Md. Code. Ann. Transp. §10-204; and in Virginia as codified in Va. Code Ann. §§ 56-529 and 56-530 (the WMATA Compact does not, however, appear at §§ 56-529 and 56-530, instead it is set forth in full in the “Compacts” companion volume at p. 410 (2010)). The WMATA Compact is also set forth at 2009 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771, and that is the citation used for Virginia in this volume.
Attachment 2 A2-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD ...... i CITATION ...... i ARTICLE I ...... 1 1. Definitions ...... 1 ARTICLE II—PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS ...... 1 2. Purpose ...... 1 ARTICLE III—ORGANIZATION AND AREA ...... 2 3. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Zone ...... 2 4. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority ...... 2 5. Board Membership ...... 2 6. Compensation of Directors and Alternates ...... 3 7. Organization and Procedure ...... 3 8. Quorum and Actions by the Board ...... 3 9. Officers ...... 3 10. Conflict of Interest ...... 4 ARTICLE IV—PLEDGE OF COOPERATION ...... 5 11. Pledge of Cooperation ...... 5 ARTICLE V—GENERAL POWERS ...... 5 12. Enumeration ...... 5 ARTICLE VI—PLANNING ...... 6 13. Mass Transit Plan ...... 6 14. Planning Process ...... 6 15. Adoption of Mass Transit Plan ...... 7 ARTICLE VII—FINANCING ...... 8 16. Policy ...... 8 17. Plan of Financing ...... 8 18. Commitments for Financial Participation ...... 9 19. Administrative Expenses ...... 10 20. Acquisition of Facilities From Federal or Other Agencies ...... 10
Attachment 2 A2-2 21. Temporary Borrowing ...... 10 22. Funding ...... 11 ARTICLE VIII—BUDGET ...... 11 23. Capital Budget ...... 11 24. Current Expense Budget ...... 11 25. Adoption and Distribution of Budgets ...... 11 26. Payments...... 11 ARTICLE IX—REVENUE BONDS ...... 12 27. Borrowing Power ...... 12 28. Funds and Expenses ...... 12 29. Credit Excluded; Officers, State, Political Subdivisions and Agencies ...... 12 30. Funding and Refunding ...... 12 31. Bonds; Authorization Generally ...... 13 32. Bonds; Resolutions and Indentures Generally...... 13 33. Maximum Maturity ...... 14 34. Tax Exemption ...... 14 35. Interest ...... 14 36. Place of Payment ...... 14 37. Execution ...... 14 38. Holding Own Bonds ...... 14 39. Sale ...... 15 40. Negotiability ...... 15 41. Bonds Eligible for Investment and Deposit ...... 15 42. Validation Proceedings ...... 15 43. Recording ...... 15 44. Pledged Revenues ...... 16 45. Remedies ...... 16 ARTICLE X—EQUIPMENT TRUST CERTIFICATES ...... 16 46. Power ...... 16 47. Payments...... 16 48. Procedure ...... 17 49. Agreements and Leases ...... 17
Attachment 2 A2-3 50. Law Governing ...... 17 ARTICLE XI—OPERATION OF FACILITIES ...... 17 51. Operation by Contract or Lease ...... 17 52. The Operating Contract ...... 17 53. Compensation for Contractor ...... 18 54. Selection of Contractor ...... 19 ARTICLE XII—COORDINATION OF PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ...... 19 55. Declaration of Policy ...... 19 56. Implementation of Policy ...... 19 57. Rights of Private Carriers Unaffected ...... 20 58. Financial Assistance to Private Carriers ...... 20 ARTICLE XIII—JURISDICTION; RATES AND SERVICE ...... 21 59. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission ...... 21 60. Public Facilities ...... 21 61. Standards ...... 21 62. Hearings ...... 22 63. Reference of Matters to WMATC ...... 22 ARTICLE XIV—LABOR POLICY ...... 23 64. Construction ...... 23 65. Equipment and Supplies ...... 23 66. Operations ...... 24 ARTICLE XV—RELOCATION ASSISTANCE ...... 26 67. Relocation Program and Payments ...... 26 68. Relocation of Public or Public Utility Facilities ...... 26 ARTICLE XVI—GENERAL PROVISIONS ...... 26 69. Creation and Administration of Funds ...... 26 70. Annual Independent Audit ...... 27 71. Reports ...... 27 72. Insurance ...... 27 73. Contracting and Purchasing ...... 28 74. Rights of Way ...... 29 75. Compliance with Laws, Regulations and Ordinances ...... 30
Attachment 2 A2-4 76. Police ...... 30 77. Exemption from Regulation ...... 32 78. Tax Exemption ...... 32 79. Reduced Fares ...... 32 80. Liability for Contracts and Torts ...... 32 81. Jurisdiction of Courts ...... 33 82. Condemnation ...... 33 83. Enlargement and Withdrawal; Duration ...... 33 84. Amendments and Supplements ...... 34 85. Construction and Severability ...... 34 86. Effective Date; Execution ...... 34
CONSENT LEGISLATION ...... 35 COMPACT HISTORY ...... 38 NOTES ...... 39
DEDICATION
This edition of the WMATA Compact is dedicated to Lorenzo Paige for his contribution toward its preparation and for his tireless dedication to the Office of General Counsel and to WMATA.
Attachment 2 A2-5 WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
COMPACT ARTICLE I
1 1. Definitions
As used in this Title, the following words and terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly requires a different meaning: (a) “Board” means the Board of Directors of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; (b) “Director” means a member of the Board of Directors of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; (c) “Private transit companies” and “private carriers” means corporations, persons, firms or associations rendering transit service within the Zone pursuant to a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission or by a franchise granted by the United States or any signatory party to this Title; (d) “Signatory” means the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the District of Columbia; (e) “State” includes District of Columbia; (f) “Transit facilities” means all real and personal property located in the Zone, necessary or useful in rendering transit service between points within the Zone, by means of rail, bus, water or air and any other mode of travel, including without limitation, tracks, rights-of- way, bridges, tunnels, subways, rolling stock for rail, motor vehicle, marine and air transportation, stations, terminals and ports, areas for parking and all equipment, fixtures, buildings and structures and services incidental to or required in connection with the performance of transit service; (g) “Transit services” means the transportation of persons and their packages and baggage by means of transit facilities between points within the Zone including the transportation of newspapers, express and mail between such points, and charter service which originates within the Zone but does not include taxicab service or individual-ticket-sales sightseeing operations; (h) “Transit Zone” or “Zone” means the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Zone created by and described in Section 3, as well as any additional area that may be added pursuant to Section 83(a); and (i) “WMATC” means Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission.
ARTICLE II—PURPOSE AND FUNCTIONS
2. Purpose
The purpose of this Title is to create a regional instrumentality, as a common agency of each signatory party, empowered, in the manner hereinafter set forth, (1) to plan, develop, finance and
Attachment 2 A2-6 cause to be operated improved transit facilities, in coordination with transportation and general development planning for the Zone, as part of a balanced regional system of transportation, utilizing to their best advantage the various modes of transportation, (2) to coordinate the operation of the public and privately owned or controlled transit facilities, to the fullest extent practicable, into a unified regional transit system without unnecessary duplicating service, and (3) to serve such other regional purposes and to perform such other regional functions as the Signatories may authorize by appropriate legislation.
ARTICLE III—ORGANIZATION AND AREA
2 3. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Zone
There is hereby created the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Zone which shall embrace the District of Columbia, the cities of Alexandria, Falls Church and Fairfax and the counties of Arlington, Fairfax and Loudoun and political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia located within those counties, and the counties of Montgomery and Prince George’s in the State of Maryland and political subdivisions of the State of Maryland located in said counties.
4. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
There is hereby created, as an instrumentality and agency of each of the signatory parties hereto, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority which shall be a body corporate and politic, and which shall have the powers and duties granted herein and such additional powers as may hereafter be conferred upon it pursuant to law.
3 5. Board Membership
(a) The Authority shall be governed by a Board of eight Directors consisting of two Directors for each Signatory and two for the federal government (one of whom shall be a regular passenger and customer of the bus or rail service of the Authority). For Virginia, the Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; for the District of Columbia, by the Council of the District of Columbia; for Maryland, by the Washington Suburban Transit Commission; and for the federal government, by the Administrator of General Services. For Virginia and Maryland, the Directors shall be appointed from among the members of the appointing body, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a term coincident with their term on the appointing body. A Director for a Signatory may be removed or suspended from office only as provided by the law of the Signatory from which he was appointed. The nonfederal appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate for each Director. In addition, the Administrator of General Services shall also appoint two nonvoting members who shall serve as the alternates for the federal Directors. An alternate Director may act only in the absence of the Director for whom he has been appointed an alternate, except that, in the case of the District of Columbia where only one Director and his alternate are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate, including the federal nonvoting Directors, shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a
Attachment 2 A2-7 vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall be filled in the same manner as an original appointment. (b) Before entering upon the duties of his office each Director and alternate Director shall take and subscribe to the following oath (or affirmation) of office or any such other oath or affirmation, if any, as the constitution or laws of the Government he represents shall provide: “I, , hereby solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and Laws of the state or political jurisdiction from which I was appointed as a Director (alternate director) of the Board of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and will faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter.”
6. Compensation of Directors and Alternates
Members of the Board and alternates shall serve without compensation but may be reimbursed for necessary expenses incurred as an incident to the performance of their duties.
7. Organization and Procedure
The Board shall provide for its own organization and procedure. It shall organize annually by the election of a Chairman and Vice-Chairman from among its members. Meetings of the Board shall be held as frequently as the Board deems that the proper performance of its duties requires and the Board shall keep minutes of its meetings. The Board shall adopt rules and regulations governing its meeting, minutes and transactions.
4 8. Quorum and Actions by the Board (8a)
(a) Four Directors or alternates consisting of at least one Director or alternate appointed from each Signatory, shall constitute a quorum and no action by the Board shall be effective unless a majority of the Board present and voting, which majority shall include at least one Director or alternate from each Signatory, concur therein; provided, however, that a plan of financing may be adopted or a mass transit plan adopted, altered, revised or amended by the unanimous vote of the Directors representing any two Signatories. (b) The actions of the Board shall be expressed by motion or resolution. Actions dealing solely with internal management of the Authority shall become effective when directed by the Board, but no other action shall become effective prior to the expiration of thirty days following its adoption; provided, however, that the Board may provide for the acceleration of any action upon a finding that such acceleration is required for the proper and timely performance of its functions.
5 9. Officers
(a) The officers of the Authority, none of whom shall be members of the Board, shall consist of a general manager, a secretary, a treasurer, a comptroller, an inspector general, and a general counsel and such other officers as the Board may provide. Except for the office of general manager, inspector general, and comptroller, the Board may consolidate any of
Attachment 2 A2-8 such other offices in one person. All such officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the Board, shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and shall perform such duties and functions as the Board shall specify. The Board shall fix and determine the compensation to be paid to all officers and, except for the general manager who shall be a full-time employee, all other officers may be hired on a full-time or part-time basis and may be compensated on a salary or fee basis, as the Board may determine. All employees and such officers as the Board may designate shall be appointed and removed by the general manager under such rules of procedure and standards as the Board may determine. (b) The general manager shall be the chief administrative officer of the Authority and, subject to policy direction by the Board, shall be responsible for all activities of the Authority. (c) The treasurer shall be the custodian of the funds of the Authority, shall keep an account of all receipts and disbursements and shall make payments only upon warrants duly and regularly signed by the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Board, or other person authorized by the Board to do so, and by the secretary or general manager; provided, however, that the Board may provide that warrants not exceeding such amounts or for such purposes as may from time to time be specified by the Board may be signed by the general manager or by persons designated by him. (d) The inspector general shall report to the Board and head the Office of the Inspector General, an independent and objective unit of the Authority that conducts and supervises audits, program evaluations, and investigations relating to Authority activities; promotes economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Authority activities; detects and prevents fraud and abuse in Authority activities; and keeps the Board fully and currently informed about deficiencies in Authority activities as well as the necessity for and progress of corrective action. (e) An oath of office in the form set out in Section 5(b) of this Article shall be taken, subscribed and filed with the Board by all appointed officers. (f) Each Director, officer and employee specified by the Board shall give such bond in such form and amount as the Board may require, the premium for which shall be paid by the Authority.
10. Conflict of Interest
(a) No Director, officer or employee shall: (1) be financially interested, either directly or indirectly, in any contract, sale, purchase, lease or transfer of real or personal property to which the Board or the Authority is a party; (2) in connection with services performed within the scope of his official duties, solicit or accept money or any other thing of value in addition to the compensation or expenses paid to him by the Authority; (3) offer money or any thing of value for or in consideration of obtaining an appointment, promotion or privilege in his employment with the Authority. (b) Any Director, officer or employee who shall willfully violate any provision of this section shall, in the discretion of the Board, forfeit his office or employment.
Attachment 2 A2-9 (c) Any contract or agreement made in contravention of this section may be declared void by the Board. (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate or limit the applicability of any federal or State law which may be violated by any action prescribed by this section.
ARTICLE IV—PLEDGE OF COOPERATION
11. Pledge of Cooperation
Each Signatory pledges to each other faithful cooperation in the achievement of the purposes and objects of this Title.
ARTICLE V—GENERAL POWERS
6 12. Enumeration (12n)
In addition to the powers and duties elsewhere described in this Title, and except as limited in this Title, the Authority may: (a) Sue and be sued; (b) Adopt and use a corporate seal and alter the same at pleasure; (c) Adopt, amend, and repeal rules and regulations respecting the exercise of the powers conferred by this Title; (d) Construct, acquire, own, operate, maintain, control, sell and convey real and personal property and any interest therein by contract, purchase, condemnation, lease, license, mortgage or otherwise but all of said property shall be located in the Zone and shall be necessary or useful in rendering transit service or in activities incidental thereto; (e) Receive and accept such payments, appropriations, grants, gifts, loans, advances and other funds, properties and services as may be transferred or made available to it by any signatory party, any political subdivision or agency thereof, by the United States, or by any agency thereof, or by any other public or private corporation or individual, and enter into agreements to make reimbursement for all or any part thereof; (f) Enter into and perform contracts, leases and agreements with any person, firm or corporation or with any political subdivision or agency of any signatory party or with the federal government, or any agency thereof, including, but not limited to, contracts or agreements to furnish transit facilities and service; (g) Create and abolish offices, employments and positions (other than those specifically provided for herein) as it deems necessary for the purposes of the Authority, and fix and provide for the qualification, appointment, removal, term, tenure, compensation, pension and retirement rights of its officers and employees without regard to the laws of any of the Signatories; (h) Establish, in its discretion, a personnel system based on merit and fitness and, subject to eligibility, participate in the pension and retirement plans of any Signatory, or political subdivision or agency thereof, upon terms and conditions mutually acceptable; (i) Contract for or employ any professional services; (j) Control and regulate the use of facilities owned or controlled by the Authority, the service to be rendered and the fares and charges to be made therefor;
Attachment 2 A2-10 (k) Hold public hearings and conduct investigations relating to any matter affecting transportation in the Zone with which the Authority is concerned and, in connection therewith, subpoena witnesses, papers, records and documents; or delegate such authority to any officer. Each Director may administer oaths or affirmations in any proceeding or investigation; (l) Make or participate in studies of all phases and forms of transportation, including transportation vehicle research and development techniques and methods for determining traffic projections, demand motivations, and fiscal research and publicize and make available the results of such studies and other information relating to transportation; and (m) Exercise, subject to the limitations and restrictions herein imposed, all powers reasonably necessary or essential to the declared objects and purposes of this Title.
ARTICLE VI—PLANNING
13. Mass Transit Plan
(a) The Board shall develop and adopt, and may from time to time review and revise, a mass transit plan for the immediate and long-range needs of the Zone. The mass transit plan shall include one or more plans designating (1) the transit facilities to be provided by the Authority, including the locations of terminals, stations, platforms, parking facilities and the character and nature thereof; (2) the design and location of such facilities; (3) whether such facilities are to be constructed or acquired by lease, purchase, or condemnation; (4) a timetable for the provision of such facilities; (5) the anticipated capital costs; (6) estimated operating expenses and revenues relating thereto; and (7) the various other factors and considerations, which, in the opinion of the Board, justify and require the projects therein proposed. Such plan shall specify the type of equipment to be utilized, the areas to be served, the routes and schedules of service expected to be provided and the probable fares and charges therefor. (b) In preparing the mass transit plan, and in any review of revision thereof, the Board shall make full utilization of all data, studies, reports and information available from the National Capital Transportation Agency and from any other agencies of the federal government, and from Signatories and the political subdivisions thereof.
7 14. Planning Process (14b)
(a) The mass transit plan, and any revisions, alterations or amendments thereof, shall be coordinated, through the procedures hereinafter set forth, with (1) other plans and programs affecting transportation in the Zone in order to achieve a balanced system of transportation, utilizing each mode to its best advantage; (2) the general plan or plans for the development of the Zone; and (3) the development plans of the various political subdivisions embraced within the Zone. (b) It shall be the duty and responsibility of each member of the Board to serve as liaison between the Board and the body which appointed him to the Board. To provide a framework for regional participation in the planning process, the Board shall create technical committees concerned with planning and collection and analyses of data relative to decision-making in the transportation planning process and the Mayor and
Attachment 2 A2-11 Council of the District of Columbia, the component governments of the Northern Virginia Transportation District and the Washington Suburban Transit District shall appoint representatives to such technical committees and otherwise cooperate with the Board in the formulation of a mass transit plan, or in revisions, alterations or amendments thereof. (c) The Board, in the preparation, revision, alteration or amendment of a mass transit plan, shall (1) consider data with respect to current and prospective conditions in the Zone, including, without limitation, land use, population, economic factors affecting development plans, goals or objectives for the development of the Zone and the separate political subdivisions, transit demands to be generated by such development, travel patterns, existing and proposed transportation and transit facilities, impact of transit plans on the dislocation of families and businesses, preservation of the beauty and dignity of the Nation’s Capital, factors affecting environmental amenities and aesthetics and financial resources; (2) cooperate with and participate in any continuous, comprehensive transportation planning process cooperatively established by the highway agencies of the Signatories and the local political subdivisions in the Zone to meet the planning standards now or hereafter prescribed by the Federal-Aid Highway Acts; and (3) to the extent not inconsistent with or duplicative of the planning process specified in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph (c), cooperate with the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Capital Regional Planning Council, the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, the highway agencies of the Signatories, the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the Northern Virginia Regional Planning and Economic Development Commission, the Maryland State Planning Department and the Commission of Fine Arts. Such cooperation shall include the creation, as necessary, of technical committees composed of personnel, appointed by such agencies, concerned with planning and collection and analysis of data relative to decision-making in the transportation planning process.
8 15. Adoption of Mass Transit Plan
(a) Before a mass transit plan is adopted, altered, revised or amended, the Board shall transmit such proposed plan, alteration, revision or amendment for comment to the following and to such other agencies as the Board shall determine: (1) the Mayor and Council of the District of Columbia, the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Washington Suburban Transit Commission; (2) the governing bodies of the counties and cities embraced within the Zone; (3) the transportation agencies of the Signatories; (4) the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission; (5) the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments; (6) the National Capital Planning Commission; (7) the National Capital Regional Planning Council; (8) the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission; (9) the Northern Virginia Regional Planning and Economic Development Commission;
Attachment 2 A2-12 (10) the Maryland State Planning Department; and (11) the private transit companies operating in the Zone and the Labor Unions representing the employees of such companies and employees of contractors providing services under operating contracts. (b) A copy of the proposed mass transit plan, amendment or revision, shall be kept at the office of the Board and shall be available for public inspection. Information with respect thereto shall be released to the public. After thirty days’ notice published once a week for two successive weeks in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the Zone, a public hearing shall be held with respect to the proposed plan, alteration, revision or amendment. The thirty days’ notice shall begin to run on the first day the notice appears in any such newspaper. The Board shall consider the evidence submitted and statements and comments made at such hearing and may make any changes in the proposed plan, amendment or revision which it deems appropriate and such changes may be made without further hearing.
ARTICLE VII—FINANCING
16. Policy
With due regard for the policy of Congress for financing a mass transit plan for the Zone set forth in Section 204(g) of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 537), it is hereby declared to be the policy of this Title that, as far as possible, the payment of all costs shall be borne by the persons using or benefiting from the Authority’s facilities and services and any remaining costs shall be equitably shared among the federal, District of Columbia and participating local governments in the Zone. The allocation among such governments of such remaining costs shall be determined by agreement among them and shall be provided in the manner hereinafter specified.
17. Plan of Financing
(a) The Authority, in conformance with said policy, shall prepare and adopt a plan for financing the construction, acquisition and operation of facilities specified in a mass transit plan adopted pursuant to Article VI hereof, or in any alteration, revision or amendment thereof. Such plan of financing shall specify the facilities to be constructed or acquired, the cost thereof, the principal amount of revenue bonds, equipment trust certificates and other evidences of debt proposed to be issued, the principal terms and provisions of all loans and underlying agreements and indentures, estimated operating expenses and revenues and the proposed allocation among the federal, District of Columbia, and participating local governments of the remaining costs and deficits, if any, and such other information as the Commission may consider appropriate. (b) Such plan of financing shall constitute a proposal to the interested governments for financial participation and shall not impose any obligation on any government and such obligations shall be created only as provided in Section 18 of this Article VII.
Attachment 2 A2-13 9 10 18. Commitments for Financial Participation (18c); (18d)
(a) Commitments on behalf of the portion of the Zone located in Virginia shall be by contract or agreement by the Authority with the Northern Virginia Transportation District, or its component governments, as authorized in the Transportation District Act of 1964 (Ch. 631, 1964 Virginia Acts of Assembly), to contribute to the capital required for the construction and/or acquisition of facilities specified in a mass transit plan adopted as provided in Article VI, or any alteration, revision or amendment thereof, and for meeting expenses and obligations in the operation of such facilities. No such contract or agreement, however, shall be entered into by the Authority with the Northern Virginia Transportation District unless said District has entered into the contracts or agreements with its member governments, as contemplated by Section 1(b)(4) of Article 4 of said Act, which contracts or agreements expressly provide that such contracts or agreements shall inure to the benefit of the Authority and shall be enforceable by the Authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 2, Article 5 of said Act, and such contracts or agreements are acceptable to the Board. The General Assembly of Virginia hereby authorizes and designates the Authority as the agency to plan for and provide transit facilities and services for the area of Virginia encompassed within the Zone within the contemplation of Article 1, Section 3(c) of said Act. (b) Commitments on behalf of the portion of the Zone located in Maryland shall be by contract or agreement by the Authority with the Washington Suburban Transit District, pursuant to which the Authority undertakes to provide transit facilities and service in consideration for the agreement by said District to contribute to the capital required for the construction and/or acquisition of facilities specified in a mass transit plan adopted as provided in Article VI, or in any alteration, revision or amendment thereof, and for meeting expenses and obligations incurred in the operation of such facilities. (c) With respect to the District of Columbia and the federal government, the commitment or obligation to render financial assistance shall be created by appropriation or in such other manner, or by such other legislation, as the Congress shall determine. If prior to making such commitment by or on behalf of the District of Columbia, legislation is enacted by the Congress granting the governing body of the District of Columbia plenary power to create obligations and levy taxes, the commitment by the District of Columbia shall be by contract or agreement between the governing body of the District of Columbia and the Authority, pursuant to which the Authority undertakes, subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof, to provide transit facilities and service in consideration for the undertaking by the District of Columbia to contribute to the capital required for the construction and/or acquisition of facilities specified in a mass transit plan adopted as provided in Article VI, or in any alteration, revision or amendment thereof, and for meeting expenses and obligations incurred in the operation of such facilities. (d) (1) All payments made by the local signatory governments for the Authority for the purpose of matching federal funds appropriated in any given year as authorized under Title VI, Section 601, Pub. L. 110-432 regarding funding of capital and preventative maintenance projects of the Authority shall be made from amounts derived from dedicated funding sources. (2) For the purposes of this paragraph (d), a “dedicated funding source” means any source of funding that is earmarked or required under State or local law to be used to
Attachment 2 A2-14 match federal appropriations authorized under Title VI, Section 601, Pub. L. 110-432 for payments to the Authority.
19. Administrative Expenses
Prior to the time the Authority has receipts from appropriations and contracts or agreements as provided in Section 18 of this Article VII, the expenses of the Authority for administration and for preparation of a mass transit and financing plan, including all engineering, financial, legal and other services required in connection therewith, shall, to the extent funds for such expenses are not provided through grants by the federal government, be borne by the District of Columbia, by the Washington Suburban Transit District and the component governments of the Northern Virginia Transportation District. Such expenses shall be allocated among such governments on the basis of population as reflected by the latest available population statistics of the Bureau of the Census; provided, however, that upon the request of any Director the Board shall make the allocation upon estimates of population acceptable to the Board. The allocations shall be made by the Board and shall be included in the annual current expense budget prepared by the Board.
20. Acquisition of Facilities From Federal or Other Agencies
(a) The Authority is authorized to acquire by purchase, lease or grant or in any manner other than condemnation, from the federal government, or any agency thereof, from the District of Columbia, Maryland or Virginia, or any political subdivision or agency thereof, any transit and related facilities, including real and personal property and all other assets, located within the Zone, whether in operation or under construction. Such acquisition shall be made upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon and subject to such authorization or approval by the Congress and the governing body of the District of Columbia, as may be required; provided, however, that if such acquisition imposes or may impose any further or additional obligation or liability upon the Washington Suburban Transit District, the Northern Virginia Transportation District, or any component government thereof, under any contract with the Authority, the Authority shall not make such acquisition until any such affected contract has been appropriately amended. (b) For such purpose, the Authority is authorized to assume all liabilities and contracts relating thereto, to assume responsibility as primary obligor, endorser or guarantor on any outstanding revenue bonds, equipment trust certificates or other form of indebtedness authorized in this Act issued by such predecessor agency or agencies and, in connection therewith, to become a party to, and assume the obligations of, any indenture or loan agreement underlying or issued in connection with any outstanding securities or debts.
11 21. Temporary Borrowing
The Board may borrow, in anticipation of receipts, from any Signatory, the Washington Suburban Transit District, the Northern Virginia Transportation District, or any component government thereof, or from any lending institution for any purposes of this Title, including administrative expenses. Such loans shall be for a term not to exceed two years and such rates of
Attachment 2 A2-15 interest as shall be acceptable to the Board. The Signatories and any such political subdivision or agency may, in its discretion, make such loans from any available money.
22. Funding
The Board shall not construct or acquire any of the transit facilities specified in a mass transit plan adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article VI of this Title, or in any alteration, revision or amendment thereof, nor make any commitments or incur any obligations with respect thereto until funds are available therefor.
ARTICLE VIII—BUDGET
23. Capital Budget
The Board shall annually adopt a capital budget, including all capital projects it proposes to undertake or continue during the budget period, containing a statement of the estimated cost of each project and the method of financing thereof.
24. Current Expense Budget
The Board shall annually adopt a current expense budget for each fiscal year. Such budget shall include the Board’s estimated expenditures for administration, operation, maintenance and repairs, debt service requirements and payments to be made into any funds required to be maintained. The total of such expenses shall be balanced by the Board’s estimated revenues and receipts from all sources, excluding funds included in the capital budget or otherwise earmarked for other purposes.
25. Adoption and Distribution of Budgets
(a) Following the adoption by the Board of annual capital and current expense budgets, the general manager shall transmit certified copies of such budget to the principal budget officer of the federal government, the District of Columbia, the Washington Suburban Transit District and of the component governments of the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission at such time and in such manner as may be required under their respective budgetary procedures. (b) Each budget shall indicate the amounts, if any, required from the federal government, the government of the District of Columbia, the Washington Suburban Transit District and the component governments of the Northern Virginia Transportation District, determined in accordance with the commitments made pursuant to Article VII, Section 18 of this Title, to balance each of said budgets.
26. Payments
Subject to such review and approval as may be required by their budgetary or other applicable processes, the federal government, the Government of the District of Columbia, the Washington Suburban Transit District and the component governments of the Northern Virginia
Attachment 2 A2-16 Transportation District shall include in their respective budgets next to be adopted and appropriate or otherwise provide the amounts certified to each of them as set forth in the budgets.
ARTICLE IX—REVENUE BONDS
27. Borrowing Power
The Authority may borrow money for any of the purposes of this Title, may issue its negotiable bonds and other evidences of indebtedness in respect thereto and may mortgage or pledge its properties, revenues and contracts as security therefor. All such bonds and evidences of indebtedness shall be payable solely out of the properties and revenues of the Authority. The bonds and other obligations of the Authority, except as may be otherwise provided in the indenture under which they were issued, shall be direct and general obligations of the Authority and the full faith and credit of the Authority are hereby pledged for the prompt payment of the debt service thereon and for the fulfillment of all other undertakings of the Authority assumed by it to or for the benefit of the holders thereof.
28. Funds and Expenses
The purposes of this Title shall include, without limitation, all costs of any project or facility or any part thereof, including interest during a period of construction and for a period not to exceed two years thereafter and any incidental expenses (legal, engineering, fiscal, financial, consultant and other expenses) connected with issuing and disposing of the bonds; all amounts required for the creation of an operating fund, construction fund, reserve fund, sinking fund or other special fund; all other expenses connected with administration, the planning, design, acquisition, construction, completion, improvement or reconstruction of any facility or any part thereof; and reimbursement of advances by the Board or by others for such purposes and for working capital.
29. Credit Excluded; Officers, State, Political Subdivisions and Agencies
The Board shall have no power to pledge the credit of any signatory party, political subdivision or agency thereof, or to impose any obligation for payment of the bonds upon any signatory party, political subdivision or agency thereof, but may pledge the contracts of such governments and agencies; provided, however, that the bonds may be underwritten in whole or in part as to principal and interest by the United States, or by any political subdivision or agency of any Signatory; provided, further, that any bonds underwritten in whole or in part as to principal and interest by the United States shall not be issued without approval of the Secretary of the Treasury. Neither the Directors nor any person executing the bonds shall be liable personally on the bonds of the Authority or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof.
30. Funding and Refunding
Whenever the Board deems it expedient, it may fund and refund the bonds and other obligations of the Authority whether or not such bonds and obligations have matured. It may
Attachment 2 A2-17 provide for the issuance, sale or exchange of refunding bonds for the purpose of redeeming or retiring any bonds (including the payment of any premium, duplicate interest or cash adjustment required in connection therewith) issued by the Authority or issued by any other issuing body, the proceeds of the sale of which have been applied to any facility acquired by the Authority or which are payable out of the revenues of any facility acquired by the Authority. Bonds may be issued partly to refund bonds and other obligations then outstanding, and partly for any other purpose of the Authority. All provisions of this Title applicable to the issuance of bonds are applicable to refunding bonds and to the issuance, sale or exchange thereof.
31. Bonds; Authorization Generally
Bonds and other indebtedness of the Authority shall be authorized by resolution of the Board. The validity of the authorization and issuance of any bonds by the Authority shall not be dependent upon nor affected in any way by: (i) the disposition of bond proceeds by the Board or by contract, commitment or action taken with respect to such proceeds; or (ii) the failure to complete any part of the project for which bonds are authorized to be issued. The Authority may issue bonds in one or more series and may provide for one or more consolidated bond issues, in such principal amounts and with such terms and provisions as the Board may deem necessary. The bonds may be secured by a pledge of all or any part of the property, revenues and franchises under its control. Bonds may be issued by the Authority in such amount, with such maturities and in such denominations and form or forms, whether coupon or registered, as to principal alone or as to both principal and interest, as may be determined by the Board. The Board may provide for redemption of bonds prior to maturity on such notice and at such time or times and with such redemption provisions, including premiums, as the Board may determine.
32. Bonds; Resolutions and Indentures Generally
The Board may determine and enter into indentures or adopt resolutions providing for the principal amount, date or dates, maturities, interest rate, or rates, denominations, form, registration, transfer, interchange and other provisions of the bonds and coupons and the terms and conditions upon which the same shall be executed, issued, secured, sold, paid, redeemed, funded and refunded. The resolution of the Board authorizing any bond or any indenture so authorized under which the bonds are issued may include all such covenants and other provisions not inconsistent with the provisions of this Title, other than any restriction on the regulatory powers vested in the Board by this Title, as the Board may deem necessary or desirable for the issue, payment, security, protection or marketing of the bonds, including without limitation covenants and other provisions as to the rates or amounts of fees, rents and other charges to be charged or made for use of the facilities; the use, pledge, custody, securing, application and disposition of such revenues, of the proceeds of the bonds and of any other moneys or contracts of the Authority; the operation, maintenance, repair and reconstruction of the facilities and the amounts which may be expended therefor; the sale, lease or other disposition of the facilities; the insuring of the facilities and of the revenues derived therefrom; the construction or other acquisition of other facilities; the issuance of additional bonds or other indebtedness; the rights of the bondholders and of any trustee for the bondholders upon default by the Authority or otherwise; and the modification of the provisions of the indenture and of the bonds. Reference on the face of the bonds to such resolution or indenture by its date of adoption or the apparent date
Attachment 2 A2-18 on the face thereof is sufficient to incorporate all of the provisions thereof and of this Title into the body of the bonds and their appurtenant coupons. Each taker and subsequent holder of the bonds or coupons, whether the coupons are attached to or detached from the bonds, has recourse to all of the provisions of the indenture and of this Title and is bound thereby.
33. Maximum Maturity
No bond or its terms shall mature in more than fifty years from its own date and in the event any authorized issue is divided into two or more series or divisions, the maximum maturity date herein authorized shall be calculated from the date on the face of each bond separately, irrespective of the fact that different dates may be prescribed for the bonds of each separate series or division of any authorized issue.
34. Tax Exemption
All bonds and all other evidences of debt issued by the Authority under the provisions of this Title and the interest thereon shall at all times be free and exempt from all taxation by or under authority of any signatory parties, except for transfer, inheritance and estate taxes.
12 35. Interest
Bonds shall bear interest at such rate or rates as may be determined by the Board, payable annually or semiannually.
36. Place of Payment
The Board may provide for the payment of the principal and interest of bonds at any place or places within or without the signatory states, and in any specified lawful coin or currency of the United States of America.
13 37. Execution
The Board may provide for the execution and authentication of bonds by the manual, lithographed or printed facsimile signature of members of the Board, and by additional authentication by a trustee or fiscal agent appointed by the Board; provided, however, that one of such signatures shall be manual. If any of the members whose signatures or countersignatures appear upon the bonds or coupons cease to be members before the delivery of the bonds or coupons, their signatures or countersignatures are nevertheless valid and of the same force and effect as if the members had remained in office until the delivery of bonds and coupons.
38. Holding Own Bonds
The Board shall have power out of any funds available therefor to purchase its bonds and may hold, cancel or resell such bonds.
Attachment 2 A2-19 14 39. Sale
The Board may fix terms and conditions for the sale or other disposition of any authorized issue of bonds. The Board may sell bonds at less than their par or face value but no issue of bonds may be sold at an aggregate price below the par or face value thereof if such sale would result in a net interest cost to the Authority calculated upon the entire issue so sold in excess of the applicable rate determined by the Board, payable semiannually, computed with relation to the absolute maturity of the bonds according to standard tables of bond values, deducting the amount of any premiums to be paid on the redemption of any bonds prior to maturity. All bonds issued and sold pursuant to this Title may be sold in such manner, either at public or private sale, as the Board shall determine.
40. Negotiability
All bonds issued under the provision of this Title are negotiable instruments.
41. Bonds Eligible for Investment and Deposit
Bonds issued under the provisions of this Title are hereby made securities in which all public officers and public agencies of the Signatories and their political subdivisions and all banks, trust companies, savings and loan associations, investment companies and others carrying on a banking business, all insurance companies and insurance associations and others carrying on an insurance business, all administrators, executors, guardians, trustees and other fiduciaries, and all other persons may legally and properly invest funds, including capital in their control or belonging to them. Such bonds are hereby made securities which may properly and legally be deposited with and received by any officer of any Signatory, or of any agency or political subdivision of any Signatory, for any purpose for which the deposit of bonds or other obligations of such Signatory is now or may hereafter be authorized by law.
42. Validation Proceedings
Prior to the issuance of any bonds, the Board may institute a special proceeding to determine the legality of proceedings to issue the bonds and their validity under the laws of any of the signatory parties. Such proceeding shall be instituted and prosecuted in rem and the final judgment rendered therein shall be conclusive against all persons whomsoever and against each of the signatory parties.
43. Recording
No indenture need be recorded or filed in any public office, other than the office of the Board. The pledge of revenues provided in any indenture shall take effect forthwith as provided therein and irrespective of the date of receipt of such revenues by the Board or the indenture trustee. Such pledge shall be effective as provided in the indenture without physical delivery of the revenues to the Board or to the indenture trustee.
Attachment 2 A2-20 44. Pledged Revenues
Bond redemption and interest payments shall, to the extent provided in the resolution or indenture, constitute a first, direct and exclusive charge and lien on all revenues received from the use and operation of the facility, and on any sinking or other funds created therefrom. All such revenues, together with interest thereon, shall constitute a trust fund for the security and payment of such bonds and except as and to the extent provided in the indenture with respect to the payment therefrom of expenses for other purposes including administration, operation, maintenance, improvements or extensions of the facilities or other purposes shall not be used or pledged for any other purpose so long as such bonds, or any of them, are outstanding and unpaid.
45. Remedies
The holder of any bond may for the equal benefit and protection of all holders of bonds similarly situated: (1) by mandamus or other appropriate proceedings require and compel the performance of any of the duties imposed upon the Board or assumed by it, its officers, agents or employees under the provisions of any indenture, in connection with the acquisition, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction or insurance of the facilities, or in connection with the collection, deposit, investment, application and disbursement of the revenues derived from the operation and use of the facilities, or in connection with the deposit, investment and disbursement of the proceeds received from the sale of bonds; or (2) by action or suit in a court of competent jurisdiction of any signatory party require the Authority to account as if it were the trustee of an express trust, or enjoin any acts or things which may be unlawful or in violation of the rights of the holders of the bonds. The enumeration of such rights and remedies does not, however, exclude the exercise or prosecution of any other rights or remedies available to the holders of bonds.
ARTICLE X—EQUIPMENT TRUST CERTIFICATES
46. Power
The Board shall have power to execute agreements, leases and equipment trust certificates with respect to the purchase of facilities or equipment such as cars, trolley buses and motor buses, or other craft, in the form customarily used in such cases and appropriate to effect such purchase, and may dispose of such equipment trust certificates in such a manner as it may determine to be for the best interests of the Authority. Each vehicle covered by an equipment trust certificate shall have the name of the owner and lessor plainly marked upon both sides thereof, followed by the words “Owner and Lessor.”
47. Payments
All monies required to be paid by the Authority under the provisions of such agreements, leases and equipment trust certificates shall be payable solely from the revenue to be derived from the operation of the transit system or from such grants, loans, appropriations or other revenues, as may be available to the Board under the provisions of this Title. Payment for such facilities or equipment, or rentals thereof, may be made in installments, and the deferred
Attachment 2 A2-21 installments may be evidenced by equipment trust certificates as aforesaid, and title to such facilities or equipment may not vest in the Authority until the equipment trust certificates are paid.
48. Procedure
The agreement to purchase facilities or equipment by the Board may direct the vendor to sell and assign the equipment to a bank or trust company, duly authorized to transact business in any of the signatory states, or to the Housing and Home Finance Administrator, as trustee, lessor or vendor, for the benefit and security of the equipment trust certificates and may direct the trustee to deliver the facilities and equipment to one or more designated officers of the Board and may authorize the trustee simultaneously therewith to execute and deliver a lease of the facilities or equipment to the Board.
49. Agreements and Leases
The agreements and leases shall be duly acknowledged before some person authorized by law to take acknowledgments of deeds and in the form required for acknowledgment of deeds and such agreements, leases and equipment trust certificates shall be authorized by resolution of the Board and shall contain such covenants, conditions and provisions as may be deemed necessary or appropriate to insure the payment of the equipment trust certificates from the revenues to be derived from the operation of the transit system and other funds. The covenants, conditions and provisions of the agreements, leases and equipment trust certificates shall not conflict with any of the provisions of any resolution or trust agreement securing the payment of bonds or other obligations of the Authority then outstanding or conflict with or be in derogation of the rights of the holders of any such bonds or other obligations.
50. Law Governing
The equipment trust certificates issued hereunder shall be governed by Laws of the District of Columbia and for this purpose the chief place of business of the Authority shall be considered to be the District of Columbia. The filing of any documents required or permitted to be filed shall be governed by the Laws of the District of Columbia.
ARTICLE XI—OPERATION OF FACILITIES
15 51. Operation by Contract or Lease
Any facilities and properties owned or controlled by the Authority may be operated by the Authority directly or by others pursuant to contract or lease as the Board may determine.
52. The Operating Contract
Without limitation upon the right of the Board to prescribe such additional terms and provisions as it may deem necessary and appropriate, the operating contract shall: (a) specify the services and functions to be performed by the Contractor;
Attachment 2 A2-22 (b) provide that the Contractor shall hire, supervise and control all personnel required to perform the services and functions assumed by it under the operating contract and that all such personnel shall be employees of the Contractor and not of the Authority; (c) require the Contractor to assume the obligations of the labor contract or contracts of any transit company which may be acquired by the Authority and assume the pension obligations of any such transit company; (d) require the Contractor to comply in all respects with the labor policy set forth in Article XIV of this Title; (e) provide that no transfer of ownership of the capital stock, securities or interests in any Contractor, whose principal business is the operating contract, shall be made without written approval of the Board and the certificates or other instruments representing such stock, securities or interests shall contain a statement of this restriction; (f) provide that the Board shall have the sole authority to determine the rates or fares to be charged, the routes to be operated and the service to be furnished; (g) specify the obligations and liabilities which are to be assumed by the Contractor and those which are to be the responsibility of the Authority; (h) provide for an annual audit of the books and accounts of the Contractor by an independent certified public accountant to be selected by the Board and for such other audits, examinations and investigations of the books and records, procedures and affairs of the Contractor at such times and in such manner as the Board shall require, the costs of such audits, examinations and investigations to be borne as agreed by the parties in the operating contract; and (i) provide that no operating contract shall be entered into for a term in excess of five years; provided, that any such contract may be renewed for successive terms, each of which shall not exceed five years. Any such operating contract shall be subject to termination by the Board for cause only.
53. Compensation for Contractor
Compensation to the Contractor under the operating contract may, in the discretion of the Board, be in the form of (1) a fee paid by the Board to the Contractor for services, (2) a payment by the Contractor to the Board for the right to operate the system, or (3) such other arrangement as the Board may prescribe; provided, however, that the compensation shall bear a reasonable relationship to the benefits to the Authority and to the estimated costs the Authority would incur in directly performing the functions and duties delegated under the operating contract; and provided, further, that no such contract shall create any right in the Contractor (1) to make or change any rate or fare or alter or change the service specified in the contract to be provided or (2) to seek judicial relief by any form of original action, review or other proceedings from any rate or fare or service prescribed by the Board. Any assertion, or attempted assertion, by the Contractor of the right to make or change any rate or fare or service prescribed by the Board shall constitute cause for termination of the operating contract. The operating contract may provide incentives for efficient and economical management.
Attachment 2 A2-23 54. Selection of Contractor
The Board shall enter into an operating contract only after formal advertisement and negotiations with all interested and qualified parties, including private transit companies rendering transit service within the Zone; provided, however, that, if the Authority acquires transit facilities from any agency of the federal or District of Columbia governments, in accordance with the provisions of Article VII, Section 20 of this Title, the Authority shall assume the obligations of any operating contract which the transferor agency may have entered into.
ARTICLE XII—COORDINATION OF PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
55. Declaration of Policy
It is hereby declared that the interest of the public in efficient and economical transit service and in the financial well-being of the Authority and of the private transit companies requires that the public and private segments of the regional transit system be operated, to the fullest extent possible, as a coordinated system without unnecessary duplicating service.
16 56. Implementation of Policy (56e)
In order to carry out the legislative policy set forth in Section 55 of this Article XII (a) The Authority— (1) except as herein provided, shall not, directly or through a Contractor, perform transit service by bus or similar motor vehicles; (2) shall, in cooperation with the private carriers and WMATC, coordinate to the fullest extent practicable, the schedules for service performed by its facilities with the schedules for service performed by private carriers; and (3) shall enter into agreements with the private carriers to establish and maintain, subject to approval by WMATC, through routes and joint fares and provide for the division thereof, or, in the absence of such agreements, establish and maintain through routes and joint fares in accordance with orders issued by WMATC directed to the private carriers when the terms and conditions for such through service and joint fares are acceptable to it. (b) The WMATC, upon application, complaint, or upon its own motion, shall— (1) direct private carriers to coordinate their schedules for service with the schedules for service performed by facilities owned or controlled by the Authority; (2) direct private carriers to improve or extend any existing services or provide additional service over additional routes; (3) authorize a private carrier, pursuant to agreement between said carrier and the Authority, to establish and maintain through routes and joint fares for transportation to be rendered with facilities owned or controlled by the Authority if, after hearing held upon reasonable notice, WMATC finds that such through routes and joint fares are required by the public interest; and (4) in the absence of such an agreement with the Authority, direct a private carrier to establish and maintain through routes and joint fares with the Authority, if, after
Attachment 2 A2-24 hearing held upon reasonable notice, WMATC finds that such through service and joint fares are required by the public interest; provided, however, that no such order, rule or regulation of WMATC shall be construed to require the Authority to establish and maintain any through route and joint fare. (c) WMATC shall not authorize or require a private carrier to render any service, including the establishment or continuation of a joint fare for a through route service with the Authority which is based on a division thereof between the Authority and private carrier which does not provide a reasonable return to the private carrier, unless the carrier is currently earning a reasonable return on its operation as a whole in performing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of WMATC. In determining the issue of reasonable return, WMATC shall take into account any income attributable to the carrier, or to any corporation, firm or association owned in whole or in part by the carrier, from the Authority whether by way of payment for services or otherwise. (d) If the WMATC is unable, through the exercise of its regulatory powers over the private carriers granted in paragraph (b) hereof or otherwise, to bring about the requisite coordination of operations and service between the private carriers and the Authority, the Authority may in the situations specified in paragraph (b) hereof, cause such transit service to be rendered by its Contractor by bus or other motor vehicle, as it shall deem necessary to effectuate the policy set forth in Section 55 hereof. In any such situation, the Authority, in order to encourage private carriers to render bus service to the fullest extent practicable, may, pursuant to agreement, make reasonable subsidy payments to any private carrier. (e) The Authority may acquire the capital stock or the transit facilities of any private transit company and may perform transit service, including service by bus or similar motor vehicle, with transit facilities so acquired, or with transit facilities acquired pursuant to Article VII, Section 20. Upon acquisition of the capital stock or the transit facilities of any private transit company, the Authority shall undertake the acquisition, as soon as possible, of the capital stock or the transit facilities of each of the other private transit companies within the Zone requesting such acquisition. Lack of such request, however, shall not be construed to preclude the Authority from acquiring the capital stock or the transit facilities of any such company pursuant to Section 82 of Article XVI.
57. Rights of Private Carriers Unaffected
Nothing in this Title shall restrict or limit such rights and remedies, if any, that any private carrier may have against the Authority arising out of acts done or actions taken by the Authority hereunder. In the event any court of competent jurisdiction shall determine that the Authority has unlawfully infringed any rights of any private carrier or otherwise caused or permitted any private carrier to suffer legally cognizable injury, damages or harm and shall award a judgment therefor, such judgment shall constitute a lien against any and all of the assets and properties of the Authority.
58. Financial Assistance to Private Carriers
(a) The Board may accept grants from and enter into loan agreements with the Housing and Home Finance Administrator, pursuant to the provisions of the Urban Mass
Attachment 2 A2-25 Transportation Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 302), or with any successor agency or under any law of similar purport, for the purpose of rendering financial assistance to private carriers. (b) An application by the Board for any such grant or loan shall be based on and supported by a report from WMATC setting forth for each private carrier to be assisted (1) the equipment and facilities to be acquired, constructed, reconstructed or improved, (2) the service proposed to be rendered by such equipment and facilities, (3) the improvement in service expected from such facilities and equipment, (4) how the use of such facilities and equipment will be coordinated with the transit facilities owned by the Authority, (5) the ability of the affected private carrier to repay any such loans or grants and (6) recommended terms for any such loans or grants. (c) Any equipment or facilities acquired, constructed, reconstructed or improved with the proceeds of such grants or loans shall be owned by the Authority and may be made available to private carriers only by lease or other agreement which contain provisions acceptable to the Housing and Home Finance Administrator assuring that the Authority will have satisfactory continuing control over the use of such facilities and equipment.
ARTICLE XIII—JURISDICTION; RATES AND SERVICE
59. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission
Except as provided herein, this Title shall not affect the functions and jurisdiction of WMATC, as granted by Titles I and II of this Compact, over the transportation therein specified and the persons engaged therein and the Authority shall have no jurisdiction with respect thereto.
60. Public Facilities
Service performed by transit facilities owned or controlled by the Authority, and the rates and fares to be charged for such service, shall be subject to the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the Board and, notwithstanding any other provision in this Compact contained, WMATC shall have no authority with respect thereto, or with respect to any contractor in connection with the operation by it of transit facilities owned or controlled by the Authority. The determinations of the Board with respect to such matters shall not be subject to judicial review nor to the processes of any court.
61. Standards
Insofar as practicable, and consistent with the provision of adequate service at reasonable fares, the rates and fares and service shall be fixed by the Board so as to result in revenues which will: (a) pay the operating expenses and provide for repairs, maintenance and depreciation of the transit systems owned or controlled by the Authority; (b) provide for payment of all principal and interest on outstanding revenue bonds and other obligations and for payment of all amounts to sinking funds and other funds as may be required by the terms of any indenture or loan agreement;
Attachment 2 A2-26 (c) provide for the purchase, lease or acquisition of rolling stock, including provisions for interest, sinking funds, reserve funds or other funds required for payment of any obligations incurred by the Authority for the acquisition of rolling stock; and (d) provide funds for any purpose the Board deems necessary and desirable to carry out the purposes of this Title.
17 62. Hearings
(a) The Board shall not raise any fare or rate, nor implement a major service reduction, except after holding a public hearing with respect thereto. (b) Any Signatory, any political subdivision thereof, any agency of the federal government and any person, firm or association served by or using the transit facilities of the Authority and any private carrier may file a request with the Board for a hearing with respect to any rates or charges made by the Board or any service rendered with the facilities owned or controlled by the Authority. Such request shall be in writing, shall state the matter on which a hearing is requested and shall set forth clearly the matters and things on which the request relies. As promptly as possible after such a request is filed, the Board, or such officer or employee as it may designate, shall confer with the protestant with respect to the matters complained of. After such conference, the Board, if it deems the matter meritorious and of general significance, may call a hearing with respect to such request. (c) The Board shall give at least fifteen days’ notice for all public hearings. The notice shall be given by publication in a newspaper of daily circulation throughout the Transit Zone and such notice shall be published once a week for two successive weeks. The notice period shall start with the first day of publication. Notices of public hearings shall be posted in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Board. (d) Prior to calling a hearing on any matter specified in this section, the Board shall prepare and file at its main office and keep open for public inspection its report relating to the proposed action to be considered at such hearing. Upon receipt by the Board of any report submitted by WMATC, in connection with a matter set for hearing, pursuant to the provisions of Section 63 of this Article XIII, the Board shall file such report at its main office and make it available for public inspection. For hearings called by the Board pursuant to paragraph (b), above, the Board also shall cause to be lodged and kept open for public inspection the written request upon which the hearing is granted and all documents filed in support thereof.
63. Reference of Matters to WMATC
To facilitate the attainment of public policy objectives for operation of the publicly and privately owned or controlled transit facilities as stated in Article XII, Section 55, prior to the hearings provided for by Section 62 hereof— (a) The Board shall refer to WMATC for its consideration and recommendations, any matter which the Board considers may affect the operation of the publicly and privately owned or controlled transit facilities as a coordinated regional transit system and any matter for which the Board has called a hearing, pursuant to Section 62 of this Article XIII, except
Attachment 2 A2-27 that temporary or emergency changes in matters affecting service shall not be referred; and (b) WMATC, upon such reference of any matter to it, shall give the referred matter preference over any other matters pending before it and shall, as expeditiously as practicable, prepare and transmit its report thereon to the Board. The Board may request WMATC to reconsider any part of its report or to make any supplemental reports it deems necessary. All of such reports shall be advisory only. (c) Any report submitted by WMATC to the Board shall consider, without limitation, the probable effect of the matter or proposal upon the operation of the publicly and privately owned or controlled transit facilities as a coordinated regional system, passenger movements, fare structures, service and the impact on the revenues of both the public and private facilities.
ARTICLE XIV—LABOR POLICY
64. Construction
The Board shall take such action as may be necessary to insure that all laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors in the construction, alteration or repair, including painting and decorating, of projects, buildings and works which are undertaken by the Authority or are financially assisted by it, shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on similar construction in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a-276a-5), and every such employee shall receive compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half times his basic rate of pay for all hours worked in any workweek in excess of eight hours in any workday or forty hours in any workweek, as the case may be. A provision stating the minimum wages thus determined and the requirement that overtime be paid as above provided shall be set out in each project advertisement for bids and in each bid proposal form and shall be made a part of the contract covering the project, which contract shall be deemed to be a contract of the character specified in Section 103 of the Contract Work Hours Standards Act (76 Stat. 357), as now or as may hereafter be in effect. The Secretary of Labor shall have, with respect to the administration and enforcement of the labor standards specified in this provision, the supervisory, investigatory and other authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan No. 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176, 64 Stat. 1267, 5 U.S.C. 133z-15), and section 2 of the Act of June 13, 1934, as amended (48 Stat. 948, as amended; 40 U.S.C. 276(c)). The requirements of this section shall also be applicable with respect to the employment of laborers and mechanics in the construction, alteration or repair, including painting and decorating, of the transit facilities owned or controlled by the Authority where such activities are performed by a contractor pursuant to agreement with the operator of such facilities.
65. Equipment and Supplies
Contracts for the manufacture or furnishing of materials, supplies, articles and equipment shall be subject to the provisions of the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act (41 U.S.C. 35 et seq.), as now or as may hereafter be in effect.
Attachment 2 A2-28 18 66. Operations
(a) The rights, benefits and other employee protective conditions and remedies of section 13(c) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1609(c)), as determined by the Secretary of Labor, shall apply to the operation by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority of any mass transit facilities owned or controlled by it and to any contract or other arrangement for the operation of transit facilities. Whenever the Authority shall operate any transit facility or enter into any contractual or other arrangements for the operation of such transit facility the Authority shall extend to employees of affected mass transportation systems first opportunity for transfer and appointment as employees of the Authority in accordance with seniority, in any nonsupervisory job in respect to such operations for which they can qualify after a reasonable training period. Such employment shall not result in any worsening of the employee’s position in his former employment nor any loss of wages, hours, working conditions, seniority, fringe benefits and rights and privileges pertaining thereto. (b) The Authority shall deal with and enter into written contracts with employees as defined in section 152 of Title 29, United States Code, through accredited representatives of such employees or representatives of any labor organization authorized to act for such employees concerning wages, salaries, hours, working conditions and pension or retirement provisions. (c) In case of any labor dispute involving the Authority and such employees where collective bargaining does not result in agreement, the Authority shall submit such dispute to arbitration by a board composed of three persons, one appointed by the Authority, one appointed by the labor organization representing the employees, and a third member to be agreed upon by the labor organization and the Authority. The member agreed upon by the labor organization and the Authority shall act as chairman of the board. The determination of the majority of the board of arbitration, thus established shall be final and binding on all matters in dispute. If after a period of ten days from the date of the appointment of the two arbitrators representing the Authority and the labor organization, the third arbitrator has not been selected, then either arbitrator may request the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to furnish a list of five persons from which the third arbitrator shall be selected. The arbitrators appointed by the Authority and the labor organization, promptly after the receipt of such list shall determine by lot the order of elimination, and thereafter each shall in that order alternatively eliminate one name until only one name remains. The remaining person on the list shall be the third arbitrator. The term “labor dispute” shall be broadly construed and shall include any controversy concerning wages, salaries, hours, working conditions, or benefits including health and welfare, sick leave, insurance or pension or retirement provisions but not limited thereto, and including any controversy concerning any differences or questions that may arise between the parties including but not limited to the making or maintaining of collective bargaining agreements, the terms to be included in such agreements, and the interpretation or application of such collective bargaining agreements and any grievance that may arise and questions concerning representation. Each party shall pay one-half of the expenses of such arbitration. (d) The Authority is hereby authorized and empowered to establish and maintain a system of pensions and retirement benefits for such officers and employees of the Authority as may
Attachment 2 A2-29 be designated or described by resolution of the Authority; to fix the terms of and restrictions on admission to such system and the classifications therein; to provide that persons eligible for admission in such pension system shall not be eligible for admission to, or receive any benefits from, any other pension system (except Social Security benefits), which is financed or funded, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly by funds paid or appropriated by the Authority to such other pension system, and to provide in connection with such pension system, a system of benefits payable to the beneficiaries and dependents of any participant in such pension system after the death of such participant (whether accidental or otherwise, whether occurring in the actual performance of duty or otherwise, or both) subject to such exceptions, conditions, restrictions and classifications as may be provided by resolution of the Authority. Such pension system shall be financed or funded by such means and in such manner as may be determined by the Authority to be economically feasible. Unless the Authority shall otherwise determine, no officer or employee of the Authority and no beneficiary or dependent of any such officer or employee shall be eligible to receive any pension or retirement or other benefits both from or under any such pension system and from or under any pension or retirement system established by an acquired transportation system or established or provided for, by or under the provisions of any collective bargaining agreement between the Authority and the representatives of its employees. (e) Whenever the Authority acquires existing transit facilities from a public or privately owned utility either in proceeding by eminent domain or otherwise, the Authority shall assume and observe all existing labor contracts and pension obligations. When the Authority acquires an existing transportation system, all employees who are necessary for the operation thereof by the Authority shall be transferred to and appointed as employees of the Authority, subject to all the rights and benefits of this Title. These employees shall be given seniority credit and sick leave, vacation, insurance and pension credits in accordance with the records or labor agreements from the acquired transportation system. Members and beneficiaries of any pension or retirement system or other benefits established by the acquired transportation system shall continue to have rights, privileges, benefits, obligations and status with respect to such established system. The Authority shall assume the obligations of any transportation system acquired by it with regard to wages, salaries, hours, working conditions, sick leave, health and welfare and pension or retirement provisions for employees. It shall assume the provisions of any collective bargaining agreement between such acquired transportation system and the representatives of its employees. The Authority and the employees, through their representatives for collective bargaining purposes, shall take whatever action may be necessary to have pension trust funds presently under the joint control of the acquired transportation system and the participating employees through their representative transferred to the trust fund to be established, maintained and administered jointly by the Authority and the participating employees through their representatives. No employee of any acquired transportation system who is transferred to a position with the Authority shall by reason of such transfer be placed in any worse position with respect to workmen’s compensation, pension, seniority, wages, sick leave, vacation, health and welfare insurance or any other benefits, than he enjoyed as an employee of such acquired transportation system.
Attachment 2 A2-30 ARTICLE XV—RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
67. Relocation Program and Payments
Section 7 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, and as the same may from time to time be amended, and all regulations promulgated thereunder, are hereby made applicable to individuals, families, business concerns and non-profit organizations displaced from real property by actions of the Authority without regard to whether financial assistance is sought by or extended to the Authority under any provision of that Act; provided, however, that in the event real property is acquired for the Authority by an agency of the federal government, or by a State or local agency or instrumentality, the Authority is authorized to reimburse the acquiring agency for relocation payments made by it.
68. Relocation of Public or Public Utility Facilities
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 67 of this Article XV, any highway or other public facility or any facilities of a public utility company which will be dislocated by reason of a project deemed necessary by the Board to effectuate the authorized purposes of this Title shall be relocated if such facilities are devoted to a public use, and the reasonable cost of relocation, if substitute facilities are necessary, shall be paid by the Board from any of its monies.
ARTICLE XVI—GENERAL PROVISIONS
19 69. Creation and Administration of Funds
(a) The Board may provide for the creation and administration of such funds as may be required. The funds shall be disbursed in accordance with rules established by the Board and all payments from any fund shall be reported to the Board. Monies in such funds and other monies of the Authority shall be deposited, as directed by the Board, in any branch or subsidiary of any state or national bank which has operations within the Zone, and having a total paid-in capital of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000). The trust department of any state or national bank may be designated as a depositary to receive any securities acquired or owned by the Authority. The restriction with respect to paid-in capital may be waived for any such bank which agrees to pledge federal securities to protect the funds and securities of the Authority in such amounts and pursuant to such arrangements as may be acceptable to the Board. (b) Any monies of the Authority may, in the discretion of the Board and subject to any agreement or covenant between the Authority and the holders of any of its obligations limiting or restricting classes of investments, be invested in: (1) Direct obligations of or obligations guaranteed by the United States of America; (2) Bonds, debentures, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued by agencies of the United States of America, including but not limited to the following: Bank for Cooperatives; Federal Intermediate Credit Banks; Federal Home Loan Bank System; Export-Import Bank of the United States; Federal Land Banks; Federal National Mortgage Association; Student Loan Marketing Association; Government National Mortgage Association; Tennessee Valley Authority; or United States Postal Service;
Attachment 2 A2-31 (3) Securities that qualify as lawful investments and may be accepted as security for fiduciary, trust and public funds under the control of the United States or any officer or officers thereof, or securities eligible as collateral for deposits of monies of the United States, including United States Treasury tax and loan accounts; (4) Domestic and Eurodollar certificates of deposits; and (5) Bonds, debentures, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued by a domestic corporation, such as a corporation organized under the laws of one of the states of the United States, provided that such obligations are nonconvertible and at the time of their purchase are rated in the highest rating categories by a nationally recognized bond rating agency.
20 70. Annual Independent Audit (70a)
(a) As soon as practical after the closing of the fiscal year, an audit shall be made of the financial accounts of the Authority. The audit shall be made by qualified certified public accountants selected by the Board, who shall have no personal interest direct or indirect in the financial affairs of the Authority or any of its officers or employees. The report of audit shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted auditing principles and shall be filed with the Chairman and other officers as the Board shall direct. Copies of the report shall be distributed to each Director, to the Congress, to the Mayor and Council of the District of Columbia, to the Governors of Virginia and Maryland, to the Washington Suburban Transit Commission, to the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and to the governing bodies of the political subdivisions located within the Zone which are parties to commitments for participation in the financing of the Authority and shall be made available for public distribution. (b) The financial transactions of the Board shall be subject to audit by the United States General Accounting Office in accordance with the principles and procedures applicable to commercial corporate transactions and under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by the Comptroller General of the United States. The audit shall be conducted at the place or places where the accounts of the Board are kept. (c) Any Director, officer or employee who shall refuse to give all required assistance and information to the accountants selected by the Board or who shall refuse to submit to them for examination such books, documents, records, files, accounts, papers, things or property as may be requested shall, in the discretion of the Board forfeit his office.
71. Reports
The Board shall make and publish an annual report on its programs, operations and finances, which shall be distributed in the same manner provided by Section 70 of this Article XVI for the report of annual audit. It may also prepare, publish and distribute such other public reports and informational materials as it may deem necessary or desirable.
72. Insurance
The Board may self-insure or purchase insurance and pay the premiums therefor against loss or damage to any of its properties; against liability for injury to persons or property; and against
Attachment 2 A2-32 loss of revenue from any cause whatsoever. Such insurance coverage shall be in such form and amount as the Board may determine, subject to the requirements of any agreement arising out of issuance of bonds or other obligations by the Authority.
21 73. Contracting and Purchasing
(a)(1) Except as provided in subsections (b), (c) and (f) of this section, and except in the case of procurement procedures otherwise expressly authorized by statute, the Authority in conducting a procurement of property, services or construction shall: (A) obtain full and open competition through the use of competitive procedures in accordance with the requirements of this section; and (B) use the competitive procedure or combination of competitive procedures that is best suited under the circumstances of the procurement. (2) In determining the competitive procedure appropriate under the circumstances, the Authority shall: (A) solicit sealed bids if: (i) time permits the solicitation, submission and evaluation of sealed bids; (ii) the award will be made on the basis of price and other price-related factors; (iii)it is not necessary to conduct discussions with the responding sources about their bids; and (iv) there is a reasonable expectation of receiving more than one sealed bid; or (B) request competitive proposals if sealed bids are not appropriate under clause (A) of this paragraph. (b) The Authority may provide for the procurement of property, services or construction covered by this section using competitive procedures but excluding a particular source in order to establish or maintain an alternative source or sources of supply for that property, service or construction if the Authority determines that excluding the source would increase or maintain competition and would likely result in reduced overall costs for procurement of property, services or construction. (c) The Authority may use procedures other than competitive procedures if: (1) the property, services or construction needed by the Authority is available from only one responsible source and no other type of property, services or construction will satisfy the needs of the Authority; or (2) the Authority’s need for the property, services or construction is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the Authority would be seriously injured unless the Authority limits the number of sources from which it solicits bids or proposals; or (3) the Authority determines that it is necessary in the public interest to use procedures other than competitive procedures in the particular procurement; or (4) the property or services can be obtained through federal or other governmental sources at reasonable prices. (d) For the purpose of applying subsection (c)(1) of this section: (1) in the case of a contract for property, services or construction to be awarded on the basis of acceptance of an unsolicited proposal, the property, services or construction shall be deemed to be available from only one responsible source if the source has submitted an unsolicited proposal that demonstrates a concept:
Attachment 2 A2-33 (A) that is unique and innovative or, in the case of a service, for which the source demonstrates a unique capability to provide the service; and (B) the substance of which is not otherwise available to the Authority and does not resemble the substance of a pending competitive procurement. (2) in the case of a follow-on contract for the continued development or production of a major system or highly specialized equipment or the continued provision of highly specialized services, the property, services or construction may be deemed to be available from only the original source and may be procured through procedures other than competitive procedures if it is likely that award to a source other than the original source would result in: (A) substantial duplication of cost to the Authority that is not expected to be recovered through competition; or (B) unacceptable delays in fulfilling the Authority’s needs. (e) If the Authority uses procedures other than competitive procedures to procure property, services or construction under subsection (c)(2) of this section, the Authority shall request offers from as many potential sources as is practicable under the circumstances. (f) (1) To promote efficiency and economy in contracting, the Authority may use simplified acquisition procedures for purchases of property, services and construction. (2) For the purposes of this subsection, simplified acquisition procedures may be used for purchases for an amount that does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold adopted by the federal government. (3) A proposed purchase or contract for an amount above the simplified acquisition threshold may not be divided into several purchases or contracts for lesser amounts in order to use the procedures under paragraph (1) of this subsection. (4) In using simplified acquisition procedures, the Authority shall promote competition to the maximum extent practicable. (g) The Board shall adopt policies and procedures to implement this section. The policies and procedures shall provide for publication of notice of procurements and other actions designed to secure competition where competitive procedures are used. (h) The Authority in its discretion may reject any and all bids or proposals received in response to a solicitation.
74. Rights of Way
The Board is authorized to locate, construct and maintain any of its transit and related facilities in, upon, over, under or across any streets, highways, freeways, bridges and any other vehicular facilities, subject to the applicable laws governing such use of such facilities by public agencies. In the absence of such laws, such use of such facilities by the Board shall be subject to such reasonable conditions as the highway department or other affected agency of a signatory party may require; provided, however, that the Board shall not construct or operate transit or related facilities upon, over or across any parkways or park lands without the consent of, and except upon the terms and conditions required by, the agency having jurisdiction with respect to such parkways and park lands, but may construct or operate such facilities in a subway under such parkways or park lands upon such reasonable terms and conditions as may be specified by the agency having jurisdiction with respect thereto.
Attachment 2 A2-34 75. Compliance with Laws, Regulations and Ordinances
The Board shall comply with all laws, ordinances and regulations of the Signatories and political subdivisions and agencies thereof with respect to use of streets, highways and all other vehicular facilities, traffic control and regulation, zoning, signs and buildings.
22 23 76. Police (76a & c); (76b & e)
(a) The Authority is authorized to establish and maintain a regular police force, to be known as the Metro Transit Police, to provide protection for its patrons, personnel, and transit facilities. The Metro Transit Police shall have the powers and duties and shall be subject to the limitations set forth in this section. It shall be composed of both uniformed and plainclothes personnel and shall be charged with the duty of enforcing the laws of the Signatories, and the laws, ordinances and regulations of the political subdivisions thereof in the Transit Zone, and the rules and regulations of the Authority. The jurisdiction of the Metro Transit Police shall be limited to all the transit facilities (including bus stops) owned, controlled or operated by the Authority, but this restriction shall not limit the power of the Metro Transit Police to make arrests in the Transit Zone for violations committed upon, to or against such transit facilities committed from within or outside such transit facilities, while in hot or close pursuit or to execute traffic citations and criminal process in accordance with subsection (c) below. The members of the Metro Transit Police shall have concurrent jurisdiction in the performance of their duties with the duly constituted law enforcement agencies of the Signatories and of the political subdivisions thereof in which any transit facility of the Authority is located or in which the Authority operates any transit service. Nothing contained in this section shall either relieve any Signatory or political subdivision or agency thereof from its duty to provide police, fire and other public safety service and protection, or limit, restrict or interfere with the jurisdiction of or the performance of duties by the existing police, fire and other public safety agencies. For purposes of this section, “bus stop” means that area within 150 feet of a metrobus bus stop sign, excluding the interior of any building not owned, controlled or operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. (b) A member of the Metro Transit Police shall have the same powers, including the power of arrest, and shall be subject to the same limitations, including regulatory limitations, in the performance of his duties as a member of the duly constituted police force of the political subdivision in which the Metro Transit Police member is engaged in the performance of his duties. A member of the Metro Transit Police is authorized to carry and use only such weapons, including handguns, as are issued by the Authority. A member of the Metro Transit Police is subject to such additional limitations in the use of weapons as are imposed on the duly constituted police force for the political subdivision in which he is engaged in the performance of his duties. (c) Members of the Metro Transit Police shall have power to execute on the transit facilities owned, controlled or operated by the Authority any traffic citation or any criminal process issued by any court of any Signatory or of any political subdivision of a Signatory, for any felony, misdemeanor or other offense against the laws, ordinances, rules or regulations specified in subsection (a). However, with respect to offenses committed upon, to, or against the transit facilities owned, controlled or operated by the
Attachment 2 A2-35 Authority, the Metro Transit Police shall have power to execute criminal process within the Transit Zone. (d) Upon the apprehension or arrest of any person by a member of the Metro Transit Police pursuant to the provisions of subsection (b), the officer, as required by law of the place of apprehension or arrest, shall either issue a summons or a citation against the person, book the person, or deliver the person to the duly constituted police or judicial officer of the Signatory or political subdivision where the apprehension or arrest is made, for disposition as required by law. (e) The Authority shall have the power to adopt rules and regulations for the safe, convenient and orderly use of the transit facilities owned, controlled or operated by the Authority, including the payment and the manner of the payment of fares or charges therefor, the protection of the transit facilities, the control of traffic and parking upon the transit facilities, and the safety and protection of the riding public. In the event that any such rules and regulations contravene the laws, ordinances, rules or regulations of a Signatory or any political subdivision thereof which are existing or subsequently enacted, these laws, ordinances, rules or regulations of the Signatory or the political subdivision shall apply and the conflicting rule or regulation, or portion thereof, of the Authority shall be void within the jurisdiction of that Signatory or political subdivision. In all other respects, the rules and regulations of the Authority shall be uniform throughout the Transit Zone. The rules or regulations established under this subsection shall be adopted by the Board following public hearings held in accordance with section 62(c) and (d) of this Compact. The final regulation shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the Zone at least 15 days before its effective date. Any person violating any rule or regulation of the Authority shall be subject to arrest and, upon conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction, shall pay a fine of not more than $250 and costs. Criminal violations of any rule or regulation of the Authority shall be prosecuted by the Signatory or political subdivision in which the violation occurred, in the same manner by which violations of law, ordinances, rules and regulations of the Signatory or political subdivision are prosecuted. (f) With respect to members of the Metro Transit Police, the Authority shall (1) establish classifications based on the nature and scope of duties, and fix and provide for their qualifications, appointment, removal, tenure, term, compensation, pension and retirement benefits; (2) provide for their training and for this purpose, the Authority may enter into contracts or agreements with any public or private organization engaged in police training, and this training and the qualifications of the uniformed and plainclothes personnel shall at least equal the requirements of each Signatory and of the political subdivisions therein in the Transit Zone for their personnel performing comparable duties; and (3) prescribe distinctive uniforms to be worn. (g) The Authority shall have the power to enter into agreements with the Signatories, the political subdivisions thereof in the Transit Zone, and public safety agencies located therein, including those of the federal government, for the delineation of the functions and responsibilities of the Metro Transit Police and the duly constituted police, fire and other public safety agencies, and for mutual assistance.
Attachment 2 A2-36 (h) Before entering upon the duties of office, each member of the Metro Transit Police shall take or subscribe to an oath or affirmation, before a person authorized to administer oaths, faithfully to perform the duties of that office.
77. Exemption from Regulation
Except as otherwise provided in this Title, any transit service rendered by transit facilities owned or controlled by the Authority and the Authority or any corporation, firm or association performing such transit service pursuant to an operating contract with the Authority, shall, in connection with the performance of such service, be exempt from all laws, rules, regulations and orders of the Signatories and of the United States otherwise applicable to such transit service and persons, except that laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to inspection of equipment and facilities, safety and testing shall remain in force and effect; provided, however, that the Board may promulgate regulations for the safety of the public and employees not inconsistent with the applicable laws, rules, regulations or orders of the Signatories and of the United States.
78. Tax Exemption
It is hereby declared that the creation of the Authority and the carrying out of the corporate purposes of the Authority is in all respects for the benefit of the people of the signatory states and is for a public purpose and that the Authority and the Board will be performing an essential government function, including, without limitation, proprietary, governmental and other functions, in the exercise of the powers conferred by this Title. Accordingly, the Authority and the Board shall not be required to pay taxes or assessments upon any of the property acquired by it or under its jurisdiction, control, possession or supervision or upon its activities in the operation and maintenance of any transit facilities or upon any revenues therefrom and the property and income derived therefrom shall be exempt from all federal, state, District of Columbia, municipal and local taxation. This exemption shall include, without limitation, all motor vehicle license fees, sales taxes and motor fuel taxes.
24 79. Reduced Fares
The District of Columbia, the Northern Virginia Transportation District, the Washington Suburban Transit District and the component governments thereof, may enter into contracts or agreements with the Authority to make equitable payments for fares lower than those established by the Authority pursuant to the provisions of Article XIII hereof for any specified class or category of riders.
80. Liability for Contracts and Torts
The Authority shall be liable for its contracts and for its torts and those of its Directors, officers, employees and agent committed in the conduct of any proprietary function, in accordance with the law of the applicable Signatory (including rules on conflict of laws), but shall not be liable for any torts occurring in the performance of a governmental function. The exclusive remedy for such breach of contracts and torts for which the Authority shall be liable, as herein provided, shall be by suit against the Authority. Nothing contained in this Title shall be
Attachment 2 A2-37 construed as a waiver by the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia and the counties and cities within the Zone of any immunity from suit.
25 81. Jurisdiction of Courts
The United States District Courts shall have original jurisdiction, concurrent with the Courts of Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, of all actions brought by or against the Authority and to enforce subpoenas issued under this Title. Any such action initiated in a State or District of Columbia Court shall be removable to the appropriate United States District Court in the manner provided by Act of June 25, 1948, as amended (28 U.S.C. 1446).
26 82. Condemnation (82a)
(a) The Authority shall have the power to acquire by condemnation, whenever in its opinion it is necessary or advantageous to the Authority to do so, any real or personal property, or any interest therein, necessary or useful for the transit system authorized herein, except property owned by the United States, by a Signatory, or any political subdivision thereof, whenever such property cannot be acquired by negotiated purchase at a price satisfactory to the Authority. (b) Proceedings for the condemnation of property in the District of Columbia shall be instituted and maintained under the Act of December 23, 1963 (77 Stat. 577-581, D.C. Code 1961, Supp. IV, Sections 1351-1368). Proceedings for the condemnation of property located elsewhere within the Zone shall be instituted and maintained, if applicable, pursuant to the provisions of the Act of August 1, 1888, as amended (25 Stat. 357, 40 U.S.C. 257) and the Act of June 25, 1948 (62 Stat. 935 and 937, 28 U.S.C. 1358 and 1403) or any other applicable act; provided, however, that if there is no applicable federal law, condemnation proceedings shall be in accordance with the provisions of the state law of the Signatory in which the property is located governing condemnation by the highway agency of such State. Whenever the words “real property,” “realty,” “land,” “easement,” “right-of-way,” or words of similar meaning are used in any applicable federal or state law relating to procedure, jurisdiction and venue, they shall be deemed, for the purpose of this Title, to include any personal property authorized to be acquired hereunder. (c) Any award or compensation for the taking of property pursuant to this Title shall be paid by the Authority, and none of the signatory parties nor any other agency, instrumentality or political subdivision thereof shall be liable for such award or compensation.
83. Enlargement and Withdrawal; Duration
(a) When advised in writing by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission or the Washington Suburban Transit Commission that the geographical area embraced therein has been enlarged, the Board, upon such terms and conditions as it may deem appropriate, shall by resolution enlarge the Zone to embrace the additional area. (b) The duration of this Title shall be perpetual but any Signatory thereto may withdraw therefrom upon two years’ written notice to the Board.
Attachment 2 A2-38 (c) The withdrawal of any Signatory shall not relieve such Signatory, any transportation district, county or city or other political subdivision thereof from any obligation to the Authority, or inuring to the benefit of the Authority, created by contract or otherwise.
27 84. Amendments and Supplements
Amendments and supplements to this Title to implement the purposes thereof may be adopted by legislative action of any of the signatory parties concurred in by all of the others. When one Signatory adopts an amendment or supplement to an existing section of the Compact, that amendment shall not be immediately effective, and the previously enacted provision or provisions shall remain in effect in each jurisdiction until the amendment or supplement is approved by the other Signatories and is consented to by Congress.
85. Construction and Severability
The provisions of this Title and of the agreements thereunder shall be severable and if any phrase, clause, sentence or provision of this Title or any such agreement is declared to be unconstitutional or the applicability thereof to any signatory party, political subdivision or agency thereof is held invalid, the constitutionality of the remainder of this Title or any such agreement and the applicability thereof to any other signatory party, political subdivision or agency thereof or circumstance shall not be affected thereby. It is the legislative intent that the provisions of this Title be reasonably and liberally construed.
28 86. Effective Date; Execution
This Title shall be adopted by the Signatories in the manner provided by law therefor and shall be signed and sealed in four duplicate original copies. One such copy shall be filed with the Secretary of State of each of the signatory parties or in accordance with laws of the State in which the filing is made, and one copy shall be filed and retained in the archives of the Authority upon its organization. This Title shall become effective ninety days after the enactment of concurring legislation by or on behalf of the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia and consent thereto by the Congress and all other acts or actions have been taken, including the signing and execution of the Title by the Governors of Maryland and Virginia and the Commissioners of the District of Columbia.
Attachment 2 A2-39 CONSENT LEGISLATION
Whereas Congress heretofore has declared in the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960 (Public Law 86-669, 74 Stat. 537) and in the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-173,79 Stat. 663) that a coordinated system of rail rapid transit, bus transportation service, and highways is essential in the National Capital Region for the satisfactory movement of people and goods, the alleviation of present and future traffic congestion, the economic welfare and vitality of all parts of the Region, the effective performance of the functions of the United States Government located within the Region, the orderly growth and development of the Region, the comfort and convenience of the residents and visitors to the Region, and the preservation of the beauty and dignity of the Nation's Capital and that such a s stem should be developed cooperatively by the Federal, State, and local governments of the National Capital Region, with the costs of the necessary facilities financed, as far as possible, by persons using or benefiting from such facilities and the remaining costs shared equitably among the Federal, State, and local governments ;
Whereas in furtherance of this policy, Congress, in title III of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960, authorized the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of Maryland to negotiate a Compact for the establishment of an organization, empowered, inter alia, to provide regional transportation facilities;
Whereas, it is the sense of the Congress that the Mass Transit Plan authorized by the Compact and this Act shall conform to the fullest extent practicable with the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital and the general plan for the development of the National Capital Region prepared pursuant to the National Capital Planning Act of 1952 (Public Law 82-592, 66 Stat. 781); and
Whereas, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland. with a representative of the United States appointed by the President have negotiated such a Compact, known as the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact, which amends the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact, heretofore consented to by the Congress (Public Law 86-794, 74 Stat. 1031, as amended by Public Law 87-767, 76 Stat. 764), by adding thereto a title III and said Compact has been enacted by Maryland (Ch. 869, Acts of General Assembly 1965) and in substantially the same language by Virginia (Ch. 2, 1966 Acts of Assembly) : Now, therefore,
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress hereby consents to, adopts and enacts for the District of Columbia an amendment to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact, for which Congress heretofore has granted its consent (Public Law 86-794, 74 Stat. 1031, as amended by Public Law 87-767, 76 Stat. 764) by adding thereto title III, known as the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact (herein referred to as title III), substantially as follows:
Attachment 2 A2-40 TITLE III
* * *
[Text of Title III, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact, Omitted]
* * *
Section 2. The Commissioners of the District of Columbia are authorized and directed to enter into and execute an amendment to the Compact substantially as set forth above with the States of Virginia and Maryland and are further authorized and directed to carry out and effectuate the terms and provisions of said Title III, and there are hereby authorized to be appropriated out of District of Columbia funds such amounts as are necessary to carry out the obligations of the District of Columbia in accordance with the terms of the said Title III.
Section 3. (a) To assure uninterrupted progress in the development of the facilities authorized by the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965, the transfer of the functions and duties of the National Capital Transportation Agency (herein referred to as the Agency) to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (herein referred to as the Authority) as required by Section 301 (b) of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960 shall take place on September 30, 1967. (b) Upon the effective date of the transfer of functions and duties and authorized by subsection (a) of this section, the President is authorized to transfer to the Authority such real and personal property, studies, reports, records, and other assets and liabilities as are appropriate in order that the Authority may assume the functions and duties of the Agency and, further, the President shall make provision for the transfer to the Authority of the unexpended balance of the appropriations, and of other funds, of the Agency for use by the Authority but such unexpended balances so transferred shall be used only for the purpose for which such appropriations were originally made. Subsequent to said effective date, there is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for payment to the Authority, any unappropriated portion of the authorization specified in Section 5(a)(1) of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965. There is also authorized to be appropriated to the District of Columbia out of the general fund of the District of Columbia, for payment to the Authority, any unappropriated portion of the authorization specified in Section 5(a)(2) of such Act. Any such appropriations shall be used only for the purposes for which such authorizations were originally made. (c) Pending the assumption by the Authority of the functions and duties of the Agency, the Agency is authorized and directed, in the manner herein set forth, fully to cooperate with and assist the Authority, the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Washington Suburban Transit Commission in the development of plans for the extensions, new lines and related facilities required to expand the basic system authorized by the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965 into a regional system, but, pending such transfer of functions and duties, nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair the
Attachment 2 A2-41 performance by the Agency of the functions and duties imposed by the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965. (d) In order to provide the cooperation and assistance specified in subsection (c) of this section, the Agency is authorized to perform, on a reimbursable basis, planning, engineering and such other services for the Authority, as the Authority may request, or to obtain such services by contract, but all such assistance and services shall be rendered in accordance with policy determinations made by the Authority and shall be advisory only. (e) Amounts received by the Agency from the Authority as provided in subsection (d) of this section shall be available for expenditure by the Agency in performing services for the Authority. Section 4. The United States District Courts shall have original jurisdiction, concurrent with the Courts of Maryland and Virginia, of all actions brought by or against the Authority and to enforce subpoenas issued pursuant to the provisions of Title III. Any such action initiated in a State court shall be removable to the appropriate United States District Court in the manner provided by the Act of June 25, 1948, as amended (28 U.S.C. 1446).
Section 5. (a) All laws or parts of laws of the United States and of the District of Columbia inconsistent with the provisions of Title III of this Act are hereby amended for the purpose of this Act to the extent necessary to eliminate such inconsistencies and to carry out the provisions of this Act and Title III and all laws or parts of laws and all reorganization plans of the United States are hereby amended and made applicable for the purpose of this Act to the extent necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act and Title III. (b) Section 202 of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1960 (Public Law 86-669, 74 Stat. 537), as amended by Section 7 of the National Capital Transportation Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-173, 79 Stat. 666) is hereby repealed.
Section 6. (a) The right to alter, amend or repeal this Act is hereby expressly reserved. (b) The Authority shall submit to Congress and the President copies of all annual and special reports made to the Governors, the Commissioners of the District of Columbia and/or the legislatures of the compacting States. (c) The President and the Congress or any committee thereof shall have the right to require the disclosure and furnishing of such information by the Authority as they may deem appropriate. Further, the President and Congress or any of its committees shall have access to all books, records and papers of the Authority as well as the right of inspection of any facility used, owned, leased, regulated or under the control of said Authority. (d) In carrying out the audits provided for in Section 70 (b) of the Compact the representatives of the General Accounting Office shall have access to all books, accounts, financial records, reports, files, and all other papers, things or property belonging to or in use by the Board and necessary to facilitate the audit, and they shall be afforded full facilities for verifying transactions with the balances or securities held by depositories, agents, and custodians.
Attachment 2 A2-42 COMPACT HISTORY
To the date of this publication, the Compact was adopted and has been amended in chronological order as follows (a section-by-section cross-reference table follows):
A. Ch. 869, Acts of General Assembly (1965). Adopted original Compact for Maryland.
B. Ch. 2, 1966 Acts of Assembly. Adopted original Compact for Virginia.
C. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact, Pub. L. No. 89-774, 80 Stat. 1324 (1966). Adopted original Compact for the District of Columbia and granted the consent of Congress to the WMATA Compact as Title III of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact (Pub. L. No. 86-794, 74 Stat. 1031 (1960)). See, “Consent Legislation,” above.
D. “National Capital Transportation Act of 1972,” Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 Stat. 464 (1972). Amended Sections 1(g), 5(a), 21, 35, 39, 51, 66 and 79.
E. “National Capital Area Transit Act of 1972,” Pub. L. No. 92-517, 86 Stat. 999 (1972). Amended Sections 56 and 82.
F. Act of June 4, 1976, Pub. L. No. 94-306, 90 Stat. 672 (herein, “Metro Transit Police Act of 1976,” amending Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact (“WMATRC”) to provide for the protection of WMATA patrons, personnel and property). Inserted Section 1(h) and amended Section 76.
G. Act of April 7, 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-285, 102 Stat. 82 (herein, “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 1988,” amending WMATRC relating to public hearing requirements, investment flexibility, procurement and public safety). Amended Sections 62(a), 69(a), 69(b), 73, 76(a) and 76(c).
H. Act of Oct. 19, 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. 3884 (herein, “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 1996”). Amended Sections 3, 5(a), 8(a), 14(b), 15(a), 15(b), 70(a), 73, 81 and 84.
I. Act of Dec. 16, 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-151, 111 Stat. 2686 (herein, “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 1997”). Amended Sections 62(a), 62(i), 76(b) and 76(e).
J. Act of Aug. 19, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-62, 123 Stat. 1998 (herein, “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 2009,” amending the WMATRC as specified by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-432, § 601, 122 Stat.4848, 4968-70). Amended Section 5, inserted Section 9(d) and added Section 18(d).
Attachment 2 A2-43
Table of Amendments by Section
Sections not listed have not been amended. Column labels (D-J) are references to Acts listed above. Row entries indicate whether only a particular subsection was amended, e.g. “5(a),” or amendments occurred throughout the section, e.g. “5.”
Section D E F G H I J 1 1(g) 1(h) (inserted) 3 3 5 5(a) 5(a) 5 8 8(a) 9 9(d) (inserted) 14 14(b) 15 15(a), (b) 18 18(d) (added) 21 21 35 35 39 39 51 51 56 56(e) 62 62(a) 62(a), (c) 66 66 69 69(a), (b) 70 70(a) 73 73 73 76 76 76(a), (c) 76(b), (e) 79 79 81 81 82 82(a) 84 84
Attachment 2 A2-44 NOTES
1 Subsection 1(g) amended as shown by National consisting of two Directors for each signatory. For Capital Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92- Virginia, the Directors shall be appointed by the 349, 86 Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; for the 265, Ch. 776, Sec. 317-1(g) (1971); 1972 Virginia District of Columbia, by the Council of the District of Acts of Assembly, Ch. 1591. Columbia; and for Maryland, by the Washington Suburban Transit Commission. For Virginia and Original text read: 1(g) “Transit services” means the Maryland, the Directors shall be appointed from transportation of persons and their packages and among the members of the appointing body, except baggage by means of transit facilities between points as otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a within the Zone and includes the transportation of term coincident with their term on the appointing newspapers, express and mail between such points body. A Director may be removed or suspended from but does not include taxicab, sightseeing or charter office only as provided by the law of the signatory service. from which he was appointed. The appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate for each Subsection 1(h) inserted by Metro Transit Police Act Director, who may act only in the absence of the of 1976, Pub. L. No. 94-306 (1976); Maryland Senate Director for whom he has been appointed an Bill No. 733, Ch. 586, Sec. 317-1(H) (1974); D.C. Law alternate, except that, in the case of the District of 1-67, 23 DCR 501 (1972); 1977 Virginia Acts of Columbia where only one Director and his alternate Assembly, Ch. 627. are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate shall serve at the 2 Section 3 amended as shown by Washington pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. be filled in the same manner as an original 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; 1995 Acts of appointment. Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law 11-138 See, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit (1996). Regulation Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Original text read: 3. There is hereby created the Ch. 489; 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Zone which D.C. Law 11-138 (1996). shall embrace the District of Columbia, the cities of Alexandria, Falls Church and Fairfax and the counties Prior amended text read: 5(a) The Authority shall be of Arlington and Fairfax and political subdivisions of governed by a Board of six Directors consisting of two the Commonwealth of Virginia located within those Directors for each signatory. For Virginia, the counties, and the counties of Montgomery and Prince Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia George’s in the State of Maryland and political Transportation Commission; for the District of subdivisions of the State of Maryland located in said Columbia by the City Council of the District of counties. Columbia from among its members, the Commissioner and the Assistant to the Commissioner 3 Section 5 amended as shown by Washington of the District of Columbia; and for Maryland, by the Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Washington Suburban Transit Commission. In each Amendments of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-62, 123 Stat. instance the Director shall be appointed from among 1998; 2009 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 111; 2009 Acts of the members of the appointing body, except as Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771; D.C. Law 18-0125 otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a term (2010) (The District of Columbia Council first passed coincident with his term on the body by which he was Compact amendments in response to the Passenger appointed. A director may be removed or suspended Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 by from office only as provided by the law of the emergency legislation, D.C. Act 18-0095 (2009), signatory from which he was appointed. The which was timely superseded by temporary appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate legislation, D.C. law 18-0042 (2009), which was in for each Director, who may act only in the absence of turn timely superseded by permanent legislation, D.C. the Director for whom he has been appointed an Law 18-0125 (2010).); Passenger Rail Investment alternate, except that, in the case of the District of and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-432, Columbia where only one Director and his alternate 122 Stat. 4848. are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate shall serve at the Previously amended text read: 5(a) The Authority pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a shall be governed by a Board of six Directors vacancy in the office of Director or alternate, it shall
Attachment 2 A2-45 be filled in the same manner as an original plan adopted, altered, revised or amended by the appointment. unanimous vote of the Directors representing any two See, National Capital Transportation Act of 1972, Signatories. Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. 776, Sec. 317-5 (1971); 1972 5 Subsection 9(a) amended as shown and subsection Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 571. 9(d) inserted by Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 2009, Original text read: 5(a) The Authority shall be Pub. L. No. 111-62, 123 Stat. 1998; 2009 Laws of governed by a Board of six Directors consisting of two Maryland, Ch. 111; 2009 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Directors for each signatory. For Virginia, the Ch. 771; D.C. Law 18-0125 (2010); Passenger Rail Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. Transportation Commission; for the District of 110-432, 122 Stat. 4848. Columbia, by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia; and for Maryland, by the Washington Original text read: 9(a) The officers of the Authority, Suburban Transit Commission. In each instance the none of whom shall be members of the Board, shall Director shall be appointed from among the members consist of a general manager, a secretary, a of the appointing body and shall serve for a term treasurer, a comptroller and a general counsel and coincident with his term on the body by which he was such other officers as the Board may provide. Except appointed. A Director may be removed or suspended for the office of general manager and comptroller, the from office only as provided by the law of the Board may consolidate any of such other offices in signatory from which he was appointed. The one person. All such officers shall be appointed and appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate may be removed by the Board, shall serve at the for each Director, who may act only in the absence of pleasure of the Board and shall perform such duties the Director for whom he has been appointed an and functions as the Board shall specify. The Board alternate, and each alternate shall serve at the shall fix and determine the compensation to be paid to pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a all officers and, except for the general manager who vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall shall be a full-time employee, all other officers may be be filled in the same manner as an original hired on a full-time or part-time basis and may be appointment. compensated on a salary or fee basis, as the Board (b) Before entering upon the duties of his office may determine. All employees and such officers as each Director and alternate director shall take and the Board may designate shall be appointed and subscribe to the following oath (or affirmation) of removed by the general manager under such rules of office or any such other oath or affirmation, if any, as procedure and standards as the Board may the Constitution or laws of the signatory he represents determine. shall provide: (b) The general manager shall be the chief “I, , hereby solemnly swear administrative officer of the Authority and, subject to (or affirm) that I will support and defend the policy direction by the Board, shall be responsible for Constitution of the United States and the Constitution all activities of the Authority. and Laws of the state or political jurisdiction from (c) The treasurer shall be the custodian of the which I was appointed as a director (alternate funds of the Authority, shall keep an account of all director) of the Board of Washington Metropolitan receipts and disbursements and shall make payments Area Transit Authority and will faithfully discharge the only upon warrants duly and regularly signed by the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter.” Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Board, or other person authorized by the Board to do so, and by the 4 Subsection 8(a) amended as shown by Washington secretary or general manager; provided, however, Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact that the Board may provide that warrants not Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. exceeding such amounts or for such purposes as may 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; 1995 Acts of from time to time be specified by the Board may be Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law 11-138 signed by the general manager or by persons (1996). designated by him. (d) An oath of office in the form set out in Original text read: 8(a) Four Directors or alternates Section 5(b) of this Article shall be taken, subscribed consisting of at least one Director or alternate and filed with the Board by all appointed officers. appointed from each Signatory, shall constitute a (e) Each Director, officer and employees quorum and no action by the Board shall be effective specified by the Board shall give such bond in such unless a majority of the Board, which majority shall form and amount as the Board may require, the include at least one Director or alternate from each premium for which shall be paid by the Authority. Signatory, concur therein, provided, however, that a plan of financing may be adopted or a mass transit
Attachment 2 A2-46 6 An additional subsection, 12(n), appears in Virginia Maryland State Planning Department; and (11) the legislation, but is not effective because it was not private transit companies operating in the Zone and adopted by all three Signatories or consented to by the Labor Unions representing the employees of such Congress. The additional but ineffective subsection companies and employees of contractors providing states, “Establish regulations providing for public service under operating contracts. access to Board Records.” See, 2009 Acts of Information with respect thereto shall be released Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771. to the public. A copy of the proposed mass transit plan, amendment or revision shall be kept at the office 7 Subsection 14(b) amended as shown by of the Board and shall be available for public Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation inspection. After thirty days’ notice published once a Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, week for two successive weeks in one or more 110 Stat. 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; newspapers of general circulation within the Zone, a 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law public hearing shall be held with respect to the 11-138 (1996). proposed plan, alteration, revision or amendment. The thirty days’ notice shall begin to run on the first Original text read: 14(b) It shall be the duty and day the notice appears in any such newspaper. The responsibility of each member of the Board to serve Board shall consider the evidence submitted and as liaison between the Board and the body which statements and comments made at such hearing and appointed him to the Board. To provide a framework may make any changes in the proposed plan, for regional participation in the planning process, the amendment or revision which it deems appropriate Board shall create technical committees concerned and such changes may be made without further with planning and collection and analyses of data hearing. relative to decision-making in the transportation 9 planning process and the Commissioners of the Original and current subsection 18(c) as shown. A District of Columbia, the component governments of different version of subsection 18(c) appears in the the Northern Virginia Transportation District and the Maryland Code and Virginia legislation, but the Washington Suburban Transit District shall appoint Maryland and Virginia version is not effective because representatives to such technical committees and it was not adopted by all three Signatories or otherwise cooperate with the Board in the formulation consented to by Congress. The different and of a mass transit plan, or in revisions, alterations or ineffective version of subsection 18(c) states, “With amendments thereof. respect to the federal government, the commitment or obligation to render financial assistance shall be 8 Subsections 15(a)(1), 15(a)(3) and second created by appropriation or in such other manner, or paragraph of Section 15 amended as shown by by such other legislation, as the Congress shall Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation determine. Commitments by the District of Columbia Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, shall be by contract or agreement between the 110 Stat. 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; governing body of the District of Columbia and the 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law Authority, pursuant to which the Authority undertakes, 11-138 (1996) (also designating second paragraph as subject to the provisions of Section 20 hereof, to subsection (b)). provide transit facilities and service in consideration for the undertaking by the District of Columbia to Original text read: 15(a) Before a mass transit plan is contribute to the capital required for the construction adopted, altered, revised or amended, the Board shall and/or acquisition of facilities specified in a mass transmit such proposed plan, alteration, revision or transit plan adopted as provided in Article VI, or in any amendment for comment to the following and to such alteration, revision or amendment thereof, and for other agencies as the Board shall determine: (1) the meeting expenses and obligations incurred in the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, the operation of such facilities.” See, 1996 Laws of Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Maryland, Ch. 489 (also Md. Code. Ann. Transp. §10- Washington Suburban Transit Commission; (2) the 204 (2009)), and 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, governing bodies of the Counties and Cities Ch. 150 (also 2009 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. embraced within the Zone; (3) the highway agencies 771). of the Signatories; (4) the Washington Metropolitan 10 Area Transit Commission; (5) the Washington Subsection 18(d) inserted by Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments; (6) the National Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Capital Planning Commission; (7) The National Amendments of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-62, 123 Stat. Capital Regional Planning Council; (8) the Maryland- 1998; 2009 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 111; 2009 Acts of National Capital Park and Planning Commission; (9) Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771; D.C. Law 18-0125 the Northern Virginia Regional Planning and (2010); Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Economic Development Commission; (10) the Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-432, 122 Stat. 4848.
Attachment 2 A2-47 par or face value thereof if such sale would result in a 11 Section 21 amended as shown by National Capital net interest cost to the Authority calculated upon the Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 entire issue so sold of more than six percent per Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. annum payable semiannually, according to standard 776, Sec. 317-21 (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of tables of bond values. All bonds issued and sold Assembly, Ch. 571. pursuant to this Title may be sold in such manner, either at public or private sale, as the Board shall Original text read: 21. The Board may borrow, in determine. anticipation of receipts, from any signatory, the 15 Washington Suburban Transit District, the Northern Section 51 amended as shown by National Capital Virginia Transportation District, or any component Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 government thereof, or from any lending institution for Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. any purposes of this Title, including administrative 776, Sec. 317-21 (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of expenses. Such loans shall be for a term not to Assembly, Ch. 571. exceed two years and at a rate of interest not to exceed six percent per annum. The signatories and Original text read: 51. The Authority shall not perform any such political subdivision or agency may, in its transit service, nor any of the functions, such as discretion, make such loans from any available maintenance of equipment and right of way normally money. associated with the providing of such service, with any transit facilities owned or controlled by it but shall 12 Section 35 amended as shown by National Capital provide for the performance of transit service with Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 such facilities by contract or contracts with private Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. transit companies, private railroads, or other persons. 776, Sec. 317-35 (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of Any facilities and properties owned or controlled by Assembly, Ch. 571. the Authority, other than those utilized in performing transit service, may be operated by the Authority or by Original text read: 35. Bonds shall bear interest at a others pursuant to contract or lease as the Board may rate of not to exceed six percent per annum, payable determine. All operations of such facilities and annually or semiannually. properties by the Authority and by its Contractor and lessees shall be within the Zone. 13 An additional clause appears in the first sentence of Section 37 in the Maryland and Virginia legislation, 16 Subsection 56(e) inserted by National Capital but the Maryland and Virginia clause is not effective Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-517, 86 because it was not adopted by all three Signatories or Stat. 999 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. consented to by Congress. The additional but 776, Sec. 317-56e (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of ineffective clause states (underlined portion), “The Assembly, Ch. 571. Board may provide for the execution and authentication of bonds by the manual, lithographed 17 Subsections 62(a) and (c) amended as shown by or printed facsimile signature of members of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation board, and by additional authentication by a trustee or Compact Amendments of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-151, fiscal agent appointed by the board; provided, 111 Stat. 2686; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 686 and however, that one of such signatures shall be manual; 1997 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 91; 1995 Acts of and provided, further, that no such additional Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law 11-138 authentication or manual signatures need be required (1996). in the case of bonds guaranteed by the United States of America.” See, Md. Code. Ann. Transp. §10-204 Previously amended text read: 62(a) The Board shall (2009), 2009 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771. not make or change any fare or rate, nor establish or abandon any service except after holding a public 14 Section 39 amended as shown by National Capital hearing with respect thereto, except for service Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 changes required by an emergency; minor service Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. changes as defined by regulations promulgated by 776, Sec. 317-39 (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of the Board; experimental service established to test Assembly, Ch. 571. the effect of such service, and in effect for not more than six months; and fare and service changes Original text read: 39. The Board may fix terms and established for special events. conditions for the sale or other disposition of any See, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit authorized issue of bonds. The Board may sell bonds Regulation Compact Amendments of 1988, Pub. L. at less than their par or face value but no issue of No. 100-285, 102 Stat. 82 (1988); 1984 Md. Laws, bonds may be sold at an aggregate price below the Chs. 674, 675; 1984 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch.
Attachment 2 A2-48 610; 1987 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 112; D.C. of Title 29, United States Code, through accredited Law 5-122 (1984). representatives of such employees or representatives of any labor organization authorized to act for such Original text of subsections (a) and (c) read: (a) The employees concerning wages, salaries, hours, Board shall not make or change any fare or rate, nor working conditions, and pension or retirement establish or abandon any service except after holding provisions. Each such contract entered into after the a public hearing with respect thereto. effective date of this act shall prohibit the contracting (c) The Board shall give at least thirty days’ employees from engaging in any strike or an notice for all hearings. The notice shall be given by employer from engaging in any lockout. publication in a newspaper of daily circulation “(c) In case of any labor dispute involving the throughout the Zone and such notice shall be Authority and such employees where collective published once a week for two successive weeks. bargaining does not result in agreement, either party The notice shall start with the day of first publication. may declare that an impasse has been reached In addition, the Board shall post notices of the hearing between the parties and may, by written notification to in its offices, all stations and terminals, and in all of its the other party and to the Federal Mediation and vehicles and rolling stock in revenue service. Conciliation Service, request the Service to appoint a mediator for the purpose of assisting them in 18 Section 66 amended as shown by National Capital reconciling their differences and resolving the Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 controversy on terms which are mutually acceptable. Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. Within five days of the receipt of the request the 776, Sec. 317-66e (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service shall Assembly, Ch. 571. appoint a mediator in accordance with its rules and procedures for such appointment. The mediator shall Original text read: 66. It shall be a condition of the meet with the parties forthwith, either jointly or operation of the transit facilities owned or controlled separately, and shall take such steps as he or she by the Authority that the provisions of section 10(c) of deems appropriate to persuade the parties to resolve the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 (49 their differences and effect a mutually acceptable U.S.C. 1609(c)) shall be applicable to any contract or agreement. The mediator shall not, however, make other arrangement for the operation of such facilities. findings of fact or recommend terms of settlement. Each party shall pay one-half of the expenses of such Section 66 is entitled “Labor Standards” in the mediator. If the mediator is unable to effect settlement Maryland Code, but this title is not effective because it of the controversy within fifteen days after his or her was not adopted by all three Signatories or consented appointment, the Authority shall submit to by Congress. See, Md. Code. Ann. Transp. §10- such dispute to fact finding by a board composed of 204 (2009). three persons, one appointed by the Authority, one appointed by the labor organization representing the A different version of Section 66 (different as to employees, and a third member to be agreed upon by subsections (a)-(c) and inserting an additional the labor organization and the Authority. The member subsection (f)) appears in the Virginia legislation, but agreed upon by the labor organization and the the Virginia version is not effective because it was not Authority shall act as chairman of the board. The adopted by all three Signatories or consented to by determination of the majority of the fact finding board Congress. The different and ineffective version of thus established shall be advisory as to all matters in subsections (a)-(c) and additional subsection (f), dispute. If after a period of ten days from the date of state: “(a) The rights, benefits, and other employee the appointment of the two persons representing the protective conditions and remedies of § 13 (c) of the Authority and the labor organization, the third person Federal Transit Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. Section has not been selected, then either of the two persons 5333 (b)), as determined by the Secretary of Labor, may request the Federal Mediation and Conciliation shall apply to Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Service to furnish a list of five persons from which the Authority employees otherwise covered by the Act. third person shall be selected; provided, however, that The Authority shall extend to employees whose the list shall not include the name of the person who positions are adversely affected by the expenditure of served as mediator unless inclusion of his or her federal funds obtained by WMATA pursuant to name is mutually agreed to by both parties. The congressional appropriations, the rights, benefits, and persons appointed by the Authority and the labor other employee protective conditions and remedies of organization, promptly after the receipt of such list section 13 (c) of the Federal Transit Act, as amended shall determine by lot the order of elimination, and (49 U.S.C. § 5333(b)). thereafter each shall in that order alternately eliminate “(b) The Authority shall deal with and enter into one name until only one name remains. The written contracts with employees as defined in § 152 remaining person on the list shall be the third member of the fact finding board. The term ‘labor dispute’ shall
Attachment 2 A2-49 be broadly construed and shall include any of, or guaranteed as to interest and principal by, the controversy concerning wages, salaries, hours, United States, Maryland, Virginia or the political working conditions, or benefits including health and subdivisions or agencies thereof. welfare, sick leave, insurance or pension or retirement provisions but not limited thereto, and including any 20 Subsection 70(a) amended as shown by controversy concerning any differences or questions Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation that may arise between the parties including but not Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, limited to the making or maintaining of collective 110 Stat. 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; bargaining agreements, the terms to be included in 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law such agreements, and the interpretation or application 11-138 (1996). of such collective bargaining agreements. Each party shall pay one-half of the expenses of such fact Original text read: 70(a) As soon as practical after the finding. Under no circumstances may the parties closing of the fiscal year, an audit shall be made of resort to binding arbitration after the date of the financial accounts of the Authority. The audit shall enactment of this act or the expiration date of any be made by qualified certified public accountants contract requiring binding arbitration, whichever is selected by the Board, who shall have no personal later. This prohibition against binding arbitration shall interest direct or indirect in the financial affairs of the not be interpreted to preclude such arbitration of Authority or any of its officers or employees. The individual employee grievances.” report of audit shall be prepared in accordance with “(f) The Authority shall not require any person, as generally accepted auditing principles and shall be a condition of employment or continuation of filed with the Chairman and other officers as the employment, to join any labor union or labor Board shall direct. Copies of the report shall be organization. The Authority shall not require any distributed to each Director, to the Congress, to the person, as a condition of employment or continuation Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia, of employment, to pay any dues, fees, or other to the Governors of Virginia and Maryland, to the charges of any kind to any labor union or labor Washington Suburban Transit Commission, to the organization.” Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and to See, 2009 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771. the governing bodies of the political subdivisions located within the Zone which are parties to 19 Section 69 amended as shown by Washington commitments for participation in the financing of the Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Authority and shall be made available for public Amendments of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-285, 102 Stat. distribution. 82; 1984 Md. Laws, Chs. 674, 675; 1984 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 610; 1987 Virginia Acts of 21 Section 73 amended as shown by Washington Assembly, Ch. 112; D.C. Law 5-122 (1984). Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. Original text read: 69(a) The Board may provide for 3884; 1995 Acts of the Maryland General Assembly, the creation and administration of such funds as may Ch. 252; 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; be required. The funds shall be disbursed in D.C. Law 11-138 (1996). accordance with rules established by the Board and all payments from any funds shall be reported to the Previously amended text read: 73. Contracts for the Board. Monies in such funds and other monies of the construction, reconstruction or improvement of any Authority shall be deposited, as directed by the Board, facility when the expenditure required exceeds in any state or national bank located in the Zone twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) and contracts having a total paid-in capital of at least one million for the purchase of supplies, equipment and materials dollars ($1,000,000). The trust department of any when the expenditure required exceeds ten thousand such state or national bank may be designated as a dollars ($10,000) shall be advertised and let upon depositary to receive any securities acquired or sealed bids to the lowest responsible bidder. Notice owned by the Authority. The restriction with respect to requesting such bids shall be published in a manner paid-in capital may be waived for any such bank reasonably likely to attract prospective bidders, which which agrees to pledge federal securities to protect publication shall be made at least ten days before the funds and securities of the Authority in such bids are received and in at least two newspapers of amounts and pursuant to such arrangements as may general circulation in the Zone. The Board may reject be acceptable to the Board. any and all bids and readvertise in its discretion. If (b) Any monies of the Authority may, in the after rejecting bids the Board determines and resolves discretion of the Board and subject to any agreement that, in its opinion, the supplies, equipment and or covenant between the Authority and the holders of materials may be purchased at a lower price in the any of its obligations limiting or restricting classes of open market, the Board may give each responsible investments, be invested in bonds or other obligations bidder an opportunity to negotiate a price and may
Attachment 2 A2-50 proceed to purchase the supplies, equipment and materials in the open market at a negotiated price (a) the purchase is to be made from or the which is lower than the lowest rejected bid of a contract is to be made with the federal or any State responsible bidder, without further observance of the government or any agency or political subdivision provisions requiring bids or notice. The Board shall thereof or pursuant to any open end bulk purchase adopt rules and regulations to provide for purchasing contract of any of them; from the lowest responsible bidder when sealed bids, (b) the public exigency requires the immediate notice and publication are not required by this section. delivery of the articles; The Board may suspend and waive the provisions of (c) only one source of supply is available; or this section requiring competitive bids whenever: (d) the equipment to be purchased is of a (a) the purchase is to be made from or the technical nature and the procurement thereof without contract is to be made with the Federal or any State advertising is necessary in order to assure government or any agency or political subdivision standardization of equipment and interchangeability of thereof or pursuant to any open-end bulk-purchase parts in the public interest. contract of any of them; 22 (b) the public exigency requires the immediate Subsections 76(a) and 76(c) amended as shown by delivery of the articles; Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation (c) only one source of supply is available; or Compact Amendments of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-285, (d) the equipment to be purchased is of a 102 Stat. 82; 1984 Md. Laws, Chs. 674, 675; 1984 technical nature and the procurement thereof without Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 610, 1987 Virginia Acts advertising is necessary in order to assure of Assembly, Ch. 112, D.C. Law 5-122 (1984). standardization of equipment and interchangeability of parts in the public interest. Subsections 76(a) and 76(c) previously read: (a) The See, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority is authorized to establish and maintain a Regulation Compact Amendments of 1988, Pub. L. regular police force, to be known as the Metro Transit No. 100-285, 102 Stat. 82; 1984 Md. Laws, Chs. 674, Police, to provide protection for its patrons, personnel, 675; 1984 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 610; 1987 and transit facilities. The Metro Transit Police shall Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 112, D.C. Law 5-122 have the powers and duties and shall be subject to (1984). the limitations set forth in this section. It shall be composed of both uniformed and plainclothes Original text read: 73. Contracts for the construction, personnel and shall be charged with the duty of reconstruction or improvement of any facility when the enforcing the laws of the signatories, the laws, expenditure required exceeds ten thousand dollars ordinances, and regulations of the political ($10,000) and contracts for the purchase of supplies, subdivisions thereof in the Transit Zone, and the rules equipment and materials when the expenditure and regulations of the Authority. The jurisdiction of the required exceeds two thousand five hundred dollars Metro Transit Police shall be limited to all the transit ($2,500) shall be advertised and let upon sealed bids facilities owned, controlled, or operated by the to the lowest responsible bidder. Notice requesting Authority, but this shall not limit the power of the such bids shall be published in a manner reasonably Metro Transit Police to make arrests in the Transit likely to attract prospective bidders, which publication Zone for violations committed upon, to, or against shall be made at least ten days before bids are such transit facilities committed from within or outside received and in at least two newspapers of general such transit facilities while in hot or close pursuit, or to circulation in the Zone. The Board may reject any and execute traffic citations and criminal process in all bids and readvertise in its discretion. If after accordance with subsection (c). The members of the rejecting bids the Board determines and resolves that, Metro Transit Police shall have concurrent jurisdiction in its opinion, the supplies, equipment and materials in the performance of their duties with the duly may be purchased at a lower price in the open constituted law enforcement agencies of the market, the Board may give each responsible bidder signatories and of the political subdivisions thereof in an opportunity to negotiate a price and may proceed which any transit facilities of the Authority is located or to purchase the supplies, equipment and materials in in which the Authority operates any transit service. the open market at a negotiated price which is lower Nothing contained in this section shall either relieve than the lowest rejected bid of a responsible bidder, any signatory or political subdivision or agency without further observance of the provisions requiring thereof from its duty to provide police, fire, and other bids or notice. The Board shall adopt rules and public safety service and protection, or limit, restrict, regulations to provide for purchasing from the lowest or interfere with the jurisdiction of or the performance responsible bidder when sealed bids, notice and of duties by the existing police, fire, and other public publication are not required by this section. The Board safety agencies. may suspend and waive the provisions of this section (c) Members of the Metro Transit Police shall requiring competitive bids whenever: have power to execute on the transit facilities owned,
Attachment 2 A2-51 controlled, or operated by the Authority any traffic criminal process issued by any court of any signatory citation or any criminal process issued by any court of or of any political subdivision of a signatory, for any any signatory or of any political subdivision of a felony, misdemeanor or other offense against laws, signatory, for any felony, misdemeanor, or other ordinances, rules, or regulations of the Authority or of offense against the laws, ordinances, rules, or the signatory or its political subdivisions as specified regulations specified in subsection (a). However, with in subsection (a). See, Md. Code. Ann. Transp. §10- respect to offenses committed upon, to, or against the 204 (2009). transit facilities owned, controlled, or operated by the 23 Authority, the Metro Transit Police shall have power, Subsections 76(b) and 76(e) amended as shown by except in the State of Maryland, to execute criminal Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation process within the Transit Zone. Compact Amendments of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-151, See, Metro Transit Police Act of 1976, Pub. L. 111 Stat. 2686; 1997 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 699; No. 94-306, 90 Stat. 672 (1976); Maryland House Bill 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law No. 733, Ch. 586, Sec. 317-76 (a)-(h) (1974); D.C. 11-138 (1996). Law 1-67, 23 DCR 501 (1976); 1977 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 627. Subsections 76(b) and 76(e) previously read: (b) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a Original text read: 76. The Board is authorized to member of the Metro Transit Police shall have the employ watchmen, guards and investigators as it may same powers, including the power of arrest, and shall deem necessary for the protection of its properties, be subject to the same limitations, including personnel and passengers and such employees, regulatory limitations, in the performance of his duties when authorized by any jurisdiction within the Zone, as a member of the duly constituted police force of may serve as special police officers in any such the political subdivision in which the Metro Transit jurisdiction. Nothing contained herein shall relieve Police member is engaged in the performance of his any signatory or political subdivision or agency duties. However, a member of the Metro Transit thereof from its duty to provide police service and Police is authorized to carry and use only such protection or to limit, restrict or interfere with the weapons, including handguns, as are issued by the jurisdiction of or performance of duties by the existing Authority, and only in the performance of his duties or police and law enforcement agencies. while on the transit facilities owned, controlled, or operated by the Authority in direct transit to and from Section 76 is entitled “Metro transit policy; rules and a duty assignment. A member of the Metro Transit regulations” in the Maryland Code, and “Police Police is authorized to carry such weapons only while Security” in Virginia legislation, but these titles is not in direct transit to and from a duty assignment and is effective because they were not adopted by all three subject to such additional limitations in the use of Signatories or consented to by Congress. See, Md. weapons as are imposed on the duly constituted Code. Ann. Transp. §10-204 (2009); 2009 Acts of police force for the political subdivision in which he is Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771. engaged in the performance of his duties. (e) The Authority shall have the power to adopt An additional clause in 76(a) appears in the Virginia rules and regulations for the safe, convenient, and legislation, but Virginia clause is not effective because orderly use of the transit facilities owned, controlled, it was not adopted by all three Signatories or or operated by the Authority, including the payment consented to by Congress. The additional but and the manner of the payment of fares or charges ineffective clause states, “On-duty Metro Transit therefore, the protection of the transit facilities, the Policy officers are authorized to make arrests off of control of traffic and parking upon the transit facilities, Transit facilities within the Transit Zone when and the safety and protection of the riding public. In immediate action is necessary to protect the health, the event that any such rules and regulations safety, welfare or property of an individual from actual contravene the laws, ordinances, rules or regulations of threatened harm or from an unlawful act.” See, of a signatory or any political subdivision thereof 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150 (also 2009 which are existing or subsequently enacted, these Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771). laws, ordinances, rules, or regulations of the signatory or the political subdivision shall apply and the An additional clause in the first sentence of 76(c) conflicting rule or regulation, or portion thereof, of the appears in the Maryland Code, but is not effective Authority shall be void within the jurisdiction of that because it was not adopted by all three Signatories or signatory or political subdivision. In all other respects consented to by Congress. The additional but the rules and regulations of the Authority shall be ineffective clause states (underlined portion), uniform throughout the Transit Zone. The rules and “Members of the metro transit police shall have power regulations established under this subsection shall be to execute on the transit facilities owned, controlled, adopted and published in accordance with all or operated by the Authority any traffic citation or any standards of due process, including, but not limited to,
Attachment 2 A2-52 27 the publishing or otherwise circulating of a notice of Section 84 amended as shown by Washington the intended action of the Authority and the affording Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact to interested persons the opportunity to submit data or Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. views orally or in writing, and the holding of a public 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; 1995 Acts of hearing. Any person violating any rule or regulation of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law 11-138 the Authority shall, upon conviction by a court of (1996). competent jurisdiction, pay a fine of not more than $250 and costs. Original text read: 84. Amendments and supplements See, Metro Transit Police Act of 1976, Pub. L. to this Title to implement the purposes thereof may be No. 94-306, 90 Stat. 672 (1976); Maryland House Bill adopted by legislative action of any of the signatory No. 733, Ch. 586, Sec. 317-76 (a)-(h) (1974); D.C. parties concurred in by all of the others. Law 1-67, 23 DCR 501 (1976); 1977 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 627 (this legislation also adopted and 28 Original and current Section 86 as shown. A consented to subsections 76(d), (f), (g) and (h) as different version of the final clause appears in the shown). Maryland Code and Virginia legislation, but the Maryland and Virginia version is not effective because 24 Section 79 amended as shown by National Capital it was not adopted by all three Signatories or Transportation Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-349, 86 consented to by Congress. The different and Stat. 464 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. ineffective clause states (underlined portion), 776, Sec. 317-79 (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of “including the signing an execution of the Title by the Assembly, Ch. 571. Governors of Maryland and Virginia and the Mayor and Council of the District of Columbia.” See, Md. Original text read: 79. All laws of the signatories with Code. Ann. Transp. §10-204 (2009), and 2009 Acts of respect to free transportation and school fares shall Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 771. be applicable to transit service rendered by facilities owned or controlled by the Authority.
25 Section 81 amended as shown by Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact Amendments of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-322, 110 Stat. 3884; 1996 Laws of Maryland, Ch. 489; 1995 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, Ch. 150; D.C. Law 11-138 (1996).
Original text read: 81. The United States District Courts shall have original jurisdiction, concurrent with the Courts of Maryland and Virginia, of all actions brought by or against the Authority and to enforce subpoenas issued under this Title. Any such action initiated in a State Court shall be removable to the appropriate United States District Court in the manner provided by Act of June 25, 1948, as amended (28 U.S.C. 1446).
26 Subsection 82(a) amended as shown by National Capital Transit Act of 1972, Pub. L. No. 92-517, 86 Stat. 999 (1972); Maryland House Bill No. 265, Ch. 776, Sec. 317-82a (1971); 1972 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Ch. 571.
Original text read: 82(a) The Authority shall have the power to acquire by condemnation, whenever in its opinion it is necessary or advantageous to the Authority to do so, any real or personal property, or any interest therein, necessary or useful for the transit system authorized herein, except property owned by the United States, by a signatory, or any political subdivision thereof, or by a private transit company.
Attachment 2 A2-53 Attachment 3 A3-1 Attachment 3 A3-2 Attachment 3 A3-3 Attachment 3 A3-4 Attachment 3 A3-5 Attachment 3 A3-6 Attachment 3 A3-7 Attachment 3 A3-8 Attachment 3 A3-9 Attachment 3 A3-10 Attachment 3 A3-11 Attachment 3 A3-12 Attachment 3 A3-13 Attachment 3 A3-14 Attachment 3 A3-15 Attachment 3 A3-16 Attachment 3 A3-17 Attachment 3 A3-18 Attachment 3 A3-19 Attachment 3 A3-20 Attachment 3 A3-21 Attachment 3 A3-22 Attachment 3 A3-23 Attachment 3 A3-24 Attachment 3 A3-25 Attachment 3 A3-26 Attachment 3 A3-27 Attachment 3 A3-28 Attachment 3 A3-29 Attachment 3 A3-30 Attachment 3 A3-31 Attachment 3 A3-32 Attachment 3 A3-33 Attachment 3 A3-34 Attachment 3 A3-35 Attachment 3 A3-36 Attachment 3 A3-37 Attachment 3 A3-38 Attachment 3 A3-39 Attachment 3 A3-40 Attachment 3 A3-41 Attachment 3 A3-42 Attachment 3 A3-43 Attachment 3 A3-44 Attachment 3 A3-45 Attachment 3 A3-46 Attachment 3 A3-47 Attachment 3 A3-48 Attachment 3 A3-49 Attachment 3 A3-50 2011-2020
Capital Needs Inventory
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
600 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Available online at www.metroopensdoors.com Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Attachment 4 A4-1 Attachment 4 A4-2 Metro Capital Needs Inventory
Table of Contents Contents Introduction 2 Metro’s Role in the Region 2 Overview of Future Transit Demand 6 Metro’s Capital Needs Over the Next Ten Years 9 Strategic Framework 10 Funding the Capital Program 13 Metro System Overview 15
Investment Category: Performance 24 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts 27 Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation 34 Fleet Maintenance Facilities 37 Systems and Technology 42 Track and Structures 46 Passenger Facilities 49 Maintenance Equipment 53 Support Facilities 56 Performance Project Index 60
Investment Category: Customer/Demand 66 Passenger Facilities 70 Fleet Maintenance Facilities 77 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts 80 Systems and Technology 84 Support Facilities 88 Customer/Demand Project Index 91
List of Capital Needs 94
Attachment 4 A4-3 Introduction — Capital Needs Inventory
The Capital Needs Inventory (CNI) documents Metro’s vehicle, infrastructure, fa- cility, technology and system needs over the next ten years (FY 2011 – 2020).
Metro’s Role in the Region Thanks to long-term invest- In FY 2009,1 close to 360 million trips were taken on Metro, with riders traveling ment by jurisdictional partners to work, school, tourist sites and other destinations in the Washington, DC region. and the federal government, Thanks to long-term investment by jurisdictional partners and the federal govern- Metro fulfills a critical role in ment, Metro fulfills a critical role in the region. As Metro faces daunting capital the region. needs over the next 10 years, the region is asked to continue its investment in order to support safety and reliability, preserve current levels of service, address growing ridership and improve the customers’ experience. The reasons to invest in Metro are clear:
• Metro moves people • Metro promotes and supports the region’s economy • Metro improves the environment • Metro strengthens the national capital area’s safety
Metro moves people
Metro is in the business of giving people a transportation choice. Metro directly benefits those who use the transit system, providing regional mobility andac- cess for work, school and recreation. On an average weekday in FY 2009, Metro ridership totaled about 1.2 million (close to 750,000 trips on Metro’s rail system, 440,000 on Metro’s buses and 7,500 on Metro’s paratransit service). Riders come from a 1,500 square mile area containing 3.5 million residents and hundreds of thousands of tourists. Metro is the 2nd largest rail transit system, the 6th largest bus network, and the 8th largest paratransit service provider in the United States.
Without Metro, people would not be able to get to and from work. The 2007/2008 household travel study conducted by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments found that 17% of the region’s commuting trips are on transit. Na- tionally, only 5% of commuting trips are on public transportation (2000 Census). In the center core of Washington, DC and parts of Arlington County, 43% of work- ers use transit. About half of Metrorail stations serve federal facilities, and federal employees make up nearly half of Metro’s peak period commuters. Public transit is also a vital link for citizens with disabilities who rely on MetroAccess, a paratransit service for people who cannot use fixed-route bus or rail systems. Operating in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, MetroAccess meets the needs of thousands of people per day.
1 The Metro fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30. 2 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-4 Looking to the future, the Washington, DC region is projected to experience signifi- cant growth. In a 2008 study, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments projected that from 2005 to 2030, employment in the region is expected to increase by nearly 40%, population by 32% and households by 35%. Given these growth Metro wants to be the ride of patterns, Metro ridership will grow. From 2009 and 2020, average daily Metro- choice for everyone in our re- rail ridership is expected to grow by about 20%. Over the same period, average daily Metrobus ridership is projected to grow by 10-15%. Of all its modal services, gion, including existing and fu- MetroAccess is expected to experience the fastest growing ridership at 112%.2 ture residents and visitors. The investments outlined in this These projections mirror national data indicating more and more people are choosing transit. From 1995-2008, ridership on public transit went up 38%. This Capital Needs Inventory will is faster than the growth in automobile use over this period (21%) or population enable Metro to continue to fill growth (14%). In 2008, there were over 10.7 billion passenger trips on transit in its role as a people mover. the U.S., a 4% increase from 2007.
Metro wants to be the ride of choice for everyone in our region, including existing and future residents and visitors. The investments outlined in the CNI will enable Metro to continue to fill its role as a people mover.
Metro promotes and supports the region’s economy
Besides getting people to and from work, public spending for transit is an invest- ment in job creation. According to a 2009 study by the American Public Trans- portation Association (APTA), every $1 billion of investment in transit capital in- frastructure supports 24,000 jobs. Metro creates direct jobs through its workforce of 10,000 employees which includes bus and rail operators, maintenance tech- nicians, transit police officers, engineers, accountants and employees in many other fields. Metro also supports local job creation and the economy through the purchase of goods and services. Many of these transactions benefit small local businesses and disadvantaged business enterprises.
Over 16.6 million visitors came to DC in 2008, many of whom used Metro to see the sights. Metro’s easy-to-use transit system makes the DC region an even more attractive place to visit. The importance of providing transportation to visitors was never more apparent than on Inauguration Day 2009. To accommodate record number of visitors, Metro operated trains for 22 consecutive hours, including 17 straight hours of rush hour service. This type of “stepped-up service” is also pro- vided for the multitude of other special events that occur in the DC region.
Public transportation contributes to creating places where one wants to invest, live and work. This kind of development is referred to as transit-oriented development (TOD).
2 Regional growth projections from Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Round 7.1 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts (2008). Metrobus and Metrorail ridership projections developed using Round 7.0 forecasts (2006). Paratransit rider- ship projections from HDR|HLB Decision Economics, Inc. study Paratransit Demand Statistical Analysis and Policy Scenario Analysis (2007) and MetroAccess Revenue Vehicle Fleet Management Plan (2009). All studies present projections of future growth and can be impacted by external factors. Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-5 3 TODs are mixed-used communities within walking distance of transit that combines residential, retail, office, open space and public uses in a way that makes it convenient to travel on foot or by public transportation instead of a car. Like a business, transit adds Metro’s Rosslyn-Ballston cor- value to land because of the improved accessibility it creates, but unlike a business, ridor in Arlington County is a transit does not directly capture the value it creates. Instead, an increase in demand for TOD results in an increase in revenue for local communities and property owners. nationally recognized example This in turn supports services provided by local government such as schools, public of how transit can help concen- utilities, police and firefighting. APTA estimates that every dollar invested in public trate, sustain and attract devel- transportation projects generates six dollars in local economic returns. And every $10 opment. million invested brings $30 million in new sales to businesses. Metro’s Rosslyn-Ballston corridor in Arlington County is a nationally recognized ex- ample of how transit can help concentrate, sustain and attract development. When the Ballston Metro station opened in 1979, the area was mostly used-car lots. The County encouraged denser residential development near the station, and with that came more retail. Today the area is filled with restaurants, shops and offices, bringing customers and workers to the area, and as a result, increasing tax revenues. The Urban Land Institute estimated that in Arlington County, development in two Metrorail corridors is concentrated on 6% of the land in the County but produces almost half of the County’s tax revenues. The Wheaton Metro station area in Montgomery County, MD and the U St. and 14th St. corridors in DC have also benefited from their proximity to Metrorail. The DC Office of Planning has stated that the development value within 10-minute walk of Metro stations in DC is $37 billion.
Finally, Metro helps promote the economy by saving people money. Recent re- search by the American Public Transit Association (APTA) estimated that people using public transit save over $9,000 a year in avoided parking, gasoline, insur- ance, maintenance and repairs costs. Metro also benefits those residents who do not use transit. On a daily basis, Metro buses and trains take 500,000 cars off the road reducing congestion thus saving people time. Businesses benefit from Metro’s transit services by spending less on fuel and not having to pay employees to sit in traffic. The Texas Transportation Institute reports that the congestion relief created through Metro services saves people in the region an estimated 26 million hours of travel time and an estimated $521 million each year.
Much of the anticipated new development in the region is expected in areas with transit access, supporting economic growth and providing benefits for local ju- risdictions. The investments outlined in this CNI are investments in the region’s economic future.
Metro improves the environment
Metro provides substantial environmental benefits to the region, eliminating more than 1 million tons of pollutants from the air each year. These reductions are a
4 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-6 result of removing cars from the road and operating an eco-friendly bus fleet. Metro’s nearly 1,500 buses are fueled by a combination of compressed natural gas, advanced technology diesel, and diesel-electric hybrid buses. By using advanced engines, fuel and exhaust treatments, Metro greatly reduces fleet emissions and fuel Metro provides substantial consumption. Nationally public transportation saves the U.S. the equivalent of 34 environmental benefits to the supertankers of oil a year or 900,000 automobile fill-ups every day. region, eliminating more than 1
Public transportation offers an immediate alternative for individuals seeking to million tons of pollutants from reduce their energy use and carbon footprint. The benefits gained by taking public the air each year. transportation far exceeds the combined benefits of using energy-efficient light bulbs, adjusting thermostats, weatherizing one’s home, and replacing a refrigera- tor. According to ATPA, switching to public transportation reduces individual car- bon emissions by 20 pounds per day or 4,800 pounds per year.
Metro’s CNI continues investment in vehicles and technology that protect the environ- ment. In addition, all new and substantially renovated Metro facilities will meet new energy efficient standards such as the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification.
Metro strengthens the national capital area’s security
Metro has the only tri-jurisdictional police force in the United States, operating in the District of Columbia, Virginia and Maryland. Metro’s transit police department (MTPD) consists of 458 sworn officers, security special police and civilian person- nel. The department provides protection for Metro riders, personnel, transit facilities and fare collection operations. MTPD officers have jurisdiction and arrest powers for crimes that occur in or against Metro facilities. Uniformed and plainclothes officers ride Metrobuses and patrol Metrorail trains, stations, and parking lots.
MTPD officers work proactively in the community to reduce crimes within the Metro system. Officers educate riders about how to travel safely and protect their personal belongings from theft. This is done in partnership with two dozen lo- cal, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Officers also work closely with public school administrators and teachers to address student behavior in the Metro system. This includes visits to area schools to talk with students and parents about MTPD efforts and expectations.
MTPD plays a significant role in our region’s security, particularly in the prevention of threats to the transit system and providing emergency response when needed. Several of MTPD’s prevention strategies are visible including uniformed patrols, cameras in stations and chemical and biological detection devices but many are non-visible activities. MTPD works with the FBI Local and National Joint Terrorism Task Force to ensure transit security information is shared in a timely and efficient manner. MTPD’s special operations division includes explosive detection and
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-7 5 anti-terrorism teams, and provides security and crowd control at special events impacting Metro. In the case of a crisis or emergency, Metro serves as a critical evacuation mode for the region.
Statistically, mass transit is the safest mode of transportation. Historically, highway crashes are the leading cause of death among Americans 3 to 34 years old, and the third leading cause of death in the U.S. among all persons under the age of 70. In 2006, there were 31,326 occupant fatalities on U.S. roadways (includes passenger cars, vans, SUVS and light trucks). In the same year, less than 1% of all fatalities occurred on U.S. urban public Metro’s Transit Zone transit systems. Of these, 94 resulted from bus incidents, 125 from rail incidents (light, heavy and commuter) and 8 from other public transit modes. Similarly, of the total transportation injuries in 2006, 99.9% were on U.S. roadways while .01% oc- curred on public transit systems.
The CNI will enable Metro to keep safety and security a priority.
Overview of Future Transit Demand
The Metropolitan Washington Council of Govern- ments projects that from 2005 to 2030 employment in the region is expected to increase by nearly 40%. Population is expected to grow by 32% and households by 35%. Job growth in northern Virginia and the Maryland suburbs is expected to increase by 51% and 38%, respectively, and population growth in Loudoun County is expected to increase by a notable 89%. The District of Columbia is laying the foundation to increase its population by 24% Note: Service to Loudoun County is anticipated to by increasing its housing stock and expanding community-based retail. This phe- begin in FY 2017 with the extension of Metrorail nomenal growth will translate into increased demand for Metrorail, Metrobus and to Dulles Airport. MetroAccess services.
Regional Growth: 2005-2030 Employment Population Metropolitan Total 38% 32% Metro Service Area 33% 23% Inside Beltway 23% 24% Outside Beltway 41% 23% Outer Suburbs 65% 61%
Source: MWCOG Round 7.1 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts, 2008
6 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-8 Metrorail
On an average weekday in FY 2009 there were about 750,000 trips on Metrorail. In FY 2009, there were a total of 223 million Metrorail trips. Looking to the fu- By 2030, Metrorail ridership ture, the Station Access and Capacity Study (2008) estimated that ridership would is expected to be close to 1 grow at about 1.7% per year. The projected growth is primarily driven by system million trips a day. expansion—the Dulles Corridor Metrorail extension—and regional growth. Ad- ditional ridership growth could also occur as a result of increased gas prices or faster household/employment growth. Taking these causal effects into account, overall growth between 2009 and 2020 is estimated at about 20% to 910,000 average weekday trips. By 2030, Metrorail ridership is expected to be close to 1 million trips a day. Inauguration Day 2009 gave Metro a “sneak preview” of what ridership will be like in the future. To accommodate that record ridership (1.1 mil- lion trips on Metrorail), Metro operated trains for 22 consecutive hours, including 17 straight hours of rush hour service. Even with this unprecedented amount of service, customers experienced long lines, crowded platforms and packed trains.
The two figures below illustrate how Metro’s rail system will become overcrowded in the future. Without fleet expansion, most rail lines will be congested by 2020, with the Orange/Dulles Line exceeding capacity (greater than 120 passengers per car). With expansion to 100% 8-car trains during peak periods, most rail lines will have adequate capacity through 2030, though the Orange/Dulles Line will exceed 120 passengers per car as 2030 approaches. Metrorail’s expanding ridership will place significant demands on the fleet, system and station capacity.
Metrorail System Capacity: No Additional Fleet Expansion
Line 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Red Blue (Rosslyn) Orange/ Dulles Rail Yellow/Blue (14th Bridge) Green
Metrorail System Capacity: Expansion to 100% 8-Car Trains by 2020
Line 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Red Blue (Rosslyn) Orange/ Dulles Rail Yellow/Blue (14th Bridge) Green
Congested (<100 people per car) Highly Congested (100-120 people per car) Exceeds Capacity (>120 people per car)
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-9 7 Metrobus
Today, Metrobus ridership averages 440,000 weekday trips. In FY 2009, there Bus ridership is projected to were a total of 134 million trips on Metrobus. Bus ridership is projected to expand expand to 510,000 average to 510,000 average weekday trips by 2020 (see figure), or about 1% a year. Addi- weekday trips by 2020, or about tional buses and bus garages are needed to accommodate future ridership growth, 1% a year. avoid overcrowding and maintain the expanded fleet. Metro plans to focus the purchase of new buses on priority corridors that serve the greatest concentration of riders. These priority corridors include plans for running way improvements Metrorail and Metrobus Ridership such as bus priority treatments along regional roadways (e.g., transit signal priority Trends implementation), additional travel lanes at sig- Daily Ridership Growth (in 1,000s) nalized intersections allowing buses to move to the front of traffic known as queue jumpers, 1,400 Rail- bus bulbs that extend the sidewalk for a bus forecast 1,200 stop into the parking lane so the bus can remain Rail- in the traffic lane, corridor identity improve- trend 1,000 ments and traffic management improvements. Bus- 800 forecast Priority corridor networks increase the average speed of buses by up to 30%, not only saving Bus- 600 trend Metro capital and operating expenses but also improving passenger travel times. However, 400 2005 2010 2020 2030 success of these priority corridors is dependent on partnerships with Maryland, the District of Columbia and Virginia. Through these partnerships, signal and road improvements need to be implemented to result in efficient and effective priority bus corridors.
MetroAccess
Of all its services, Metro’s paratransit service, MetroAccess, is expected to experi- ence the fastest growing ridership over the next ten years. In FY 2009, 2.1 million passenger trips were taken on MetroAccess. By 2020, ridership on MetroAccess is anticipated to grow to 4.5 million trips (112% increase). Customer demand for accessible services continues to rise for four reasons: national and regional trends in the population of senior citizens and people with disabilities, many customers remain unable to use fixed-route bus and rail service due to the severity of their disabilities, lack of accessible pathways to reach bus and rail service, and other specialized transportation programs are being downsized or eliminated with the associated demand shifting to MetroAccess. Since 2004, the MetroAccess share of the regional paratransit market share has increased from 25% to 34% while human service transportation providers have reduced their market share from 50% to 25%.3
3 Market share estimates based on 2005 study by KFH Associates and additional Metro staff analysis in 2010.
8 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-10 Metro’s Capital Needs Over the Next Ten Years FY 2011 – 2020 Capital Needs Inven- tory by Investment Category ($11.4 Over the next ten years (FY 2011 – 2020), Metro faces more than $11 billion Billion) in capital needs. These investments address Metro’s physical assets, including vehicles, fleet maintenance facilities, operating systems, information technology, Customer/ rail system track, passenger facilities, maintenance equipment and support facili- Demand ties. Metro’s capital needs are distinguished from the resources needed to operate Focus the transit system. Operating needs that cover recurring annual costs for labor, $3.8 Billion Performance supplies and services to operate Metrobus, Metrorail and MetroAccess are not 33% Focus addressed in this report. $7.6 Billion 67% In September 2008 and October 2009, Metro staff presented to the Board of Di- rectors the over $11 billion Capital Needs Inventory (CNI). The CNI includes two major categories of needs: Performance projects ($7.6 billion, 67% of total) and Customer/Demand projects ($3.8 billion, 33% of total). Year-of-Expenditure (YOE) dollars
Performance projects maintain and replace assets on a life cycle basis. They pro- mote safety and reliability and preserve the current levels of service. These projects keep Metro in a “State of Good Performance.” Assets are not simply replaced with an exact replica, but with assets that take advantage of the latest technology and materials for greater efficiency. Customer/Demand projects help meet growing ridership requirements and improve the rider`s experience on the system. Safety needs are included throughout the CNI.
The $11 billion in capital needs are driven by a number of factors, including the Performance projects maintain age and condition of Metro’s assets. The 30-year old Metrorail system requires many life cycle replacement costs for the first time, including the replacement of and replace assets on a life cycle nearly one-third of the rail car fleet. Similarly, Metrobuses need to be replaced basis. They promote safety and and rehabilitated on a regular schedule. As Metro’s vehicle fleet has changed over reliability and preserve the current time, so have the maintenance facility and equipment requirements. Several of levels of service. These projects Metro’s bus garages and rail yards used for storage and maintenance of Metro’s ve- hicle fleet are in need of rehabilitation or replacement to accommodate the profile keep Metro in a “State of Good of new clean technology buses. For example, one of Metro’s oldest bus garages Performance.” was originally constructed to store trolley cars in the early 1900s. The CNI also includes Information Technology and MetroAccess capital costs that were previ- ously included in Metro’s operating budget or addressed through federal grants (e.g. Job Access Reverse Commute and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Finally, several infrastructure repair and replacement projects are necessary Customer/Demand projects help over the next ten years for system safety and reliability. meet growing ridership require- At the same time that Metro is investing in its existing assets to preserve current ments and improve the rider`s levels of service, Metro must add capacity to meet growing ridership. These capital experience on the system. needs include new vehicles (rail cars, buses and paratransit vans), expanded pas- senger facilities, additional fleet maintenance facilities, new support facilities and upgraded systems and technology necessary to support this growth.
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-11 9 The CNI also includes investments that improve the rider’s experience on the transit system and respond to customer service requests. Not included in the CNI are system expansion projects (new entrances, stations or rail lines), transit Metro’s vision is to provide “the projects entirely funded by jurisdictions, debt repayment costs, project adminis- tration and other needs identified in the future by federal oversight agencies. best ride in the nation.” To reach that vision, Metro’s General Man- Estimated capital need amounts included in the CNI were originally formulated in ager and Executive Leadership September 2008 and are for planning purposes only. As the Office of Management and Budget Services develops Metro’s capital program, specific project budgets Team (ELT) adopted five strategic will vary from these estimates due to changing material and construction costs, goals in August 2007. These stra- project schedules, funding constraints and other reasons. tegic goals were designed to guide decision-making at Metro. Strategic Framework
Metro’s vision is to provide “the best ride in the nation.” To reach that vision, Metro’s General Manager and Executive Leadership Team (ELT) adopted five strategic goals in August 2007. These strategic goals were designed to guide decision-making at Metro. To further refine these goals, Metro developed strategic objectives for each goal by conducting a series of internal discussions and reaching out to exter- nal partners as well, such as the agency’s Jurisdictional Coordinating Committee comprised of transportation officials from the cities and counties Metro serves, the Riders Advisory Council representing all riders, and the Accessibility Advisory Council representing seniors and passengers with disabilities. Metro asked each of these stakeholders to define the strategic goals from their perspective to better appreciate whether an overarching aim such as “deliver quality service” meant on-time performance, customer communication, or both. The result was twelve strategic objectives that would help drive progress on the five strategic goals (see Metro’s Strategic Framework).
Together, the goals and objectives create a strategic framework that can guide decision-making at Metro. For example, this report documents Metro’s capital needs over the next 10 years, totaling $11 billion. Given potential funding con- straints, Metro may not be able to fund all of these needs in the FY 2011 – 2020 timeframe. The strategic framework has been used to recommend priority projects and identify those projects that may need to be deferred beyond FY 2020. This was done by identifying every capital project’s linkage to each strategic goal and each objective. In addition, prioritization takes into account a project’s relative priority to other projects, a project’s budget, asset age and policy considerations.
In October 2009, Metro staff recommended priority Performance projects to the Metro Board of Directors for FY 2011 – 2020, including rehabilitation of sections of the rail system that are more than 30 years old, replacement of older rail cars and buses, replacement/rehabilitation of Metro’s oldest bus garages and informa- tion technology system upgrades. Key Customer/Demand projects recommended
10 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-12 as high priority include rail fleet expansion and power upgrades that would al- Metro used its strategic goals and low the full use of eight-car trains on all rail lines, safety and security enhance- ments, such as building a police training facility and expanding the Metrobus and objectives to prioritize projects for MetroAccess fleet of vehicles. American Recovery and Reinvest-
Metro used its strategic goals and objectives to prioritize projects for Ameri- ment Act (stimulus) funding. Metro’s can Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus) funding. Metro’s approach approach was highlighted as a was highlighted as a best practice by the Metropolitan Policy Program at best practice by the Metropolitan Brookings in its Implementing ARRA: Innovations in Design in Metro America Policy Program at Brookings in its report (July 2009). Implementing ARRA: Innovations The identification and prioritization of Metro’s capital needs are the first two in Design in Metro America report phases of the strategic capital planning process being developed at Metro. As the figure to the right illustrates, the core of the strategic process is Metro’s (July 2009). agency goals which guide investment and implementation decision. Once capital priorities are established, Metro will develop the capital bud- get and deliver the capital program. Next, Metro intends to monitor 1. Generate how efficiently the capital program was delivered and to Capital Needs evaluate progress made towards agency goals. All Inventory of these steps contained in this strategic planning 5. Monitor 2. Prioritize process have existed at Metro, but the connec- Delivery and Capital tion between these steps and agency goals is Outcomes Metro Needs being strengthened. Goals
4. Deliver 3. Program Capital Capital Program Budget
Metro’s Strategic Framework Strategic Capital Planning Process
GOAL: Create a Safer Organization
Objective Definition Improve customer and Provision, maintenance, upgrade or replacement employee safety and of assets to prevent breakdowns and malfunctions, security (“prevention”) to reduce incidents and to comply with federal environmental and safety regulations. Protection of assets from vandalism, fraud, crime, or terrorism. Implementation of employee safety and security programs, training and testing. Strengthen Metro’s safety Facility enhancements, new equipment and stra- and security response tegic partnerships that improve Metro’s ability to (“reaction”) respond to emergencies. Enhance incident response timing, planning, preparation and implementation.
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-13 11 GOAL: Deliver Quality Service
Objective Definition Improve reliability of Maintenance and replacement of capital assets service to minimize disruptions and subsequent delays. Deliver transit service according to service and operating plans. Increase service and Targeted capacity expansion investments and capacity to relieve over- service adjustments to relieve overcrowding and crowding and meet future to promote regional ridership growth. demand Maximize rider satisfac- Investments that address our riders’ day-to-day tion through convenient total experience on Metro. Provision of customer and comfortable services service for all aspects of their trip. Facility and and facilities that are in vehicle improvements that ease the use of Metro good condition and are services and improve asset condition and ride easy to navigate quality. “experience once on the system” Enhance mobility by Provide regional leadership to increase the at- improving access to and tractiveness of transit services through facility en- linkages between trans- hancements, improved accessibility, equipment portation options upgrades, service adjustments, and seamless con- nectivity between travel modes, including other transportation systems and pedestrian/bicycle facilities. “getting riders onto the system”
GOAL: Use Every Resource Wisely
Objective Definition Manage resources Business and technology infrastructure invest- efficiently ments that improve efficiencies. Strategic invest- ments that rehabilitate, reconstruct or replace assets based on life cycle data, conditions and usage. Assets include facilities, structures, vehicles, operational systems, equipment and technological infrastructure. Target investments that re- Tactical investments that reduce operating costs duce operating costs and through resource efficiencies, lower staffing / or generate revenue requirements, or reduced maintenance needs. In- vestments that increase asset revenue generation.
12 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-14 GOAL: Retain, Attract and Reward the Best and the Brightest
Objective Definition Support diverse work- Investments in business processes, technology force development infrastructure and training. Innovative technolo- through management, gies and equipment that enhance employee skills training and provision of and promote career development. Development state of the art facilities, of high quality leadership and management. vehicles, systems and equipment
GOAL: Maintain and Enhance Metro’s Image
Objective Definition Enhance communication Convenient access to timely and accurate in- with customers, employ- formation on travel modes, schedules, facilities ees, Union leadership, and service disruptions. Effectively communicate Board, media and other with Metro’s wide range of stakeholders our role stakeholders and performance results. Promote the region’s Investments that generate economic return for economy and livable jurisdictional partners and enhance the eco- communities nomic competitiveness of the region. Use natural resources Technology, capital assets and business practices efficiently and reduce that reduce the consumption of natural resources environmental impacts and pollution.
Funding the Capital Program
Metro’s capital funding comes from several sources: the federal government, Maryland, the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia jurisdictions, debt/finan- cial management and internal sources (e.g., interest). Federal funds are provided through annual appropriations and Federal Transit Administration grants. Most of these funds are matched by state and local funds, generally on an 80 – 20 basis. In other words, for every dollar of capital need, the federal government will fund $0.80 if the state/local governments fund $0.20. This is a typical funding arrange- ment in the transportation sector.
From FY 2005 – 2010, funding for Metro’s capital program was governed by a funding agreement between Metro and its partners, known as “Metro Matters.”
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-15 13 Under this agreement, Maryland, the District of Columbia and the Northern Vir- ginia jurisdictions agreed to match federal funds and provide additional capital funding critical to the transit system. The two figures below illustrate Metro’s capi- tal funding sources for the FY 2005 – 2010 period.
Metro Capital Funding$74.2 Sources FY 2005 - 2010 ($2.7 Billion) $74.2 $318.5 Debt/FinancialFederal Funds Management $318.5 InternalStateDebt/Financial and Funding Local SourceFunds Management $1,333.2 StateDebt/FinancialInternal and Local Funding Funds Management Source $1,333.2 $1,022.4 FederalInternalState Funds andFunding Local Source Funds $1,022.4 Federal Funds
State and Local Capital Funding Details FY 2005 - 2010 ($1.02 Billion)
$2.9 $2.9 $1.7 $1.7 $57.9 $57.9 DistrictDistrict of Columbia of Columbia
MarylandMaryland $113.2$113.2 Fairfax County $336.1$336.1 Fairfax County
$181.3$181.3 ArlingtonArlington County County
AlexandriaAlexandria $329.3$329.3 Falls ChurchFalls Church
City of CityFairfax of Fairfax
The Metro Matters agreement funded specific categories of capital improve- ments. The figure on page 15 shows Metro Matters expenditures for FY 2005 - 2010. Here, expenditures are shown by asset categories corresponding to those presented in this report, which include vehicles and vehicle parts, fleet maintenance facilities, systems and technology, track and structures, passenger facilities, maintenance equipment, and support facilities. Reimbursable projects (site-specific projects that are funded entirely by the jurisdictions) are not in- cluded in this capital funding discussion.
14 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-16 Metro Capital Budget Uses FY 2005 - 2010 ($2 Billion) $48.6 Vehicles/VehicleVehicles/Vehicle Parts Parts $48.6 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts Metro reports its capital funding and future $147.3 SystemsSystems and and Technology Technology capital needs in two Washington metropolitan $147.3 Systems and Technology regional planning documents: the Transpor- $158.4 $158.4 PassengerPassenger Facilities Facilities tation Improvement Program (TIP), a 6-year$696.2 Passenger Facilities $696.2 financial program that describes the sched- $226.1 Fleet Maintenance Facilities $226.1 Fleet Maintenance Facilities ule for obligating federal funds to state Fleet Maintenance Facilities and local projects, and the Constrained $259.5 TrackTrack and and Structures Structures Long Range Plan (CLRP) which includes all $259.5 Track and Structures $467.4 regionally significant transportation projects $467.4 SupportSupport Facilities Facilities Support Facilities and programs that are planned over the next 30 years. Both of these planning documents are RailRail Infrastructure Infrastructure Rehabilitation Rehab Rail Infrastructure Rehab federally mandated.
In 2008, Congress passed legislation (HR 2095) that authorizes up to $1.5 billion Excludes $744.9 million for financing in federal funds for Metro’s capital program over 10 years if matched by Metro’s expenses, debt service and program funding partners. Prior to this legislation, Metro was the only major transit system management/support. The figure re- without a source of dedicated funding. Although the new dedicated funding is flects actual expenditures for FY 2005 – notable progress, the funds are not guaranteed (subject to annual appropriation) 2008 and forecasts for FY 2009 – 2010. and alone will not address Metro’s daunting capital needs. Only through signifi- cant support from the federal government, Maryland, the District of Columbia and Northern Virginia will Metro be able to fulfill its critical role in the region.
Metro System Overview
Plans for the Metrorail system were first developed in the 1960s with groundbreak- ing occurring in 1969 and service beginning in 1976. By 1980, 40 stations were Today Metrorail has over 1,100 open and by 1990, Metrorail served 63 stations. The most recent stations, Morgan trains serving 86 stations on 106 Boulevard and Largo Town Center in Prince George’s County, opened in 2004. miles of track. Nearly 1,500 buses Today Metrorail has over 1,100 trains serving 86 stations on 106 miles of track. Nearly 1,500 buses and over 500 MetroAccess vehicles move residents and em- and over 500 MetroAccess vehi- ployees to destinations throughout the region. cles move residents and employ- ees to destinations throughout The Washington, DC metropolitan area benefits tremendously from this long- the region. term investment in mass transit infrastructure. Seventeen percent (17%) of the region’s commuting trips are on transit according to the 2007/2008 household travel study conducted by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. In FY 2009, Metro provided close to 360 million passenger trips (223 million on Metrorail, 134 million on Metrobus and about 2 million on MetroAccess). Overall, 43 percent of those working in the center core – Washington and parts of Arlington County – use mass transit.
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-17 15 Added to the highly visible elements of Metro’s infrastructure – trains, stations and buses - are the facilities, equipment and technology infrastructure providing criti- cal support to transit operations. This section provides a brief overview of Metro’s capital assets, including its vehicle fleet and fleet mainte- nance facilities for Metrorail, Metrobus and MetroAccess, Metro Transit Police Department assets, business support facilities and technology infrastructure.
MetroRail
Metro’s first rail segment opened in March 1976. This first segment included 4 stations in downtown Washington, DC from Farragut North to Rhode Island Avenue. In 1977, service began in Virginia with the opening of stations on today’s Blue, Yellow and Orange lines into DC. The young- est of Metro’s rail lines, the Green line, made its debut in 1991. Today’s Metrorail system has a total of 86 stations, 40 of which are in DC, 26 in Maryland and 20 in Virginia. On a typical weekday in FY 2009, Metrorail provided about 750,000 passenger trips. Metrorail provided a total of 223 million trips in FY 2009. With Metrorail’s oldest segments now over 30 years old, Metro plans a systematic rehabilitation of the system, starting with rail segments, stations and rail yards constructed in the 1970s.
Metro Station Openings
35 37
30
25
20 20 15
10 13
5 8
0 4 4 1976-1979 1980-1984 1985-1989 1990-1994 1995-1999 2000-2004
16 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-18 The Metrorail system includes 106 miles of track: 50.50 subway miles (below Key Assets Supporting ground), 46.31 surface miles (above ground) and 9.22 aerial miles (bridges). The Metrorail Access track extends from the District of Columbia (38.30 miles) into Virginia (29.47 System-wide No. miles) and Maryland (38.29 miles). Escalators 588 Elevators 236 Metrorail Facilities by Political Jurisdiction Bus stops (Metro-owned) 412 Jurisdiction Miles* Stations Parking Spots (Metro-owned) 58,000 District of Columbia 38.30 40 Bike Racks (Metro-owned) 1,743 Maryland Bike Lockers 1,268 Montgomery County 18.43 11 Prince George’s County 19.86 15 Total Maryland 38.29 26 Virginia Alexandria 6.11 3 Arlington 12.19 11 Fairfax County 11.17 6 Total Virginia 29.47 20
*The sum of miles does not equal the total because of rounding.
The Metrorail system will grow in Virginia over the next 10 years with the extension to Dulles Airport through Tysons Corner, adding 23.1 miles and 11 new stations.
Metrorail’s fleet consists of 1,130 75-ft. rail cars. The oldest of the fleet, 290 1000-Se- ries cars, were purchased between 1974 and 1978. The newest cars are Metro’s 6000-Series, purchased between 2006 and 2008. Over the next 10 years, Metro plans to replace its oldest cars (the 1000-Series) and begin the design work for the 2000- and 3000-Series replacements. Metro rehabilitates rail cars at their mid-life point (20 years) in order to maintain reliability, avoid high maintenance costs and realize the planned 40 year life-cycle. Metro will perform a comprehensive mid-life rehabilitation of the 4000-Series in the next 10 years and begin the rehabilitation of the 5000-Series. Furthermore, in order to respond to growing ridership trends, Metro plans to acquire new rail cars to expand the rail car fleet.
Metro Operating Rail Fleet by Rail Car Series Number of Cars in Series Manufacturer Years Purchased Service (July 2009) 1000 Rohr 1974-1978 290 2000/3000 BREDA 1983-1988 364 4000 BREDA 1992-1994 100 5000 CAF 2001-2004 192 6000 Alstom 2006-2008 184 TOTAL 1,130 Note: Does not include 4 1000-Series cars used for revenue collection, 6 1000-Series cars permanently out of service and 2 5000-Series cars permanently out of service. Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-19 17 Metrorail Facilities Service & Running Location Rail Facility Age Storage Yard Inspection Heavy Repair Overhaul Repair District of Columbia Brentwood 37 √ √ √ √ √ Maryland Branch Avenue 6 √ √ √ Greenbelt 16 √ √ √ √ √ Glenmont 11 √ New Carrollton 31 √ √ √ Largo 5 √ Shady Grove 25 √ √ √ Virginia Alexandria 26 √ √ √ West Falls Church 23 √ √ √
Metro’s rail cars are stored and maintained 9 rail yards located throughout the system. Maintenance facilities at Metro’s rail yards include service and inspec- tion shops and maintenance, operations and yard control buildings, totaling ap- proximately 1.3 million square feet of floor area. Metro plans to implement a new maintenance program for its rail yards to extend each facility’s useful life. In addition, as the fleet grows to accommodate all 8-car trains, Metro will need to build additional rail yard storage capacity.
MetroBus
The Metrobus system was created in 1973, when Metro consolidated service provided by 4 different private bus companies. Metro operates bus service in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia on over 300 routes within a 1,500 square mile area. Today’s Metrobus fleet is comprised of nearly 1,500 buses serving over 12,000 bus stops. On a typical weekday in FY 2009, Metro- bus provided over 440,000 trips. There were 134 million boardings on Metro- bus in FY 2009. On a typical weekday in In June 2006, the Metro Board adopted an average bus age target of 7½ years. FY 2009, Metrobus provided This means that Metro strives to replace 1/15th of its bus fleet each year, or over 440,000 trips. There approximately 100 buses a year. In addition, Metro routinely conducts mid- were 134 million boardings on life overhauls on each bus at 7½ years to extend a bus’ useful life to 15 years Metrobus in FY 2009. by replacing components at the end of their useful life. During the first 7½ years of life a Metrobus will accumulate approximately 300,000 miles. Metro’s policy reflects the approach of many other large US transit agencies to improve service reliability (fewer bus breakdowns) and lower overall maintenance cost. The mid-life rehabilitation program reduces the replacement cycle and de- creases Metro’s bus replacement needs from approximately 120 buses a year to 100 buses a year.
18 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-20 Metro’s newest buses, New Flyer Hybrids, were purchased in 2009. The oldest buses – Metro Flxible – entered service in 1990, and at 19 years old, will be retired soon. Metro plans to replace its oldest diesel buses with hybrid-electric and compressed natural gas buses. As a result of anticipated growth in Metro- bus ridership, plans include the purchase of new buses to expand the fleet. The purchase and maintenance of additional buses will depend on available bus garage facilities.
Metro Bus Fleet by Year Purchased
300
250 263 250 200 232 20 150 167
100 125 100 100 80 50 64 8 47 0 21 31 1990 1994 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
*As of August 1, 2009
Metro has 9 bus operating garages located throughout the region to store and maintain its buses. A tenth bus garage, the Southeastern Bus Garage, closed in 2008 when the Nationals Ballpark opened in Southeast Washington and is being relocated to the DC Village location. In addition, Metro operates two Heavy Overhaul support facilities located at Bladensburg in the District of Columbia and at the Carmen Turner Facility in Maryland. Metro also oper- ates 3 service vehicle support facilities located at Bladensburg, Alexandria, and the Carmen Turner Facility, which support over 1,000 service vehicles. Metro’s oldest bus garages originally served as trolley car barns, including Northern (102 years old) and Western (64 years old), both of which are lo- cated in the District of Columbia. Metro plans to rehabilitate/and or replace its oldest bus garages, and move all bus garages to a regular maintenance schedule in order to extend the useful life of each facility. In addition, Metro
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-21 19 plans to build additional bus garage capacity to accommodate new buses that will serve anticipated ridership growth.
MetroBus Facilities Year Current Bus Equipped Operating Garage Built Age Capacity Assignment for CNG District of Columbia Bladensburg 1962 47 257 300 √ Northern 1907 102 175 171 Western 1945 64 138 132 Maryland Landover 1989 20 210 173 Montgomery 1983 26 240 198 Southern 1922 87 103 133 Virginia Four Mile Run 1977 32 218 218 √ Royal Street 1945 64 83 65 West Ox Road 2009 0 100 90 Total Nine Operating Garages 1,524 1,480 *As of August 1, 2009
MetroAccess
In 1994, Metro began providing its paratransit service, called MetroAccess, for people with disabilities who cannot use the fixed-route bus or rail system. On an average weekday, MetroAccess provides 7,500 trips. In FY 2009, the service provided a total of 2.1 million passenger trips. The current paratransit vehicle fleet includes over 500 vehicles. In the next 10 years, MetroAccess plans to replace paratransit vehicles (the goal is to retire vehicles 4 years old due to heavy usage) and purchase new vehicles to meet increased demand for paratransit service. A MetroAccess Fleet Management Plan has been reviewed and approved by the In 1994, Metro began provid- Metro Board and the Federal Transit Administration. ing its paratransit service, called MetroAccess, for people with dis- Business Support Facilities abilities who cannot use the fixed-
route bus or rail system. Metro’s support facilities house transit and public safety operations as well as busi- ness functions. The largest of these facilities is the Jackson Graham Building (JGB) located in downtown Washington, DC. JGB houses Metro’s administrative offices, including transit operations (rail, bus and MetroAccess), MTPD administration, engineering, information technology, finance, planning, human resources and com- munications. The building also houses an Operations Control Center (OCC) that monitors the movement of Metro vehicles.
In addition to JGB, other Metro business support facilities include the Carmen Turner Facility (CTF) in Hyattsville, MD that in the near future will house the primary OCC,
20 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-22 Alexandria Yard Revenue Collection Facility and Systems Maintenance Facility in Al- exandria, VA, Open Materials Storage Facility and Metro Supply Facility in Landover, MD, Stone Straw Building and Blair Road Support Shop in Washington, DC.
Over the next 10 years, Metro plans to perform basic maintenance and rehabilita- tion to JGB and the Revenue Collection Facility, and anticipates developing Metro- owned operating garages for MetroAccess. Metro also plans to conduct minor renovations to other support facilities.
Metro Transit Police Department
MTPD officers are responsible for providing law enforcement and public safety services on the Metrorail and Metrobus systems. The service area extends 1,500 square miles within three jurisdictions: Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. MTPD has an authorized strength of 458 sworn police officers, 114 security special police and 4 armored vehicle guards. The Department is split into two patrol Districts, each covering one half of the system. A third district serves Metro’s revenue collection operation.
Police capital assets include 98 emergency response vehicles and numerous facili- ties. MTPD vehicles include police sedans, utility vehicles, motorcycles, armored trucks and explosive ordnance vehicles. Facilities include administrative offices in the Jackson Graham building, two substations (District I substation near Fort Totten Metro station and District II near Huntington Metro station) and offices for the Department’s Special Operations Division.
MTPD’s capital needs include replacing emergency vehicles, portable radios, emergency management equipment and facility improvements. MTPD’s facility needs also include replacement of the District II substation, construction of a per- MTPD has an authorized manent Special Operations Division and two new buildings – a training facility and new District IV substation. strength of 458 sworn police officers, 114 security special police and 4 armored vehicle Technology Infrastructure guards.
Working behind the scenes is Metro’s information technology infrastructure, pro- viding critical support to transit operations. Some key examples include software for scheduling buses and trains and dispatch communication systems for Metro Transit Police. Metro also uses software to monitor the condition of its infrastruc- ture and plan for maintenance and repairs. Other technology is designed to serve the customer, such as Next Bus which uses Global Positioning System (GPS) soft- ware and route schedules to predict bus arrival times and Metro’s website, www. wmata.com. The website provides a wide array of customer information, including
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-23 21 route and schedule information through the Trip Planner, service updates, fare information and more. Metro’s systems and technology capital needs also extend to the corporate and financial management of the agency. This includes software for treasury, budget, cash management and accounts payable.
Metro Asset Categories
Metro’s capital needs are organized by investment category, asset category and project type (groupings of individual capital projects) in this report. The table below lists the 8 asset categories. A definition for each category is provided, along with an example project type.
Project Type Asset Category Definition Example Vehicles/ Vehicle Replacement or purchase of new rail Rehabilitation Parts cars, buses, paratransit vehicles and/ of Rail Cars or service vehicles, rehabilitation of rail cars and buses and replacement parts to maintain the vehicle fleet. Rail System Multiple systems and equipment Rail Line Infrastructure within the rail stations and tunnels Segment Rehabilitation that enable safe, reliable service. Rehabilitation Several of these critical components are apparent to the transit rider (e.g., public address systems) but many are “behind the scenes” (e.g., uninter- rupted power supply [UPS], that pro- vides emergency power when utility power is not available). Fleet Maintenance Rehabilitation, maintenance, replace- Rehabilitation Facilities ment and/or new bus garages and rail and Replace- yards to support repairs to vehicle ment of Bus fleet. Garages Systems and Technology systems, software and Operations Technology equipment supporting transit opera- Support tions and business functions. Software
22 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-24 Project Type Asset Category Definition Example Track and Structures Steel running rail that guides Metro’s Track train cars, the cross ties and fasteners Rehabilitation that hold the rail in place, the ballast bed that supports the cross ties and the third rail that provides power to the train. Structures include the retaining walls that protect the track bed and underground tunnels, the concrete pads that keep the track bed properly elevated and the bridges that span roads and bodies of water. Passenger Facilities Facilities at Metro’s 86 Metro rail sta- Elevator / tions, including bus loops, bus stops, Escalator parking garages, surface lots, Kiss- Facilities and-Ride spaces, access roads and bus loops, bike racks and lockers. Maintenance Equipment to rehabilitate track and Bus Repair Equipment maintain the vehicle fleet (rail and Equipment bus). Support Facilities Facilities that house administrative Police Facilities offices, training rooms, revenue pro- cessing activities, material storage, police work and a print shop.
Attachment 4 IntroductionA4-25 23 Investment Category: Performance
Investments to address Metro’s Performance needs total $7.6 billion over the next ten years (FY 2011- 2020). Performance projects maintain and replace assets on a life cycle basis. They promote safety and reliability and preserve the current levels of service. These projects keep Metro in a “State of Good Performance” - assets are not simply replaced with an exact replica, but with assets that take advantage of the latest technology and materials. For example, diesel buses will be replaced with cleaner technology buses and inefficient fleet maintenance facilities will be replaced with environmentally friendly buildings. Key Performance needs include the replacement of older rail cars, buses and vehicles, rehabilitation of sections of the rail system that are more than 30 years old, track rehabilitation, MTPD equipment and facilities and information tech- nology system upgrades.
FY2011 - 2020 Performance Needs by Asset Category ($7.6 Billion) $240.6 $240.6 3% Asset Category $49.7 3% $49.7$372.3 1% Vehicles/Vehicle Parts 1%5% $372.3 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts 5% Vehicles/Vehicle Parts RailRail System System Infrastructure Infrastructure Rehabilitation Rehabilitation $585.4 8% Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation $585.4 Fleet Maintenance Facilities $2,600.6 8% Fleet Maintenance Facilities 34% $2,600.6 $731.9 9% Fleet Maintenance Facilities 34% $731.9 SystemsSystems and and Technology Technology 9% $1,194.2 Systems and Technology TrackTrack and and Structures Structures $1,822.2 16% $1,194.2 24% Track and Structures $1,822.2 16% PassengerPassenger Facilities Facilities 24% Passenger Facilities MaintenanceMaintenance Equipment Equipment Maintenance Equipment Total: $7.6 Billion SupportSupport Facilities Facilities YOE, $ Millions Support Facilities
Metro’s FY 2011 – 2020 Performance needs are driven by several factors. For the first time in the agency’s history, Metro is faced with rehabilitating or replacing original capital assets. For example, sections of the rail system that opened for service in 1976 will soon reach the end of their life cycle and must be rehabili- tated. Similarly, the 1000-Series rail cars that were purchased when the system was built need to be replaced and a program of regular rail car replacement must be instituted. In addition, according to Board policy adopted in June 2006, Metro’s target is to achieve an average bus fleet age of 7½ years and a maximum age of 15 years. This means that Metro strives to replace 1/15th of its bus fleet each year, or approximately 100 buses each year. Metro’s policy reflects the approach
24 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-26 of many other large US transit agencies to improve service reliability (fewer bus breakdowns) and lower overall maintenance cost.
Besides replacing vehicles, Metro needs to rehabilitate assets to keep them working safely and reliably. The 2000- and 3000-Series rail cars were rehabili- tated when they reached 20 years of age, and the 4000-Series rail cars will also be rehabilitated once they reach that age. Metro’s regular bus rehabilitation Metro is not alone in facing large program is necessary to achieve an average bus fleet age of 7½ years by ex- capital needs that are necessary tending the useful life of a bus to 15 years. The result of this rehabilitation work to maintain its existing system. is like-new rail cars and buses with cutting edge technological upgrades, safety enhancements, and extended life cycles. This results in cost savings through FTA’s Rail Modernization Study, reduced maintenance and increased reliability. Correspondingly, the oldest an April 2009 report to Congress, rail yards and bus facilities that are critical to storing and maintaining Metro’s found that more than one-third vehicle fleet are in need of rehabilitation. of the assets of the nation’s seven Metro’s FY 2011 – 2020 Performance needs also capture other assets that are being largest transit agencies, including capitalized for the first time. Previously, many of the information technology Metro, are near or have already investments and all of the capital investments for the MetroAccess program were exceeded their expected useful addressed under the operating budget. Now, in order to capture cost savings through a regular program of replacement and upgrades, these programs are lives. included in Metro’s CNI.
Metro is not alone in facing large capital needs that are necessary to maintain its existing system. The Federal Transit Administration’s Rail Modernization Study, an April 2009 report to Congress, found that more than one-third of the assets of the nation’s seven largest transit agencies, including Metro, are near or have already exceeded their expected useful lives. The FTA study estimates that the backlog of capital needs of these seven agencies total roughly $50 billion.
The table below breaks down Metro’s $7.6 billion in Performance needs by asset category and project type (grouping of individual capital projects). The following sections provide additional detail by asset category.
Performance Needs by Asset Category and Project Type Asset Capital Needs, Category Project Type FY 2011 - 2020 Vehicles/ Replacement of Rail Cars $978 Vehicle Parts Replacement of Buses $749 Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $265 Rehabilitation of Buses $228 Vehicle Replacement Components $176 Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles $141 Replacement of Service Vehicles $63 Subtotal $2,601
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-27 25 Asset Capital Needs, Category Project Type FY 2011 - 2020 Rail System Infrastruc- Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $1,822 ture Rehabilitation Subtotal $1,822 Fleet Maintenance Rehabilitation and Replacement of $489 Facilities Bus Garages Maintenance of Bus Garages $328 Maintenance of Rail Yards $281 Rail Maintenance Facilities $60 Environmental Compliance Projects $37 Subtotal $1,194 Systems and Operations Support Software $426 Technology Business Support Software & Equipment $256 Power System Upgrades - Rail $25 Rail Fare Equipment $24 Subtotal $732 Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $539 Station/Tunnel Rehabilitation $46 Subtotal $585 Passenger Facilities Elevator/Escalator Facilities $234 Maintenance of Rail Station Facilities $134 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities $5 Subtotal $372 Maintenance Rail Maintenance Equipment $160 Equipment Rail Car Repair Equipment $44 Bus Repair Equipment $29 Business Facilities Equipment $8 Subtotal $241 Support Facilities Business Support Facilities $29 Police Facilities $21 Subtotal $50 TOTAL $7,597
26 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-28 Asset Category: Vehicles/Vehicle Parts $749.5
$749.5 Metro runs the 2nd largest rail transit system, the 6th largest bus system and the 8th largest paratransit service in the United States. In FY 2009, ridership on the Metrorail system was over 220 million and ridership on the Metrobus system was over 130 million. Metro’s revenue service fleet consists of more than 1,100 rail cars and approximately 1,500 buses. Rehabilitation and replacement of Metro’s vehicle fleet are essential to delivering safe, reliable, and comfortable service to our customers. Prior investments in Metro’s vehicle fleet have increased the Performance – Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts average distance between breakdowns and increased the energy efficiency of Needs by Project Type ($2.6 Billion) the fleet. In order to maintain and$749.5 build on these improvements, a sustained capital program is necessary. $63.4 $749.5 $141.0 Replacement of Rail Cars Metro’s program of comprehensive mid-life rehabilitations has kept its rail and bus fleet in a state of good performance and has extended the useful life of the $175.8 Replacement of Buses fleet. With mid-life rehabs, the useful life of a Metrobus is 15 years, and the Rehabilitation of Rail Cars useful life of a Metrorail car is 40 years. The Metrobus fleet has been modern- $978.2 $228.2 ized through a program of normal replacement. Now, for the first time since Rehabilitation of Buses the system began service in 1976, Metro must begin a replacement program $264.5 for its rail cars. The oldest rail cars (the 1000-Series) were purchased between Vehicle Replacement Components 1974 and 1978, and will need to be replaced. This normal replacement pro- $749.5 gram will also introduce new technologies and improved customer features Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles (e.g., lighting). Both bus and rail fleet plans (approved by the Metro Board and the Federal Transit Administration$63.4 in 2007) are available on Metro’s website, Replacement of Service Vehiclees www.wmata.com. $141.0 ReplacementReplacement of Rail Carsof Rail Cars
Metro’s vehicle fleet also includes service vehicles, such as patrol cars used by ReplacementReplacement of Buses of Buses the MTPD or light-duty trucks used by maintenance$175.8 personnel. These vehicles are necessary for the security of Metro’s passengers and employees and for the RehabilitationRehabilitation of Rail ofCars Rail Cars transportation of materials$978.2 and equipment$228.2 to different locations throughout the Metro transit zone. Locations include rail stations, rail right-of-ways, ser- RehabilitationRehabilitation of Buses of Buses vice and inspection yards, maintenance facilities,$264.5 revenue collection facilities, public parking facilities and Metrobus stops. Metro’s transit zone consists of Vehicle Replacement Components the District of Columbia, the suburban Maryland counties of Montgomery and Vehicle Replacement Components Prince George’s and the Northern$749.5 Virginia counties of Arlington, Fairfax and Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles Loudoun and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax and Falls Church. With such a Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles large transit zone, Metro’s service vehicles need to be replaced on a regular cycle similar to that of the rail and bus fleet. ReplacementReplacement of Service of VehiclesService Vehiclees
The figure breaks down Metro’s Performance - Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts needs ($2.6 billion over the next ten years) by project type. A brief description of each project type follows.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-29 27 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Replacement of Rail Cars ($978.2 Million)
Over the next ten years, Metro plans to begin a replacement program for its 1000-Series, 2000-Series and 3000-Series rail cars. The 1000-Series Rail Car Replacement project will replace all 300 of the 1000-Series rail cars with new 7000-Series rail cars. The 1000-Series rail cars were purchased between 1974 and 1978. These cars have a 40-year life and need replacement beginning in early FY 2015. The 40-year life anticipated in the original car design has proven to be accurate. This program is one component of a combined 7000-Se- ries procurement strategy structured to avoid repetitive developmental costs associated with a new car design, development and delivery. The replacement of the 1000-Series cars with the 7000-Series cars will improve reliability, reduce maintenance and operating costs and incorporate technology and enhancements of newly designed rail cars. The total 1000-Series Rail Car Replacement program cost will be $841.2 million or $2.8 million per car. Of the total cost, $811 million is reflected in this 10-year Capital Needs Inventory and the $30.2 million balance will be incurred after FY 2020.
The 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Replacement project will begin in FY 2018, but most of the new rail cars will arrive after 2020. This project will replace all 366 of the 2000- and the 3000-Series rail cars with new 8000-Series rail cars. The 2000- and 3000-Series rail cars were purchased between 1983 and 1988 and underwent a comprehensive mid-life rehabilitation at their 20-year mark. As a result, they will need to be replaced beginning in FY 2023. The project calls for the design and procurement of a new 8000-Series car. Design will commence in FY 2018, leading to a contract award the following year, which will enable full scale car delivery to begin in FY 2023. The replacement of these cars is needed to maintain safety and reliability, avoid high maintenance costs and incorporate technology found on newer rail cars. Based on experience with the 1000-Series cars, a 40-year life is anticipated for the 2000/3000-Series. The total 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Replacement program cost will be $1.5 billion or $4.0 million per car (the higher per-car cost is due to inflation). Of the total cost, $167.2 million is reflected in the 10-year CNI Metro’s 2007 Rail Fleet Plan and the $1.3 billion balance will be incurred after FY 2020.
FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21+ Fleet 1000-Series fleet renewal (300 cars) Replacement 2000- and 3000-Series fleet renewal (366 cars) Mid-Life Fleet 4000-Series Mid-Life Rehabilitation (100 cars) Rehabilitation 5000 Series Mid-Life Rehabilitation (192 cars) Growth Fleet 75% 8-Car Trains (130 rail cars) 100% 8-Car Trains (90 rail cars)
Replacement of Rail Cars includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 057: 1000-Series Rail Car Replacement $811.0 CNI 059: 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Replacement $167.2 Total $978.2
28 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-30 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Rehabilitation of Rail Cars ($264.5 Million)
Metro rehabilitates rail cars at their mid-life point in order to maintain reliability, avoid high maintenance costs and realize the planned 40 year life-cycle. The design process for rail car rehabilitation must begin four to five years before the cars will be delivered. Over the next ten years, Metro will complete the rehabilitation of the 2000- and 3000-Series and begin the rehabilitation of the 4000-Series (purchased between 1992 and 1994) and the 5000-Series (purchased between 2001 and 2004). The mid-life rehabilitation of the 100 4000-Series rail cars and the 192 5000-Series rail cars will be contracted as a component of the 7000-Series rail car procurement in order to gain economies of scale, incorpo- rate enhancements from newer rail cars and ensure compatibility with the fleet. The total cost to rehabilitate the 4000- and 5000-Series is $564.6 million (about $1.6 million for each 4000-Series rail car and about $2.1 million, due to infla- tion, for each 5000-Series rail car). Of this total cost, $230.6 million is reflected in the 10-year CNI and the $334 million balance will be incurred after FY 2020. Metro’s rehabilitation work over the next ten years will also complete required heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) work on the 1000-Series rail cars.
Metrorail’s fleet currently consists of six rail car series purchased and rehabilitated at different times since 1976 and operates on rail tracks constructed over a thirty year period. To address compatibility issues across the fleet and interaction with the track, Metro performs engineering analysis, diagnosis, testing, and resolution implementation under the Rail Car Safety and Reliability Enhancement project. The sustained engineering capability under this program is necessary to maintain high reliability standards, fulfill regulatory requirements and meet Federal Transit Administration mandates. In addition, this capital project covers unforeseen issues Metro rehabilitates rail cars at that need to be addressed in a short time horizon (e.g., air compressor replace- their mid-life point in order to ments). maintain reliability, avoid high Rehabilitation of Rail Cars includes the following CNI projects: maintenance costs and realize
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) the planned 40 year life-cycle. CNI 060: 4000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation $163.0 CNI 061: 5000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation $67.6 CNI 067: Rail Car Safety & Reliability Enhancements $26.1 CNI 064: 1000-Series Rail Car HVAC Replacement $5.2 CNI 058: 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation $2.6 Total $264.5
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-31 29 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Replacement of Buses ($749.5 Million)
Metro’s fleet of approximately 1,500 buses, the th6 largest in the country, trans- ported 134 million riders in FY 2009. Buses range in size from 26 feet to 62 feet, and are a mix of conventional and articulated buses (see table below for details). Of Metro’s fleet, 714 (48%) are hybrid electric or compressed natural gas (CNG) fueled buses. In June 2006, the Metro Board adopted an average bus age target of 7½ years. This means that Metro strives to replace 1/15th of its bus fleet each year, or approximately 100 buses a year. Metro plans to continue to invest in buses that utilize clean fuel technologies to reduce emissions.
CNG-fueled buses decrease Metro’s diesel fuel usage by over 4.5 million gallons an- nually and reduce more than 90 percent of carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions and approximately 50 percent of nitrogen oxide emissions. The advanced technology diesel buses enable Metro to reduce more than 67 percent of nitrogen oxide emissions and 50 percent of particulate matter emissions. The diesel/electric hybrid buses decrease Metro’s diesel fuel consumption by more than 50,000 gallons annually and reduce more than 90 percent of carbon monoxide, particulate matter and hydrocarbon emissions, and more than 67 percent of nitrogen oxide emissions.
Over the next ten years, Metro’s bus replacement needs are $749.5 million, or In June 2006, the Metro Board approximately $570,000 per bus. Metro also plans to replace 22 of its 62-foot ar- adopted an average bus age tar- ticulated buses costing approximately $900,000 per bus. (Estimated average costs get of 7½ years. This means that are in 2008 dollars and do not reflect inflation). Metro strives to replace 1/15th of Metrobus Fleet Details* its bus fleet each year, or approxi- Total Manufacturer Size Seating Capacity mately 100 buses a year. Metro 189 New Flyer CNG 40 feet 40 75 plans to continue to invest in buses 21 Neoplan Articulated 60 feet 66 100 that utilize clean fuel technologies 0 Ikarus Articulated 60 feet 65 100 to reduce emissions. 111 ADB Flxible Metro with lift 40 feet 45 78 460 Orion 40 feet 38-46 57-77 51 Orion 30 feet 30 46 215 Orion CNG 40 feet 41 77 35 Orion CNG 30 feet 29 56 117 New Flyer 40 feet 39 59 6 Chevrolet 26 feet 20 26 22 NABI Articulated CNG 60 feet 61 100 20 New Flyer Hybrid 37 feet 39 63 211 New Flyer Hybrid 40-42 feet 39 63 22 New Flyer Hybrid 62 feet 39 63 1,480 Total CNG – Fueled by compressed natural gas
*As of August 1, 2009.
30 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-32 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Replacement of Buses includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 006: Bus Replacement $749.5 Total $749.5
Rehabilitation of Buses ($228.2 Million)
During the first 7½ years of life, a Metrobus will accumulate approximately 300,000 miles. Metro routinely conducts mid-life overhauls on each bus at 7½ years to extend a bus’ useful life to 15 years by replacing components at the end of their useful life. On average, Metro rehabilitates 100 buses per year.
Under this rehabilitation project, the bus engine, transmission and elec- tronics are all rebuilt by Metro employees restoring the bus to an “as new” condition. Like many other large US transit agencies, Metro rebuilds a bus at mid-life due to better service reliability (fewer breakdowns) and lower overall maintenance cost. This program reduces the replacement cycle and decreases Metro’s bus replacement needs from approximately 120 buses a year to 100 buses a year. Metro’s bus rehabilitation needs over the next ten years totals $228.2 million.
Rehabilitation of Buses includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 005: Bus Rehabilitation $228.2 Total $228.2
Vehicle Replacement Components ($175.8 Million)
Metro requires an inventory of replacement parts to maintain its fleet of vehicles in a state of good performance. Capital replacement components are needed once an item cannot be refurbished and re-used, to address fleet composition changes and to meet federal regulations (e.g., technology upgrades dictated by EPA). Bus reha- bilitation components support Metro’s mid-life rehabilitation program, destination sign replacement, hybrid/electric battery replacement and soot filter replacement programs. Examples of bus rehabilitation components include alternators, transmis- sions, engines, coolers, driver’s seats, cylinder heads, fan motors, and radiator assem- blies. Rail rehabilitation components are assemblies that can be removed from the rail cars and refurbished (e.g., traction motors, brake assemblies, heaters, electronic
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-33 31 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
signs, compressors and axle assemblies). A supply of rail replacement components are necessary to switch out items that are beyond economic repair. Metro’s rehabili- tation component needs over the next ten years total $175.8 million.
Vehicle Replacement Components includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 008: Bus Rehabilitation Components $128.6 CNI 063: Rail Rehabilitation Components $47.2 Total $175.8
Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles ($141.0 Million)
The current MetroAccess fleet consists of over 500 vehicles. After re-evaluation of capacity in terms of service quality and projected ridership, MetroAccess has adopted a four-year life cycle target for its rolling stock. Operating the paratransit fleet beyond the useful life reduces the reliability of the service through increased breakdowns, increases exposure to safety risks and increases the cost of expensive maintenance including new engines and transmissions. As of April 2009, 51% of the MetroAccess fleet exceeded the retirement age of 4 years. To meet the four-year average fleet age target, Metro plans to purchase Operating the paratransit fleet a total of 2,631 MetroAccess vehicles from FY 2011 – 2020, for an average beyond the useful life reduces the of 260 vehicles per year. Each vehicle costs an average of $55,000 bringing reliability of the service through the total capital needs from FY 2011 – 2020 to $141.0 million. The number of MetroAccess vehicles that need to be replaced will increase over time as the increased breakdowns, increases passenger population expands (projected growth between FY 2011 – 2020 is exposure to safety risks and 112% or 2.3 million). increases the cost of expensive This replacement project will shift the acquisition strategy for rolling stock maintenance including new from using a paratransit contractor as the purchasing agent to a capitally engines and transmissions. funded, Metro-owned program. MetroAccess estimates show that shifting to direct ownership of vehicles will result in significant savings. For example, in FY 2008, Metro procured 65 MetroAccess replacement vehicles directly rather than through a contractor, saving $600,000. These savings are real- ized through the tax savings, waived annual license fee (vehicles registered with exempt plates), and elimination of the 11% markup (over $4,500/ve- hicle) that private contractors charge. Combined, savings are approximately $9,200/vehicle when vehicles are purchased directly. In order to continue these savings during future vehicle procurements, Metro must establish a capital funding mechanism for these procurements. The MetroAccess Fleet Management Plan was adopted by the Metro Board and approved by the Federal Transit Administration.
32 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-34 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 015: MetroAccess Vehicles $141.0 Total $141.0
Replacement of Service Vehicles ($63.4 Million)
Metro developed a service vehicle replacement plan in May 2007 to eliminate the backlog of $23.5 million in deferred replacement vehicles and to meet future needs. This replacement strategy will enhance service, lower maintenance costs, and improve vehicle reliability and availability. The service vehicle fleet includes passenger vehicles, utility vehicles, specialized maintenance vehicles such as welding trucks and hi-rail vehicles, tow trucks, armored cars, and other special- ized types. The plan recommends a weighted average replacement cycle of 7.1 years across all vehicle types. In 2007, 29% of the fleet was older than 10 years and 56% of the service vehicle fleet was over 6 years old.
The approximate number of vehicles to be replaced during FY 2011 – 2020 in each category is:
Passenger Cars: 214 Pickup/Utility Trucks: 506 SUVs: 346 Metro developed a service Vans: 260 Heavy Trucks: 65 Tow Trucks: 11 vehicle replacement plan in May Street Sweepers: 4 All others: 27 2007 to eliminate the backlog
The service vehicle category also include the Metro Transit Police Department (MTPD) of $23.5 million in deferred re- fleet. The 98 MTPD vehicles are shared by officers on two or more shifts, increasing the placement vehicles and to meet wear and tear on these vehicles. With the exception of emergency management person- future needs. nel, MTPD officers are not given “take-home” cars as condition of employment. MTPD relies on its emergency vehicles to transport police officers, K-9s, and special equipment to the site of reported crimes, public disturbances, and suspicious persons and packages throughout the 1,500 square mile Metro service area. MTPD also requires vehicles to respond to intrusions in rail right-of-ways, service and inspection yards, bus lots and garages, maintenance facilities, revenue collection facilities, public parking facilities and Metrobus stops. These vehicles must be replaced in order to maintain passenger and employee safety and security. Over the next ten years, MTPD plans to replace 1/3 of its emergency vehicles to ensure sedans are replaced every three years due to heavy usage. Armored trucks and heavy-duty bomb squad trucks are replaced every seven years.
Replacement of Service Vehicles includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 009: Service Vehicle Replacement $52.0 CNI 104: Police Vehicle Replacement $11.4 Total $63.4
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-35 33 Asset Category: Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation
The Metrorail system is 106 miles long, including 51 miles of subway (below- ground), 9 aerial miles (above-ground), and 46 surface-level miles. This totals 212 miles of track, since the rail system has two tracks. The oldest sections of Metro’s rail system were put into service in 1976, and the newest opened in 2004. These segments generally require rehabilitation every 40 years. The useful life of system Sequence of Metrorail Openings components will vary greatly depending on their function and will deteriorate at Line Segment Stations Miles Date different rates based on their location. For Farragut North to Rhode Island Ave 5 4.6 3/29/1976 example, components in deep tunnels Gallery Pl-Chinatown 1 none 12/15/1976 with water penetration will deteriorate at a faster rate than those in a dry, well- To Dupont Circle 1 1.1 1/17/1977 ventilated area of a station. Therefore, to National Airport to Stadium-Armory 17 11.8 7/1/1977 keep the system in a state of good perfor- To Silver Spring 4 5.7 2/6/1978 mance, Metro will begin a comprehensive rehabilitation of the rail infrastructure for To New Carrollton 5 7.4 11/20/1978 the first time in its history. To Ballston-MU 4 3 12/1/1979 Multiple systems and equipment are in- To Addison Road 3 3.6 11/22/1980 stalled within the rail stations and tunnels To Van Ness-UDC 3 2.1 12/5/1981 to provide safe, reliable service. Several of these critical components are apparent to Gallery Pl-Chinatown to Pentagon 1 3.3 4/30/1983 the transit rider (e.g., public address sys- To Huntington 4 4.2 12/17/1983 tems) but many are “behind the scenes” (e.g., uninterrupted power supply (UPS), To Grosvenor 5 6.8 8/25/1984 that provides emergency power when To Shady Grove 4 7 12/15/1984 utility power is not available). All of these To Vienna/Fairfax-GMU 4 9.1 6/7/1986 rail infrastructure elements require peri- odic investment to maintain their struc- To Wheaton 2 3.2 9/22/1990 tural integrity and functionality. The Rail To U St/African-Amer Civil War 3 1.7 5/11/1991 System Infrastructure Rehabilitation how- Memorial/Cardozo ever, does not address the steel running To Van Dorn Street 1 3.9 6/15/1991 rail needs which are addressed under the To Anacostia 3 2.9 12/28/1991 asset category “Track and Structures.” To Greenbelt 4 7 12/11/1993 The Metrorail system is a two-tracked system—one track heading in each direc- To Franconia-Springfield 1 3.3 6/29/1997 tion. When Metro needs to perform ma- To Glenmont 1 1.4 7/25/1998 jor maintenance work on a section of the Columbia Heights to Fort Totten 2 2.9 9/18/1999 system, that segment must be taken out of service, thus altering service patterns. To Branch Ave 5 6.5 1/13/2001 To minimize service disruptions, Metro To Largo Town Center 2 3.2 12/18/2004 conducts maintenance on weekends, in the evenings, when ridership is low, and New York Avenue 1 none 11/20/2004
34 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-36 Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation
while the system is closed. When major maintenance work is needed, Metro can take one track out of service in each direction. Trains moving in both directions will then take turns sharing the section of track through the work zone. This is known as single-tracking. To the extent possible, Metro takes advantage of low rail ridership on three-day holiday weekends to save on late-night maintenance costs and reduce single-tracking. Although performing major work when the system is closed or on weekends has minimized customer impacts, Metro’s future mainte- nance needs will exceed available track work hours.
The Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program is designed to streamline upgrades throughout the Metrorail system, expand available work hours by coor- dinating work at specific segments, increase productivity during those track work hours and minimize customer delays. The schedule by segment (as of July 2008) is shown in the Figure below. The basic concept is to accomplish all rehabilitation work at a specific segment using one contract. It takes several hours to secure a work area after closing and before opening the system for service. When this requirement is added to the time necessary to swap work crews between different contractors, the total track work hours is notably decreased. The new Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program will coordinate work at a segment thus en- abling maintenance crews to spend more time performing the necessary work. Concentrating the work area versus spreading the work across the 106.3 mile system will also result in more efficient use of safety, escort and inspection person- nel. The overall impact will be more work completed under a shorter timeframe at a lower cost. Metro Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation Schedule 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20172018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Dupont to Silver Spring
Dupont to Grosvenor Grosvenor to Shady Grove Silver Spring to Glenmont
National Airport to New Carrollton Rosslyn to Vienna National Airport to Huntington Franconia to Spring eld & Largo
U Street to Anacostia Fort Totten to Greenbelt U Street to Fort Totten Anacostia to Branch Avenue
Source: July 24, 2008 presentation to Planning, Development and Real Estate Committee Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-37 35 Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation
Under the Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program, all Metrorail segments are grouped into four “tiers” based on age. For example, Tier 1 includes the rail segment Red Line Dupont to Silver Spring which was completed between 1976 and 1978 mak- ing it the oldest section of the rail system. Metro plans to sequence the infrastructure rehabilitation work based on these four tiers. The Metro Board has already approved work under Tier One (Red Line between the Dupont Circle and Silver Spring and Blue and Orange lines between the Stadium-Armory and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport). The Station Enhancement Program work (e.g., platform slab and tile replacement) will also be coordinated under the Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilita- tion Program to improve the effectiveness of both programs.
Typical infrastructure rehabilitation work includes drainage pumping rehabilita- tion, fire system rehabilitation, ceiling tile replacement, tunnel ventilation, station chiller rehabilitation, automatic train control rehabilitation, tunnel lighting replace- ment, mid-life power system rehabilitation, replacement of un-interruptible power supply systems and battery banks, replacement of traction power switchgear, and communications system rehabilitation. Metro’s Rail System Infrastructure Reha- bilitation Program needs over the next ten years total $1.8 billion. Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation by CNI Projects ($1.8 Billion)* Total (YOE, Rehabilitation Opening $ Mil- Tier CNI Project Dates lions) Rail Tier 1 CNI 107: Red Line: Dupont to 1976-1978 $139.0 Silver Spring CNI 110: Blue/Orange/Yellow Lines: 1977-1978 $371.9 National Airport to New Carrollton CNI 108: Red Line: Dupont to 1981-1984 $234.1 Grosvenor CNI 113: Green/Yellow Lines: U Street 1991 $98.4 to Anacostia Rail Tier 2 CNI 109: Red Line: Grosvenor to Shady 1984- $185.7 Grove and Silver Spring to Glenmont 1998 CNI 111: Blue/Orange/Yellow Lines: 1979-1986 $232.9 Rosslyn to Vienna CNI 114: Green/Yellow Lines: U Street 1993-1999 $159.9 to Greenbelt Rail Tier 3 CNI 112: Blue/Orange/Yellow Lines: 1983-1991 $203.8 National Airport to Huntington and 1997-2004 Franconia-Springfield and Largo Extension CNI 115: Green/Yellow Lines: 2001 $112.6 Anacostia to Branch Avenue Rail Tier 4 CNI 122: Next Segment $83.9 Total $1,822.2 *Cost estimates as of May 2009.
36 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-38 Asset Category: Fleet Maintenance Facilities
Metro’s fleet maintenance facilities include nine bus operating garages (a 10th bus division – Southeastern – is being relocated to the DC Village location) and nine rail yards. At these facilities, Metro employees complete regular repairs to the bus and rail fleet, conduct vehicle safety inspections and clean the vehicles for customer comfort. These facilities also provide secure storage of Metro’s bus and rail fleet when these vehicles are not in use. Rehabilitation of Metro’s maintenance facilities is required to upgrade safety, environmental, and maintenance systems, as well as to provide a better work environment for employees. The work at Metro’s maintenance facilities is critical to keeping the Metrobus and Metrorail fleet safe and reliable.
Rail fleet maintenance work includes the following: automatic train controls, brakes, communication devices, doors, lighting, heating and cooling systems, power, propul- sion, signs and signals. Bus maintenance work includes the vehicle power train (engine and transmission), brakes, electrical components, body/doors and heating and cooling system. In addition to regular maintenance, bus facilities are also used to rehabilitate vehicles halfway through their life cycle to extend the useful life of each vehicle. Rail car mid-life rehabilitation is conducted off-site by the rail car manufacturer.
As described in the Metro system overview, Metro’s bus garages range in age from 20 years old to 102 years old, excluding the new West Ox facility that opened in 2009. The average age of Metro’s bus garages (excluding West Ox) is 55.25 yrs. A peer review panel conducted by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) in Rehabilitation of Metro’s main- 2005 found that due to the age and condition of Metro’s bus garages, working condi- tenance facilities is required to tions impeded efficient operations. The panel recommended the development of a upgrade safety, environmental, and bus facilities plan to address deficiencies at the garages. As communicated to Metro’s Board in November 2008, Metro aims to place all bus garages on a regular mainte- maintenance systems, as well as nance cycle so that the facilities can continue to serve Metro for many years into the to provide a better work environ- future. These improvements are discussed under Maintenance of Bus Garages. ment for employees. The work at
In June 2009, Metro presented to the Board its strategy for addressing bus garages Metro’s maintenance facilities is that have outlived their useful lives. These old facilities present limitations due to critical to keeping the Metrobus and the size and configuration of the garage and/or the amount of land area available Metrorail fleet safe and reliable. for bus storage, so more significant investments are needed. These investments are addressed under Rehabilitation and Replacement of Bus Garages.
Metro’s first rail yards were constructed at the opening of the Metrorail system in 1976. The youngest yard, Largo, was put into service in 2004. The Maintenance of Rail Yards program allows Metro to extend the useful lives of these facilities. Main- tenance includes replacing equipment and building systems that have reached the end of their life cycles and repairs to worn walls, ceilings and floors. The first series of rail yard improvements was presented to the Metro Board in September 2009.
Testing and commissioning of new and rehabilitated rail cars is done on Metrorail track during the short 4-hour window when the rail system is closed. With the influx of over
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-39 37 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
1,100 new and rehabilitated rail cars in the next decade, a new rail car testing and com- missioning facility is needed. This is discussed under Rail Maintenance Facilities.
Performance – Fleet Maintenance Facilities As Metro’s maintenance facilities age and technology changes, capital investment Needs by Project Type ($1.2 Billion) in these facilities increases in degree and necessity. In addition, Metro must con- tinue to comply with increasingly stringent environmental regulations at all its $36.8 $60.0 facilities. The figure to the leftRehabilitation shows Metro’s andPerformance Replacement - Fleet ofMaintenance Bus Garages Facilities needs ($1.2 billion over 10 years) by project type. Maintenance of Bus Garages
Maintenance of Rail Yards $488.6 $280.7 Rehabilitation and Replacement of Bus Garages ($488.6 Million) Rail Maintenance Facilities
Many of Metro’s oldest garagesEnvironmental present operational Compliance challenges as Projectsthe facilities were $328.1 not designed for today’s bus configurations. These garages, some of which were originally designed as trolley barns, are not adequate to meet today’s bus mainte- nance and storage needs. To address this, Metro needs to replace and rehabilitate these garages with modern, energy efficient facilities and equipment at a cost of YOE, $ Millions $488.6 million (see table below). These improvements respond to the 2005 APTA Peer Review of Metro’s bus operations and facilities that recommended Metro develop a facilities plan for its bus garages. Metro’s plans for bus garages that have $36.8 Rehabilitation and Replacement outlived their useful lives were presented to the Metro Board in June 2009. $60.0 of BusRehabilitation Garages and Replacement of Bus Garages At Southern Avenue Bus Garage (built in 1928), the circulation aisle is too narrow MaintenanceMaintenance of Bus Garagesof Bus Garagesto turn a bus into a repair bay in a single maneuver. Reconstruction of this garage will allow for more efficient bus movement within the facility, among many other Maintenance of Rail Yards Maintenance of Rail Yards improvements (CNI 084). At other facilities, replacement at alternate sites is more $488.6 $280.7 appropriate. These facilities present limitations due to the size and configuration of Rail Maintenance Facilities Rail Maintenance Facilities the garage and/or the amount of land area available for bus storage. Replacement of Bus Garages (CNI 085) provides Metro the opportunity to build new two facilities EnvironmentalEnvironmental Compliance Compliance Projects Projects to replace the Royal Street Bus Garage in Alexandria and the Northern Bus Garage $328.1 in DC at sites that allow for future expansion as needed. Metro also plans to replace the Southeastern Bus Garage that was sold to accommodate development near the Nationals baseball stadium with a new garage at DC Village (CNI 086).
Rehabilitation and Replacement of Bus Garages includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 085: Replacement of Additional Bus Garages $328.6 CNI 084: Southern Avenue Bus Garage Replacement $110.0 CNI 086: Southeastern Bus Garage Replacement* $50.0 Total $488.6 *Additional project funding to come from the sale of Southeastern Bus Garage ($60 million) and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 funds ($30 million).
38 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-40 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
Maintenance of Bus Garages ($328.1 Million)
Strategic investments can extend a bus garage’s useful life so that the facility can continue to serve Metro for many years into the future. These investments allow Metro to move to a regular maintenance schedule for those bus garages not ad- dressed in Rehabilitation and Replacement of Bus Garages. Many of Metro’s bus garages have a long list of deferred capital needs, hampering the efficiency of bus repair programs and decreasing employee morale. Improvements to correct these deficiencies total $328.1 million. Similar to the Rail System Infrastructure Reha- bilitation program, Metro will group bus garage maintenance work under three separate contracts to streamline procurement procedures, increase contractor pro- ductivity and minimize work interruptions at maintenance facilities. Metro’s Board was informed of this initiative in November 2008.
Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 1 (CNI 119) includes maintenance at Metro’s bus garages that are most in need of repair, including Western (64 years old), Northern (102 years old) and Landover (20 years old). Bus Facilities Tier 1 also includes maintenance at Metro support facilities: Revenue Collection Facility, Metro Supply Facility, Landover Open Storage, Blair Road Support Shop and the MTPD District 1 Substation. Although the substation is a new facility (built in 2007), minor repairs are anticipated near the end of the CNI time frame to keep the facility in good working condition. Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 2 (CNI 120) includes bus garages that have been in operation for 27 to 31 years. Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 3 (CNI 121) includes Metro bus garages that were Many of Metro’s bus garages recently renovated. have a long list of deferred capital needs, hampering the efficiency Specific bus garage improvements will vary depending on the age and condi- tion of each facility, including replacement of bus maintenance equipment, of bus repair programs and installing additional in-ground bus lifts and automated bus cleaning systems, decreasing employee morale. rehabilitating wear surfaces and rehabilitating employee areas. At Metro’s Northern bus garage (Metro’s oldest, constructed in 1907), plans include ex- tending and upgrading 3 service bays to better accommodate articulated bus maintenance. An articulated bus uses a pivoting joint in the center to extend the bus length and passenger capacity, while still allowing it to turn on city streets. At 62-feet, articulated buses are considerably longer and require more maintenance and storage space than a standard Metrobus (37-feet or 42-feet). At Western bus garage, improvements will be made to bus service bays to im- prove maintenance capacity and electrical systems will be replaced, among many other improvements. At Landover bus garage, improvements include rehabilitation of the dispatch booth and bus maintenance equipment, along with replacement of the fire alarm system. Improvements address facility is- sues identified in the 2005 APTA Peer Review of Metro’s bus operations and facilities.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-41 39 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
Maintenance of Bus Garages includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 119: Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 1: Western, Northern and Landover $135.9 CNI 120: Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 2: Montgomery and Four Mile Run $113.9 CNI 121: Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 3: Bladensburg $78.2 Total $328.1
Maintenance of Rail Yards ($280.7 Million)
As with Maintenance of Bus Garages, the Maintenance of Rail Yards program al- lows Metro to extend the useful life of an existing facility, specifically, its rail yards. Facilities at Metro’s rail yards include service and inspection shops, maintenance, operations and yard control buildings and traction power/tiebreaker substations. Improvements will begin with Metro’s oldest rail yards that were built at the open- ing of the rail system. The scope of work will vary by facility depending on age and conditions, but may include: replacing shop/building equipment, rehabilitating wear surfaces, rehabilitating employee areas, upgrading security and public an- nouncement systems, among other improvements.
Similar to the Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation program and Maintenance of Bus Garages, Metro will group rail yard maintenance work under three separate contracts to streamline procurement procedures, increase contractor productiv- Rail yard maintenance work will ity and minimize work interruptions at maintenance facilities. Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 1 (CNI 116) includes maintenance at Metro’s oldest rail yards at Alex- vary by facility depending on age andria, Brentwood and New Carrollton, ranging from 26 to 33 years old. Rail Yard and conditions, but may in- Facility Repairs Tier 2 (CNI 117) includes facilities that have been in operation for clude: replacing shop/building 16 to 23 years. Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 3 (CNI 118) includes Metro’s newest rail maintenance facilities, ranging in age from 5 to 11 years old. Capital needs at equipment, rehabilitating wear Metro’s rail yards total $280.7 million. surfaces, rehabilitating employ- ee areas, upgrading security and Maintenance of Rail Yards includes the following CNI projects: public announcement systems, CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) among other improvements. CNI 116: Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 1: Alexandria, Brentwood and New Carrollton $125.7 CNI 117: Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 2: West Falls Church, Greenbelt and Shady Grove $123.9 CNI 118: Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 3: Branch Avenue, Glenmont and Largo $31.1 Total $280.7
40 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-42 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
Rail Maintenance Facilities ($60.0 Million)
Metro needs to replace rail cars for the first time in its 30+ year history. Over the next decade, Metro capital needs include over 1,100 new and rehabilitated rail Currently, testing and commis- cars. Metro conducts extensive testing on each train before putting it into service. sioning of new trains is conducted The testing and commissioning period for a pair of rail cars is typically sixty days. at night during the short 4-hour All on-board systems are tested as well as how the cars work with the Automatic Train Control System. The tests are performed under a variety of operating condi- window when the Metrorail sys- tions that examine performance both within the normal operating range and at the tem is closed. This is not sufficient limits of that range and include tests on acceleration and braking, communica- given the volume of trains that tions, heating and cooling systems, lighting, signage and door controls. will be commissioned over the Metro does not have a dedicated facility to do this work. Currently, testing and com- next ten years. missioning of new trains is conducted at night during the short 4-hour window when the Metrorail system is closed. In the evenings, Metrorail track is shared with contrac- tors, maintenance crews, and trains being moved for maintenance and staging for the next day’s operations. Under these conditions, a maximum of 8-10 trains can be commissioned per month. This is not sufficient given the volume of trains that will be received through 2020. A new test track and commissioning facility will cost $60.0 million and will permit Metro to accept up to 20 cars per month. The facility will also be used for ongoing engineering analysis and enhancement to the rail fleet.
Rail Maintenance Facilities includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 071: Test Track and Commissioning Facility $60.0 Total $60.0
Environmental Compliance Projects ($36.8 Million)
Metro’s maintenance facilities house environmental systems that must operate properly to ensure compliance with increasingly stringent environmental regula- tions and to prevent expensive remediation programs and potential fines or shut- downs at maintenance facilities. These include vehicle fuel tanks and systems, storm water and wastewater pre-treatment systems, air emissions controls and other systems. This program includes the upgrade and replacement of existing systems within warranty periods and the installation of additional systems, totaling $36.8 million through 2020.
Environmental Compliance Projects include the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 011: Underground Storage Tank Replacement $29.5 CNI 010: Environmental Compliance Projects $7.3 Total $36.8
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-43 41 Asset Category: Systems and Technology
Metro’s Information Technology Capability PyramidInformation as of FY Technology 2010 Capability - End of FY2010 The highly visible elements of Metro’s infrastructure are its trains, buses and vans that move customers to Goal 4: Enterprise-Wide Services & Information destinations throughout the region 365 days a year. Service Enterprise Internal Regional Enterprise Working behind the scenes is Metro’s business and Oriented Information WMATA Government Web Architecture Management Interoperability Interoperability Applications technology infrastructure that provides critical sup- port to transit operations. Some of Metro’s technol- Goal 3: Enterprise-Wide Applications ogy systems, software and equipment go unnoticed Property & Facilities Human Customer Rail Bus Financial by customers, but without them, transit operations Management Resources Service Applications Applications Applications Applications Applications Applications would be severely hampered.
Transit Scheduling Asset Management Fleet Management Procurement Public Safety Using Metrobus as an example, software and Applications Applications Applications Applications Applications communication equipment enable staff to Goal 2: Foundation of Information Technology Infrastructures schedule buses, distribute information to the Geographic Data Center Operations Seat Management & Data public (printed timetables, web, telephone Information Systems & Consolidation Enterprise Licensing Warehousing and smart phones), collect fares and data about the number of passengers traveling on IT/Network Wireless Email Network E-Government particular lines, assign bus operators to routes, Operations Center Communications Messaging Modernization Infrastructure monitor performance, track new and/or relo- Telecommuni- Wide Area Voice Radio Enterprise Document cated bus stops, store employee records, cations Network Communications IT Security Management along with numerous other functions. Goal 1: Establishment of Information Technology Operations An extensive technology infrastructure is Strategic Planning Management Enterprise Business Process IT Budget Procurement also in place for Metrorail and MetroAc- (Business & IT) Infrastructure Architecture Re-engineering Planning Policies & Procedures cess. For example, as MetroAccess riders call into Metro’s call center to request a Needs Signi cant Improvement Progress Made, Still Needs Improvement Working Well ride, software is used to track eligibil- The above figure illustrates the status of information technology systems beginning in FY 2011, ity, schedule trips and identify routes. identifying those systems that still require investment. Technology also helps Metro monitor the condition of its physical infrastructure and plan for maintenance and re- $24.1 $25.3 pairs. For example, Metrobus uses software to monitor maintenance for each of its approximately 1,500 Performance – Systems and Technology buses and Metrorail’s track inspectors use soft- Needs by Project Type ($731.9 Million) Operations Support Software $24.1 $25.3 ware to record and monitor the condition of the $24.1 $25.3 rail. Investment in theseBusiness systems Support is discussed Software & Equipment $24.1 $25.3 $24.1 Operations Support Software $256.5 under Operations Support Software. $25.3 Operations Support Software Rail Fare Equipment Operations Support Software $426.0 OperationsBusinessBusiness Support Support Software Software Software & Equipment and Metro’s systems and technology capital needs BusinessOperations Support Support Software Software & Equipment Power System Upgrades - Rail $256.5 RailEquipment Fare Equipment extend to the corporate and financial management $426.0 $256.5 Business Support Software & Equipment $426.0 RailBusiness Fare EquipmentSupport Software & Equipment $256.5 Power System Upgrades - Rail of the agency (see Business Support Software and $426.0 $256.5 RailPower Fare EquipmentSystems Upgrades - Rail $426.0 PowerRail Fare System Equipment Upgrades - Rail Equipment). Needed system and technology invest- Power System Upgrades - Rail PowerRail Fare System Equipment Upgrades - Rail YOE, $ Millions ments also include Power System Upgrades – Rail and Rail Fare Equipment. Metro’s Performance - System and Technology needs fall into four main project types and total $731.9 million over the next 10 years (see figure at left). A brief description of each project type follows.
42 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-44 Systems and Technology
Operations Support Software ($426 Million)
These projects cover software upgrades and other technology improvements that are essential to transit operations. Metro’s Operations Support Software program totals $426 million over the next 10 years including scheduling and dispatch software, on-board applications (for example, automatic bus fluid management), asset management systems, and the technology infrastructure needed to support these applications such as data centers and communication networks (see table below).
Rail operations support software includes upgrades to the Operations Control Center system that monitors train movement and expansion of the system to serve the new Dulles extension. Enhancements to Metrorail operating support software will improve the integration with other Metorail systems (for example, asset management and track work scheduling) and incorporate data from the new 7000-Series rail cars. Bus operations support software covers the deploy- ment of centralized, field and on-board applications such as automatic vehicle maintenance, fluid management, computer aided dispatch and automatic vehicle location systems. Metrobus and Metrorail operations both utilize as- set manage support software to track inventory and monitor the condition of assets. This software will be upgraded and new modules implemented in order to increase the efficiency of maintenance work. MTPD operations support soft- ware addresses the department’s records management system which needs to be upgraded to support dispatch, crime and response tracking.
Operations Support Software projects include enhanced technology infrastruc- ture to minimize service disruptions. For example, Metro’s data centers will be upgraded to industry standards to improve reliability and avoid unnecessary failures. A network operations center will monitor system and network enter- prise health. In addition, telephone and wireless communication systems will be upgraded to avoid outages impacting transit operations and customer service. Operations Support Software
Operations Support Software includes the following CNI projects: projects include enhanced tech- nology infrastructure to minimize CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 056: Rail Operations Support Software $147.6 service disruptions. For example, CNI 045: Data Centers and Infrastructures $97.9 Metro’s data centers will be CNI 043: Bus Operations Support Software $74.4 upgraded to industry standards CNI 052: Network and Communications $51.6 to improve reliability and avoid CNI 053: Network Operations Center (NOC) $26.8 unnecessary failures. CNI 042: Bus & Rail Asset Management Software $26.2 CNI 051: Police Dispatch and Records Management $1.6 Total $426.0
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-45 43 Systems and Technology
Business Support Software and Equipment ($256.5 Million)
Business Support Software and Equipment projects include improvements to Metro’s technology infrastructure to enhance the security of electronic informa- tion, replace outdated machines with newer, more technologically advanced equipment and upgrade software to support the corporate and financial manage- ment of the agency. Metro’s Business Support Software and Equipment program totals $256.5 million over the next 10 years (see table below).
In order to secure Metro’s technology infrastructure and reduce the risk of mali- cious attacks, cyber terrorism and fraud, Metro will put in place a comprehensive agency-wide security architecture. This includes additional security measures for credit card transactions made by Metro riders, including the purchase of farecards, loading value to SmarTrip cards and paying parking fees. IT security controls are required by Payment Card Industry (PCI) and financial system audits to protect electronic data and resources.
Metro will also replace key equipment necessary for transit operation support. New portable radios will enable transit police officers to quickly respond to incidents. Outdated currency processing machines, used by Metro employees for making fare box revenue deposits, will be replaced with newer machines that are more reliable and efficient.
Many of Metro’s financial management software systems are at end-of-life and will no longer be supported by the vendor. This includes software for treasury, budget, cash management and accounts payable. Planned improvements will address out-of-date technology management techniques. In addition, the Metro IT OneStop and Office Automation program will provide for remote trouble- shooting and electronic software distribution, increasing response time and In order to secure Metro’s tech- productivity. Moving away from manual paper based processes to electronic records and forms through implementation of a document management system nology infrastructure and reduce will produce significant employee productivity gains. the risk of malicious attacks, cyber terrorism and fraud, Metro Business Support Software and Equipment includes the following CNI projects: will put in place a comprehen- CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) sive Agency-wide security CNI 049: Management Support Software $100.9 architecture. CNI 048: Sensitive Data Protection Technology $69.3 CNI 050: Metro IT OneStop and Office Automation $47.1 CNI 046: Document Management System $33.1 CNI 103: Police Portable Radio Replacement $3.9 CNI 030: Currency Processing Machines $2.2 Total $256.5
44 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-46 Systems and Technology
Power System Upgrades – Rail ($25.3 Million)
To meet increasing ridership To meet increasing ridership de- mand and avoid overcrowding, demand and avoid overcrowding, Metro is moving from a combina- Metro is moving from a combina- tion of 6- and 8-car trains to 100% tion of 6- and 8-car trains to 100% 8-car trains at peak periods. This requires additional investment in 8-car trains at peak periods. This the electrical system that powers requires additional investment in the trains. This project includes the electrical system that powers improvements to the traction- power system to support 8-car the trains. trains. This includes upgrades to traction power equipment and cables to reduce the risk of power outages and/or fire. Metro’s Power System Upgrades – Rail program totals $25.3 million over the next 10 years.
Power System Upgrades - Rail includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 076: 8-Car Train Power Upgrades $25.3 Total $25.3
Rail Fare Equipment ($24.1 Million)
Metro is considering new technologies for fare collection, potentially moving to a bank card (credit/debit) fare payment system. Until then, Metro will continue to support its Automatic Fare Collection (AFC) system. This includes replacing and upgrading fare collection system parts and IT components at fare gates, ex- press vendors and other machines as they age and/or become obsolete, as well as upgrades necessary to continue compliance with Payment Card Industry (PCI) standards. Metro’s Rail Fare Equipment program totals $24.1 million over the next 10 years (see table below).
Rail Fare Equipment includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 095: Automatic Fare Collection Machine Repairs $12.0 CNI 093: Maintaining NEXTFARE System $6.4 CNI 031: Debit/Credit Processing Requirements $4.1 CNI 032: Fare Media Encoders $1.5 Total $24.1
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-47 45 Asset Category: Track and Structures
Metro’s track and structure assets include more than just the railroad track. Assets include the steel running rail that guides Metro’s train cars, the cross ties and fasteners that hold the rail in place, the ballast bed that supports the cross ties and the third rail that provides power to the train. Structures also refer to the retaining walls that protect the track bed and underground tunnels, the concrete pads that Metro Stations Opening by Year keep the track bed properly elevated and the bridges that span roads and bodies of water. Together, track and structure assets comprise the 106 mile long Metrorail system: 51 subway miles (below ground), 46 surface miles (above ground) and 9 aerial miles (bridges). This totals 212 miles of track, since the rail system has two tracks.
Metro’s oldest rail segments date back to 1976, when the system opened, and require major track and structural rehabilitation (see graphic). The maintenance needs of these capital assets have accelerated due to increased train frequency, extended operating hours and longer trains (the 4-car trains used when the system opened have been replaced with 6- and 8-car trains). The region makes good use of this infrastructure. Compared with other large U.S. transit agencies, Metrorail moves more passengers per operating mile than the national average (excluding New York City transit).4 Metro wears down its track faster than many heavy rail systems in the U.S. including BART (San Francisco), Chicago Transit Authority and MARTA (Atlanta). On an average weekday in FY 2009, there were about 750,000 passenger trips on Metrorail or 3,537 pas- senger trips per track mile per day.1 Projections show average weekday passenger trips increasing by about 20% to 910,000 trips by 2020 and to 970,000 trips by 2030. As Metrorail ridership grows, additional investment in track and structures will be critical to the system’s safe and reliable operations.
The capital investments needed to maintain Metro’s existing track and structures come to almost $600 million over the next ten years (FY 2011 – 2020) and fall into two project types: track rehabilitation and station/tunnel rehabilitation. A brief description of each project type follows.
Track Rehabilitation - $540M Station/Tunnel Rehabilitation - $46M
YOE, $ Millions
4 Source: Federal Transit Administration National Transit Database, 2005 Annual National Transit Summaries and Trends.
46 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-48 Track and Structures
Track Rehabilitation ($539.3 Million)
As part of the track rehabilitation capital program, Metro rehabilitates ma- jor sections of the rail system (routine maintenance is addressed through the operating program). Track work occurs during off-peak hours (evenings and weekends) and when the system is closed. This rehabilitation work includes replacing turnouts that allow trains to switch from one track to another (30/ year), running rail (52,800 feet/year, or 10 miles/year), direct fixation fasten- ers (16,000/year), cross ties (8,000/year) and third rail insulators (5,000/year). Metro replaces components when they become worn or unserviceable due to deterioration, excessive wear, or defects. In addition, track rehabilitation proj- ects upgrade the performance of the track using new technologies, processes and equipment. For example, as the third rail is being replaced, a new alumi- num and steel composite will be installed. The new third rail design will pro- vide less resistance for 8-car trains and save energy. Metro uses a continuous welding process to rehabilitate track which reduces the number of open rail joints throughout the rail system, requires less maintenance than mechanical splices, improves the electrical conductivity of the rail, eliminates joint defects and eliminates cross tie fires. Metro continually strives to identify strategies that save capital and operating dollars.
Track rehabilitation projects also maintain the integrity of structures (e.g., aerial bridges and retaining walls) by repairing masonry, drainage systems, tensioning cables and expansion joints. Many of Metro’s structures have been in service between 20 - 30 years and have been subjected to extreme environ- mental conditions. By rehabilitating structural components, Metro maintains the integrity of these dynamically loaded Right-of-Way structures and restores the structures to their designed load carrying capacity.
Concrete pads (or grout/plinth pads) located below the track are another key structural component addressed under track rehabilitation projects. Concrete pads provide elevation and support for the track and track fasteners. Other pads, called floating slab isolation pads, dissipate vibration energy and are replaced as needed to restore the track structure to the proper elevation. Im- proper elevation can result in damage to the car’s third rail collector shoes and the vibrations can potentially lead to structural cracking in the surrounding buildings and structures. Metro’s Track Rehabilitation projects total $540 mil- Many of Metro’s structures have lion over the next 10 years. been in service between 20 - 30
Track Rehabilitation includes the following CNI projects: years and have been subjected to extreme environmental CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) conditions. CNI 024: Track Rehabilitation $387.2 CNI 023: Third Rail Rehabilitation $40.2
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-49 47 Track and Structures
CNI 018: Track Welding Program $31.7 CNI 021: Track Pad/Shock Absorber Rehabilitation $29.5 CNI 022: Track Structural Rehabilitation $22.4 CNI 019: Track Floating Slabs Rehabilitation $16.3 CNI 089: Track Fasteners $12.0 Total $539.3
Station/Tunnel Leak Rehabilitation ($46 Million)
Water, moisture and humidity cause premature deterioration of Metro’s infra- structure, track components, electrical, lighting and automatic train control equipment. Station/Tunnel Leak Mitigation work eliminates unsafe wet condi- tions for Metrorail passengers and prevents service delays resulting from water intrusion.The goal of this capital project is to maintain the structural integrity of the tunnel liners and prevent the corrosion of wayside systems and equipment. Repairing station/tunnel leaks over the next ten years requires $46.0 million to conduct engineering assessments, purchase specialized access equipment and provide additional training for employees.
Water, moisture and humidity cause premature deterioration of Metro’s infrastructure, track components, electrical, light- Station/Tunnel Leak Rehabilitation includes the following CNI projects: ing and automatic train control CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) equipment. CNI 026: Station/Tunnel Leak Mitigation $46.0 Total $46.0
48 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-50 Asset Category: Passenger Facilities
Passenger facilities refer to the 86 rail stations used by over 220 million customers in FY 2009. Metro’s rail stations are iconic in design and structure and provide for a pleasant and unique passenger experience. However, 38% (33 stations) are between 20 and 30 years old, and 32% (28 stations) are over 30 years old. These stations are in need of consistent investment to maintain their safe functionality.
Maintenance of the rail stations falls under Metro’s Station Enhancement program, an in-house program that conducts a range of rehabilitation work to help restore the stations to its original character. Taking one architectural feature of the sta- tions as an example, Metro maintains over 2.4 million square feet of paver tiles on mezzanines and platforms, which is equivalent to over 15 dual lane roadway miles. Regular cleaning and repair of the stations will preserve the value of these assets, improve customer perception of the system, and identify and address any potential safety concerns. Well maintained stations are a part of Metro’s overall service delivery package. Metrorail Stations by Age Within Metro’s rail stations, 236 elevators and 588 35 escalators provide vital transportation linkages to dis- abled and elderly passengers throughout the region. 30 Metro is also responsible for maintaining 39 elevators 33 at its support facilities. To keep elevator and escala- 25 28 tor facilities available and reliable, Metro conducts regular maintenance throughout the system and 20 upgrades the safety standards of existing equipment. Preventing outages reduces the need for shuttle bus 15 service, which is an inconvenience to passengers and 10 14 increases Metro’s operating costs. When outages do 11 occur, Metro communicates with customers through 5 passenger information displays at stations, station an- nouncements, email and text message alerts, website 0 announcements and signs. <10 years 10-20 years 20-30 years Over 30 years
Metro’s vehicle-related passenger facilities include 21 parking garages, 29 surface lots with approximately 58,000 park-and-ride and 3,500-metered Kiss-and-Ride spaces, 6 access roads and 51 bus loops. Metro’s parking garages range in age from 3 years old to 40 years old. Metro parking garages are deteriorating due to ex- posure to the elements and to a lack of a capitally-funded preventive maintenance program. Currently, the parking garages do not have a preventive maintenance program, and undergo a minor rehabilitation every 7 years and a major rehabilita- tion every 15 years. A capital maintenance program would extend the life of park- ing garages and reduce rehabilitation costs by 30 to 50%. Bus loops and access roads have been used for more than 30 years as well. Metro needs to conduct preventive maintenance work to extend the useful life of vehicle-related assets and
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-51 49 Passenger Facilities
prevent costly rehabilitation projects. The close proximity of these vehicle-related Metro needs to conduct pre- facilities to rail stations makes it important to prevent water, debris and other run- ventive maintenance work to off from damaging the track bed.
extend the useful life of vehicle- Although the bulk of Metro’s passenger facilities investment target rail stations, related assets and prevent costly elevators, escalators and parking facilities, additional investments are required to rehabilitation projects. The close maintain Metro’s bicycle racks and lockers. Between 2002 and 2007, the number of people using bikes to access rail stations grew by 60%. Bicycling is one of proximity of these vehicle-re- the most cost-efficient modes of station access Metro can provide. For example, lated facilities to rail stations the space dedicated to a single vehicle in a parking garage could hold 10 – 12 makes it important to prevent bicycles. Metro has 1,743 bike racks and 1,268 key-operated lockers throughout water, debris and other runoff the rail system. Due to increased population, denser development around stations and gas prices, it has become clear that Metro needs to provide and maintain from damaging the track bed. bicycle storage facilities. Metro’s Performance - Passenger Facility needs over the next ten years total $372.3 million and fall into three project types: Maintenance of Rail System Facilities, Elevators/Escalators Facilities, and Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (see table below). A brief description of each project type follows.
Performance Passenger Facility Needs by Project Type Project Type Capital Needs ($ YOE Millions) Elevator/Escalator Facilities $233.8 Maintenance of Rail Station Facilities $133.9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities $4.6 Total $372.3
Elevator / Escalator Facilities ($233.8 million)
Metro staff maintains 275 elevators (236 in Metrorail system and 39 in Metro support facilities) and 588 escalators in order to control costs and allow for greater scheduling flexibility. This program continually conducts preventive maintenance work throughout the system to keep the elevators and escalator facilities available and reliable. In ad- dition, Metro refurbishes 15 elevators and 30 escalators a year. Elevators and escala- tors generally have a 40-50 year life with a midlife rehabilitation at about 20-25 years. Hydraulic elevators can be modernized for about $240,000 (2008 dollars) and traction elevators can be modernized for about $300,000 (2008 dollars) depending on the size and location of the elevator. The cost of rehabilitating an escalator is about $400,000 depending on the style, manufacturer, and length of the escalator. Metro estimates that the maintenance work extends the life of escalators by an additional 20 years.
A regular maintenance program enables Metro to lower operating and future re- pair costs. These capital investments ensure the longevity of Metro’s escalators and
50 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-52 Passenger Facilities
elevators. Metro also strives to improve the safety and reliability of elevators and escalators by installing upgrades to comb plates, hand rail systems, controllers and drives, amongst other features. To increase the safety of elevators and escalators, Metro upgrades equipment, enhances lighting around assets, and produces advertising campaigns (e.g., the advertisement comparing escalators to alligators; see right).
Elevator/Escalator Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 073: Escalator Rehabilitation $177.8 CNI 072: Elevator Rehabilitation $56.0 Total $233.8
Maintenance of Rail Station Facilities ($133.9 Million)
The Station Enhancement Program was initiated in April 1991. The purpose of the Station Enhancement Program is to restore the appearance of stations. When the program started, the goal was to complete “major” enhancements at 10 stations per year which was subsequently increased to 12 stations per year. “Major” en- hancement tasks include pressure washing coffered ceilings and walls and painting interior surfaces that are not easily reachable (e.g., track bed grates). In July 2000, the program was expanded to include 12 “mini” enhancements. “Mini” enhance- ment tasks include cleaning masonry surfaces (e.g., passageways, trackbed walls, and exterior canopies), painting interior surfaces (e.g., fare gates, mezzanine and passageway ceiling tiles), repairing metal components (e.g., platform shelter, sta- tion doors, and drainage grates), repairing interior masonry surfaces (e.g., granite edge stones and paver tiles); painting exterior surfaces (e.g., parking lot light poles, bike racks/lockers, and parking booths), replacing station signs (e.g., on kiosks and trash receptacles), refinishing bus and station platform shelter benches, and pol- ishing bronze surfaces (e.g., on escalators). A “major” enhancement takes about 3 months while a “mini” enhancement takes about three weeks. By completing 12 “major” and 12 “mini” enhancements annually, the condition of each Metrorail station is restored every 3.75 years. The Station Enhancement Program work will be coordinated under the Rail System Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program.
The Parking Lot Preventive Maintenance Program provides for continuous reha- bilitation of Metro’s 21 parking garages and 29 surface lots. A program of regular sweeping and washdowns reduces the concentrations of corrosive road dirt and chemicals inside the structures. Under a preventive maintenance program, as- phalt parking lots will be routinely crack-sealed and treated to extend the life of the surfaces. Every five years, a sealing treatment will be applied to concrete
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-53 51 Passenger Facilities
pavement, concrete walkways, structural concrete slab surfaces and stairways to prevent water and chemical penetration, which cause premature deterioration of the parking facilities. Periodic maintenance of parking signs and post would also be performed under the preventive maintenance program.
Maintenance of Rail Station Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 087: Station Enhancement Program $80.3 CNI 075: Parking Lot Preventive Maintenance $53.6 Total $133.9
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ($4.6 Million)
Over the next ten years, Metro needs $4.6 million to replace remaining Rack III style bike racks (see photo) that are in poor condition, are difficult to maintain and provide limited bike storage capacity. Many of these racks were installed when the Metrorail system opened. The program will also replace other racks that are structurally damaged and implement a locker replacement plan. This program will replace up to 900 bike racks. It will also replace bike lockers, many of which also are showing their age or are damaged, with an effective replacement that provides the same features – secure, covered and guaranteed bike parking.
Replacement of bike racks and lockers on a regular basis will provide access to more people in the region, and effectively increases the “bike-shed,” or the distance that people will travel to and from each rail station. More cyclists traveling to and from each station also results in a safer travel environment around the station, which results in a feedback loop that will generate additional cyclist use of each station. Bicycling to a Metro station is becoming a more attractive option due to the increasing number of bike trails linked to stations. For example, the Washington, Ohio and Dominion Trail and Mount Vernon trails provide riders access to many Orange and Blue line stations in Virginia. New and enhanced trails, such as the improvements underway to the Metropolitan Branch Trail (from Union Station in the District of Columbia to Silver Spring, MD), will provide enhanced access to many Metro stations.
Bicycles & Pedestrian Facilities includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 036: Replacement of Bicycle Racks & Lockers $4.6 Total $4.6
52 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-54 Asset Category: Maintenance Equipment
Metro’s rail system consists of 106 miles of track that was put into service between Timely rehabilitation and re- 1976 and 2004. Maintaining this network of track in a safe and reliable state requires an array of rail maintenance equipment. Rail maintenance equipment placement of track equipment is essential for the efficient execution of track rehabilitation projects. Timely re- will ensure equipment depend- habilitation and replacement of track equipment will ensure equipment depend- ability, reduce the probability of ability, reduce the probability of delay due to equipment breakdown and allow delay due to equipment break- for efficient use of track work hours. To keep the track work area safe, Metro also needs to replace old and illegible signage (e.g., “High Voltage”). Rail maintenance down and allow for efficient use equipment needs also includes the rehabilitation of the track switch machines and of track work hours. the procurement of a geometry vehicle to analyze track conditions.
To maintain Metro’s rail car and bus fleet, maintenance facilities use a variety of equipment. The rehabilitation and replacement of this fleet maintenance equipment on a life cycle basis is necessary to maintain equipment reliability and safety.
Metro stores the parts and materials necessary to deliver Metrobus, Metrorail and Performance—Maintenance Equipment MetroAccess services at 23 storerooms. These storerooms are operated by the Office Needs by Project Type ($240.5 Million) of Procurement and Materials (5), the Rail Department (7) and the Office of Bus Main- $7.7 tenance (11). The majority of storerooms are located at bus garages and rail yards. The Rail Maintenance Equipment Metro Supply Facility (MSF) is the agency’s major storeroom and is operated by the Of- fice of Procurement and Materials. To maintain safe and reliable storeroom operations, Rail Car Repair Equipment $29.1 materials handling equipment (e.g., forklifts) must be replaced on a life cycle basis. In addition, the replacement of existing vertical storage units, shelving, and racking will Bus Repair Equipment improve the operational efficiency of Metro’s storerooms. $44.1 Business Facilities Equipment Metro’s Performance - Maintenance Equipment needs fall into four main project $159.7 types and total $240.5 million over the next 10 years (see figure to the right). A brief description of each project type follows.
Rail Maintenance Equipment ($159.7 Million) $7.7 RailRail Maintenance Maintenance Equipment Equipment Under the Track Maintenance Equipment project, Metro rehabilitates and replaces RailRail Car Car Repair Repair Equipment Equipment heavy-duty track equipment including locomotives, tunnel washers,$29.1 deicers, flat cars, tampers, prime movers, grinders, and cranes. About two-thirds of this equipment is Bus Repair Equipment used to maintain the steel running rail that guides Metro’s trains, the cross ties and Bus Repair Equipment fasteners that hold the rail in place, the ballast bed that supports the cross ties and the $44.1 Business Facilities Equipment third rail that provides power to the train. The other equipment is used to maintain Business Facilities Equipment Metro’s aerial structures and tunnels. Over the$159.7 next ten years, Metro plans to replace 84 pieces of heavy-duty maintenance equipment according to equipment life cycles.
Metro’s rail system contains thousands of graphic signs indicating locations and warnings to employees, emergency responders, and the general public. Examples
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-55 53 Maintenance Equipment
include: “High Voltage,” “Fire Department,” “No Trespassing,” and “Danger.” Rail track signage is essential for safe operations and emergency responses. Many signs throughout the rail system are approximately 30 years old and require replace- ment because they are damaged, deteriorated or obsolete. Under the Replacement of Rail Track Signage project, Metro plans to fabricate and install approximately 3,000 track markers and 500 fire and safety signs per year.
Track switch machines are the mechanical devices that move the steel rail so a train can move from one track to another. Metro’s rail system currently has 306 main line track switch machines which move track (“throws”) about 1,000 times per day. These devices will be regularly replaced under the Switch Machine Rehabilitation project thus improving the safety and reliability of the track in- terlocking infrastructure. This project will focus on maximizing the life of newly installed switch machines and the replacement of units based on years of number of “throws” and years in service.
Metro’s maintenance equipment needs include the procurement of a track ge- ometry vehicle used for track evaluation. A track geometry car passes over the steel rail measuring position, curvature, alignment of the track and smoothness. This special rail car uses various sensors and auxiliary wheels for this purpose. The geometry vehicle can prevent safety and reliability problems by detecting track misalignments and faults. Currently, Metro has contracts with outside firms to do track geometry inspections twice a year, track flaw detection and lateral load testing. Purchasing this vehicle would allow for more frequent track inspections throughout the year, as well as testing all track repairs as they are completed.
Under the Track Maintenance Rail Maintenance Equipment includes the following CNI projects: Equipment project, Metro re- CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) habilitates and replaces heavy- CNI 025: Track Maintenance Equipment $129.8 duty track equipment including CNI 020: Replacement of Rail Track Signage $12.5 CNI 027: Switch Machine Rehabilitation Project $11.1 locomotives, tunnel washers, CNI 065: Geometry Vehicle $6.3 deicers, flat cars, tampers, prime Total $159.7 movers, grinders, and cranes. Rail Car Repair Equipment ($44.1 Million)*
Metro’s rail car maintenance shops use a variety of portable work equipment (e.g., generators and welding carts) and test equipment to maintain the rail car fleet. Metro’s inventory of rail car repair equipment includes 125 units of maintenance equipment, 48 units of shop test equipment and 15 units of shop machine equip- ment. To keep this equipment safe and reliable, Metro plans to annually replace the equipment that has reached the end of its life cycle. The total cost of this equipment is $44.1 million.
54 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-56 Maintenance Equipment
Rail Car Repair Equipment includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 066: Rail Car Repair Equipment* $44.1 Total $44.1 *Previously referred to as “Heavy-Duty Track Equipment.”
Bus Repair Equipment ($29.1 Million)
Metro uses a variety of bus repair equipment to maintain its bus fleet. This equip- ment includes jack stands, wheel dollies, pressure washers, parts cleaners, test equipment, storeroom shelving, paint booths, and battery chargers. Bus repair equipment needs to be replaced when it is beyond economical repair or when it hinders maintenance shop performance. Over the next ten years, new repair equipment will be necessary to address the changing configuration of the bus fleet. The total cost of this equipment is $29.1 million.
Bus Repair Equipment includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 004: Bus Repair Equipment $29.1 Total $29.1
Business Facilities Equipment ($7.7 Million)
Metro’s 23 warehouse storage facilities utilize heavy equipment in their day-to-day operations. These facilities store Metro’s inventory of repair parts for the system. Equipment such as propane forklifts, electric stand up forklifts, electric man up order pickers, and electric swing-reach narrow-aisle forklifts require regular re- placement at the end of their useful life. Replacement of materials handling equip- ment will also lower operating costs by reducing contracted maintenance on this equipment. Additionally, upgraded vertical storage units, shelving, and racking must be installed to use available space and labor more efficiently and safely. The improved technology will result in more accurate accounting of the material being stored. Over the next ten years, Metro’s materials handling equipment and vertical storage units/shelving replacement needs at all 23 storerooms totals $7.7 million.
Business Facilities Equipment includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 029: Warehouse Vertical Storage Units/ Shelving $6.2 CNI 028: Materials Handling Equipment $1.5 Total $7.7
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-57 55 Asset Category: Support Facilities
In addition to its 86 rail stations, 35 parking garages, 9 bus operating garages and 9 rail yards, Metro owns and maintains 12 additional support facilities. These buildings house administrative offices, training rooms, revenue processing activi- ties, material storage, police work and a print shop (see list of support facilities below). The largest of these facilities is the Jackson Graham Building (JGB) lo- cated in downtown Washington, DC. JGB houses Metro’s administrative offices, including transit operations (Metrorail, Metrobus and MetroAccess), Transit Police administration, engineering, information technology, finance, planning, human resources and communications. The building also houses an Operations Control Center that monitors the movement of Metro vehicles. After 35 year in operation, JGB is in need of renovation.
Metro’s Support Facilities Facility Use Size (sq ft) Jackson Graham Building Metro’s headquarters, administra- 437,644 600 5th Street, NW, tive offices, and an Operations Washington, DC Control Center Carmen Turner Facility Administrative offices, mainte- 725,574 3500 Pennsy Drive, nance, and training facilities. The Hyattsville, MD facility will house the primary Operations Control Center in the In addition to its 86 rail stations, near future. Alexandria Yard Revenue Col- Revenue processing, fare media 50,000 35 parking garages, 9 bus oper- lection Facility handling ating garages and 9 rail yards, 3401 Eisenhower Avenue, Metro owns and maintains 12 Alexandria, VA additional support facilities. Metro Supply Facility 8201 Administrative offices and supply 142,912 Ardwick-Ardmore Road, storage Landover, MD Open Materials Storage Facility Surplus materials storage 58,000 3360 Pennsy Drive, Landover, MD Stone Straw Building Surplus materials storage, print 68,721 900 Franklin Street, NE, shop and MTPD Cadet Training Washington, DC Facility Salt Storage Facility Centralized storage of salt for win- 28,204 2310 Chillum Road, ter ice melting Hyattsville, MD MTPD District I Substation – Police facility 18,500 Fort Totten 5315 1st Place, NE, Washington, DC
56 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-58 Support Facilities
Facility Use Size (sq ft) MTPD District II Substation – Police facility 7,500 Huntington 5801 N. King’s Highway, Alexandria, VA Blair Road Support Shop Office of Plant Maintenance 6,600 6211 Blair Road, NW, facility Washington, DC Special Operations Division Police facility 2,500 4303 Auth Place, Camp Springs, MD Systems Maintenance on Administrative offices, storage and 57,740 Telegraph Road training 195 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, VA
At Metro’s Alexandria revenue collection facility (RCF), employees process fares for deposit. New equipment and building repairs are needed at this facility to improve efficiency of fare collection processes. Metro’s support facilities also provide necessary storage for a variety of materials. Over the next ten years, Metro plans to conduct minor renovation at Metro Supply Facility, Open Materials Storage, Salt Storage Facil- ity, Blair Road Support Shop, and Systems Maintenance on Telegraph Road. Metro has proposed conducting renovations at the Metro Supply Facility, Open Materials Storage, and Blair Road Support Shop under the Bus Facilities Tier 1 project.
Three of Metro’s support facilities specifically serve the Metro Transit Police Depart- ment (MTPD): District 1 Substation (Fort Totten), District 2 Substation (Huntington) and the Special Operations Division offices. These support facilities enable the MTPD to provide law enforcement and public safety services in 1,500 square The District 2 Substation and miles within Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. The District 2 Sub- station and Special Operation Division facilities are severely deficient in meeting Special Operation Division the Department’s needs and require replacement. facilities are severely deficient in meeting the Department’s needs The Performance capital investments needed to maintain Metro’s support facilities that are not covered under the Bus Facilities Tier 1 project total $50 million over the and require replacement. next ten years (FY 2011 – 2020). A brief description of each project type follows. Business Support Facilities - $28.9M Police Facilities - $21.1M
YOE, $ Millions
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-59 57 Support Facilities
Business Support Facilities ($28.9 Million)
Improvements to Metro’s business support facilities include renovation of the Jack- son Graham building (JGB) and new equipment at the revenue collection facility. These investments total $28.9 million over the next 10 years (see table below).
JGB is Metro’s headquarters. It was constructed in 1974 prior to the Metrorail system opening in 1976. The 440,000 sq. ft. building has not undergone complete renovation in its 35 years. An analysis conducted for Metro by Bolan Smart As- sociates indicated that the sale of the Jackson Graham Building and relocation of Metro headquarters would result in a net loss of between $5 and $50 million for Metro. As a result, Metro plans to renovate the facility. Original equipment will be replaced with more reliable and energy efficient systems (e.g., ventilation system). The program will also upgrade the building’s mechanical and electrical systems, upgrade exterior walls and rehabilitate interior spaces.
Metro’s 50,000 sq. ft. revenue collection facility is located at the Alexandria rail yard. At this facility, Metro employees process fare revenue in preparation for bank deposit. Existing office and facility equipment (e.g., loading dock levers) have ex- ceeded or are at the end of their life cycles. Replacement and upgrades of this equipment and technologies are needed to improve efficiency of fare collection processes. Repairs to the revenue collection building (~$1.8 million) are included under the Bus Garage Facility Tier 1 project.
Business Support Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 080: Jackson Graham Building Renovation $25.0 CNI 033: Replacement of Revenue Facility Equipment $3.9 Total $28.9
Police Facilities ($21.1 Million) The replacement District 2 MTPD
substation will accommodate Two police facilities are in need of replacement over the next ten years: the District officer training, administrative 2 Substation located at the Huntington Metro station and the Special Operations Division facility. The cost of replacing these facilities is $21.1 million (see table). functions, crime scene search technicians, evidence storage, Metro plans to replace MTPD’s District 2 Substation with a new 18,500 sq. ft. fa- police interview rooms, locker cility modeled on the new District 1 Substation near the Fort Totten Metro station (constructed in 2007). More than 100 officers operate out of the current District rooms and restroom facilities. 2 Substation, a 7,000 sq. ft. former private residence that was acquired when the Huntington Metro station was constructed. Not designed for police work, the
58 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-60 Support Facilities
facility is severely deficient in meeting the Department’s needs. The replacement District 2 MTPD substation will accommodate officer training, administrative functions, crime scene search tech- nicians, evidence storage, police interview rooms, locker rooms and MTPD Districts restroom facilities.
Plans also call for replacing MTPD’s Special Operations Division facility with a permanent 9,000 sq. ft. build- ing. The Special Operations Division District I handles the many special events that impact Metro, responds to bomb threats and suspicious packages, ad- dresses robberies on the bus and rail systems, among many other respon-
sibilities. The following MTPD units Potomac River are assigned to the Special Opera- tions Division: the Special Response Team, the Transit Anti-Crime Team,
the Auto Theft Unit, K-9 Teams, the Anacostia River Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Team, and the Motorcycle Unit. The District II original design of this facility was to N provide office space for MTPD’s ca- nine unit which consisted of fourteen members. Now, over 67 members are assigned to the Special Operations Division and are forced to operate out of a trailer. The new Special Operations Division facility will provide the appropriate amount of space necessary for officers to carry out their work.
Police Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 101: Police Substation - New District 2 $12.1 CNI 106: Special Operations Division Facility $9.0 Total $21.1
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-61 59 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
004 Bus Repair Equipment Maintenance Equipment Bus Repair Equipment $ 29,087
005 Bus Rehabilitation Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Buses $ 228,219
006 Bus Replacement Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Replacement of Buses $ 749,483
Bus Rehabilitation 008 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Vehicle Replacement Components $ 128,599 Components
Service Vehicle 009 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Replacement of Service Vehicles $ 52,032 Replacement
Environmental Compliance Fleet Maintenance 010 Environmental Compliance Projects $ 7,271 Projects Facilities
Underground Storage Tank Fleet Maintenance 011 Environmental Compliance Projects $ 29,483 Replacement Facilities
015 MetroAccess Vehicles Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Purchase of MetroAccess Vehicles $ 140,975
018 Track Welding Program Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 31,798
Track Floating Slab 019 Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 16,254 Rehabilitation
Replacement of Rail Track 020 Maintenance Equipment Rail Maintenance Equipment $ 12,513 Signage
Track Pad/Shock Absorber 021 Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 29,478 Rehabilitation
Track Structural 022 Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 22,430 Rehabilitation
023 Third Rail Rehabilitation Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 40,153
024 Track Rehabilitation Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 387,227
Track Maintenance 025 Maintenance Equipment Rail Maintenance Equipment $ 129,768 Equipment
Station/Tunnel Leak 026 Track and Structures Station/Tunnel Rehabilitation $ 46,033 Mitigation
60 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-62 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
Switch Machine 027 Maintenance Equipment Rail Maintenance Equipment $ 11,084 Rehabilitation Project
Materials Handling 028 Maintenance Equipment Business Facilities Equipment $ 1,543 Equipment
Warehouse Vertical Storage 029 Maintenance Equipment Business Facilities Equipment $ 6,167 Units/Shelving
Currency Processing Business Support Software & 030 Systems and Technology $ 2,186 Machines Equipment
Debit/Credit Processing 031 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 4,100 Requirements
032 Fare Media Encoders Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 1,548
Replacement of Revenue 033 Support Facilities Business Support Facilities $ 3,934 Facility Equipment
Replacement of Bicycle 036 Passenger Facilities Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities $ 4,571 Racks & Lockers
Bus & Rail Asset 042 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 26,151 Management Software
Bus Operations Support 043 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 74,398 Software
Data Centers and 045 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 97,866 Infrastructures
Document Management Business Support Software & 046 Systems and Technology $ 33,125 System Equipment
Sensitive Data Protection Business Support Software & 048 Systems and Technology $ 69,312 Technology Equipment
Management Support Business Support Software & 049 Systems and Technology $ 100,882 Software Equipment
Metro IT OneStop and Business Support Software & 050 Systems and Technology $ 47,067 Office Automation Equipment
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-63 61 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
Police Dispatch and 051 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 1,647 Records Management
Network and 052 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 51,566 Communications
Network Operations 053 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 26,781 Center (NOC)
Rail Operations Support 056 Systems and Technology Operations Support Software $ 147,633 Software
1000-Series Rail Car 057 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Replacement of Rail Cars $ 811,011 Replacement
2000/3000-Series Rail Car 058 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $ 2,597 Mid-Life Rehabilitation
2000/3000-Series Rail Car 059 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Replacement of Rail Cars $ 167,171 Replacement
4000-Series Rail Car Mid- 060 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $ 163,042 Life Rehabilitation
5000-Series Rail Car Mid- 061 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $ 67,609 Life Rehabilitation
Rail Rehabilitation 063 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Vehicle Replacement Components $ 47,191 Components
1000-Series Rail Car HVAC 064 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $ 5,202 Rehabilitation
065 Geometry Vehicle Maintenance Equipment Rail Maintenance Equipment $ 6,300
066 Rail Car Repair Equipment Maintenance Equipment Rail Car Repair Equipment $ 44,078
Rail Car Safety & 067 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rehabilitation of Rail Cars $ 26,053 Reliability Enhancements
Test Track & 071 Maintenance Facilities Rail Maintenance Facilities $ 60,000 Commissioning Facility
072 Elevator Rehabilitation Passenger Facilities Elevator/Escalator Facilities $ 56,035
62 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-64 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
073 Escalator Rehabilitation Passenger Facilities Elevator/Escalator Facilities $ 177,815
Parking Lot Preventive Maintenance of Rail Station 075 Passenger Facilities $ 53,593 Maintenance Facilities
076 8-Car Train Power Upgrades Systems and Technology Power System Upgrades - Rail $ 25,291
Jackson Graham Building 080 Support Facilities Business Support Facilities $ 24,648 Renovation
Southern Avenue Bus Fleet Maintenance Rehabilitation and Replacement of 084 $ 110,000 Garage Replacement Facilities Bus Garages
Replacement of Additional Fleet Maintenance Rehabilitation and Replacement of 085 $ 328,640 Bus Garages Facilities Bus Garages
Southeastern Bus Garage Fleet Maintenance Rehabilitation and Replacement of 086 $ 50,000 Replacement Facilities Bus Garages
Station Enhancement Maintenance of Rail Station 087 Passenger Facilities $ 80,297 Program Facilities
089 Track Fasteners Track and Structures Track Rehabilitation $ 12,000
Maintaining NEXTFARE 093 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 6,377 System
Automatic Fare Collection 095 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 12,047 Machine Repairs
Police Substation - New 101 Support Facilities Police Facilities $ 12,125 District 2
Police Portable Radio Business Support Software & 103 Systems and Technology $ 3,900 Replacement Equipment
Police Vehicle 104 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Replacement of Service Vehicles $ 11,358 Replacement
Special Operations 106 Support Facilities Police Facilities $ 9,000 Division Facility
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Rail System Infrastructure 107 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 139,013 Dupont to Silver Spring Rehabilitation
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-65 63 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Rail System Infrastructure 108 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 234,050 Dupont to Grosvenor Rehabilitation
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: Grosvenor to Shady Rail System Infrastructure 109 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 185,692 Grove and Silver Spring to Rehabilitation Glenmont
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Rail System Infrastructure 110 National Airport to New Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 371,880 Rehabilitation Carrollton
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: Rail System Infrastructure 111 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 232,898 Rosslyn to Vienna Rehabilitation
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 3: National Airport to Rail System Infrastructure 112 Huntington and Franconia Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 203,843 Rehabilitation Springfield plus the Largo Extension
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Rail System Infrastructure 113 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 98,371 U Street to Anacostia Rehabilitation
Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: Rail System Infrastructure 114 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 159,949 U Street to Greenbelt Rehabilitation
Rail Rehabilitation Tier Rail System Infrastructure 115 3: Anacostia to Branch Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 112,596 Rehabilitation Avenue
Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 1: Alexandria, Fleet Maintenance 116 Maintenance of Rail Yards $ 125,714 Brentwood and New Facilities Carrollton
Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 2: West Falls Church, Fleet Maintenance 117 Maintenance of Rail Yards $ 123,896 Greenbelt and Shady Facilities Grove
64 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-66 Performance Project Index
Project Capital Needs Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type FY2011-2020
Rail Yard Facility Repairs Fleet Maintenance 118 Tier 3: Branch Avenue, Maintenance of Rail Yards $ 31,070 Facilities Glenmont and Largo
Bus Garage Facility Repairs Fleet Maintenance 119 Tier 1: Western, Northern Maintenance of Bus Garages $ 135,884 Facilities and Landover
Bus Garage Facility Repairs Fleet Maintenance 120 Tier 2: Montgomery and Maintenance of Bus Garages $ 113,948 Facilities Four Mile Run
Bus Garage Facility Repairs Fleet Maintenance 121 Maintenance of Bus Garages $ 78,245 Tier 3: Bladensburg Facilities
Rail System Infrastructure 122 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 4 Rail Line Segment Rehabilitation $ 83,921 Rehabilitation
*Note: Some projects were consolidated with others during the prioritization process.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: PerformanceA4-67 65 Investment Category: Customer/Demand
The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments projects that from 2005 to 2030, employment is expected to increase by nearly 40%, population by 32% and households by 35% in the Washington metropolitan region. Job growth in northern Virginia and the Maryland suburbs is WMATA Service Area expected to increase by 51% and 38% respectively and population growth in Loudoun County is expected to Maryland increase by a notable 89%. The District of Columbia Montgomery is laying the foundation to increase its population by County 24% by expanding its housing stock and community- based retail. This phenomenal growth in the region Fairfax will translate into increased demand for Metrorail, Arlington Metrobus and MetroAccess services. County County DC Fairfax Falls Regional Growth: 2005-2030 Church Prince Employment Population City of Alexandria Georges Metropolitan Total 38% 32% County Metro Service Area 33% 23% Virginia Inside Beltway 23% 24% Outside Beltway 41% 23% Outer Suburbs 65% 61% Note: Service to Loudoun County will begin in FY 2017 with the extension of Metrorail to Dulles Airport. Source: MWCOG Round 7.1 Cooperative Land Use Forecasts, 2008
Between 2010 and 2020, average daily Metrorail ridership is expected to grow by about 20%. Over the same period, average daily Metrobus ridership is pro- jected to grow by 10 - 15%. Of all its modal services, Metro’s paratransit service, MetroAccess, is expected to experience Metro’s fastest growing ridership at 112%. Customer/Demand capital needs includes investments that address Metro’s grow- ing ridership and improvements to the rider experience.
On an average weekday in FY 2009, there were about 750,000 trips on Metro- rail. By 2030, Metrorail ridership is expected to be close to 1 million trips on an average weekday, approaching the ridership seen on Inauguration Day 2009 (1.1 million trips). To accommodate record ridership on Inauguration Day, Metro Projected growth in the operated trains for 22 consecutive hours, including 17 straight hours of rush hour Washington, DC region will service. Even with this unprecedented amount of service, customers experienced translate into increased de- long lines, crowded platforms and packed trains. In order to handle Inauguration mand for Metrorail, Metrobus Day ridership on a daily basis without severe overcrowding, Metro needs to invest in new rail cars and upgraded power systems to run 100% 8-car trains. and MetroAccess services.
66 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-68 The two charts below comparing Metro’s rail system capacity with and without fleet expansion clearly illustrate the need for additional rail cars. Without fleet expansion, most rail lines will be congested by 2020, with the Orange/Dulles Line Metrorail and Metrobus Ridership exceeding capacity (greater than 120 passengers per car). With expansion to 100% Trends 8-car trains during peak periods, most rail lines will have adequate capacity through 2030, though the Orange/Dulles Line will Daily Ridership Growth (in 1,000s) exceed 120 passengers per car as 2030 1,400 approaches. An expanded rail car fleet Rail- forecast in turn will necessitate additional rail car 1,200 storage, fleet maintenance facilities and a Rail- trend new test track and rail car commissioning 1,000 facility. To accommodate the increased Bus- 800 forecast passenger flow across the rail system, ca- pacity improvements at core stations and Bus- 600 trend additional pedestrian connections are also needed. 400 2005 2010 2020 2030
Metrorail System Capacity: No Additional Fleet Expansion An expanded rail car fleet Line 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Red in turn will necessitate ad- Blue (Rosslyn) ditional rail car storage, fleet Orange/ Dulles Rail maintenance facilities and Yellow/Blue (14th Bridge) a new test track and rail car Green commissioning facility. To ac- commodate the increased Metrorail System Capacity: Expansion to 100% 8-Car Trains by 2020 passenger flow across the rail Line 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 system, capacity improve- Red ments at core stations and Blue (Rosslyn) Orange/ Dulles Rail additional pedestrian con- Yellow/Blue (14th Bridge) nections are also needed. Green
Congested (<100 people per car) Highly Congested (100-120 people per car) Exceeds Capacity (>120 people per car)
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-69 67 In FY 2009, Metrobus ridership averaged 440,000 trips daily. Metrobus is pro- Additional buses and bus jected to expand to 510,000 average daily trips by 2020. Additional buses and bus garages are needed to ac- garages are needed to accommodate future ridership growth, avoid overcrowding commodate future ridership and maintain the expanded fleet. Metro plans to focus the purchase of new buses on priority corridors that serve the greatest concentration of riders. Runningway growth, avoid overcrowding improvements on priority corridors increase the average speed of buses up to 30% and maintain the expanded not only saving Metro capital and operating expenses, but also improving pas- fleet. senger travel times. However, success of these priority corridors is dependent on partnerships with Maryland, the District of Columbia and Virginia. Through these partnerships, signal and road improvements need to be implemented to result in FY 2011 - 2020 Customer/Demand efficient and effective priority corridors. Needs by Asset Category ($3.8 Billion) $34.9 Demand for MetroAccess has recently grown significantly and is expected to con- 1% tinue over the next ten years. In FY 2009, 2.1 million passenger trips were taken on MetroAccess. By 2020, ridership is anticipated to grow to 4.5 million trips (112%) $355.6 as the population ages and riders switch to MetroAccess from other providers. To 10% accommodate growing ridership, additional MetroAccess vehicles and garages are needed. This will reduce leasing costs and ensure that garages are located so $1,366.7 $1,020.4 that deadheading costs are reduced. 36% 26% Metro consistently works to improve the rider’s experience on the transit system $1,056.7 and respond to customer service requests. Over the next ten years, Metro plans to 27% enhance its passenger facilities, vehicles and technologies to ease the use of Metro $34.9 services and improve ride quality. Examples range from new farecard vending 1% YOE, $ Millions machines that distribute SmarTrip cards (permanent, rechargeable farecards that $355.6 operate like credit cards) to Metrobus enhancements such as on-board cameras 10% Passenger Facilities and automatic vehicle location equipment. Customer/Demand needs also includes investments that provide information to customers regarding various aspects of $1,366.7 Fleet Maintenance Facilities $1,020.4 their trips. For example, Metro plans to upgrade the www.wmata.com website to 36% 26% Vehicles/Vehicle Parts encourage increased rider interaction and information sharing. Systems and Technology $1,056.7 27% Support Facilities
Demand for MetroAccess has recently grown signifi- cantly and is expected to continue over the next ten years.
68 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-70 Investments to address Metro’s Customer/Demand needs total $3.8 billion over the next ten years (FY 2011 – 2020) and fall into five asset categories: passen- ger facilities, fleet maintenance facilities, vehicles and vehicle parts, systems and technology and support facilities. The table below breaks down Metro’s $3.8 bil- lion in Customer/Demand needs by asset category and project type (grouping of individual capital projects). The following sections provide additional details by asset category.
Customer/Demand Needs by Asset Category and Project Type
Capital Needs, Asset Category Project Type FY 2011 – 2020 Passenger Facilities Rail Station: Capacity/Enhancements $ 1,184 Bus Priority Corridor Improvements $ 120
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities $ 40 Rail Station Equipment $ 22 Subtotal $ 1,367
Fleet Maintenance Rail Maintenance Facilities $ 596 Facilities Expansion of Bus Garages $ 445 Expansion of MetroAccess Garages $ 16 Subtotal $ 1,057
Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rail Car Fleet Expansion $ 605 Bus Fleet Expansion $ 255
Bus Enhancements $ 116 MetroAccess Fleet Expansion $ 44 Subtotal $ 1,020
Systems and Technology Power System Upgrades - Rail $ 150 Operations Support Software $ 134
Business Support Software & Equipment $ 40 Rail Fare Equipment $ 32 Subtotal $ 356
Support Facilities Police Facilities $ 23 MetroAccess Operations Facility $ 8 Business Support Facilities $ 4 Subtotal $ 35
TOTAL $ 3,834
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-71 69 Asset Category: Passenger Facilities
Over 220 million passengers used Metro’s 86 rail stations in FY 2009. A 2002 Core Capacity study evaluated available capacity at existing stations and con- cluded the following six stations have the highest ridership volume: Metro Cen- ter, Gallery Place/Chinatown, Union Station, Farragut West, L’Enfant Plaza, and Farragut North. When examining future ridership growth, these stations are also highlighted as among the busiest in the system (see chart below). With an ap- proximately 20% ridership growth projected over the next ten years, Metro has identified rail station capacity expansion and enhancements projects that will reduce congestion, improve station maneuverability and save customers travel time. At stations with the highest activity, Metro plans to make capacity im- provements to the platforms and mezzanines, and will create pedestrian tunnels between key stations to provide previously unavailable transfers. Rail station enhancements include the installation of station entrance and platform canopies designed to protect customers from inclement weather and prevent damage to escalators, stairs, and platforms.
Stations Lines Growth at Highest Ridership Metrorail Stations 2005-2030 Metro Center Gallery Place Union Station Farragut West Dupont Circle L’Enfant Plaza Foggy Bottom-GWU Farragut North (decreased) Rosslyn McPherson Sq Ballston Shady Grove Pentago City Pentago Court House Smithsonian Crystal City Silver Spring Judiciary Sq 2030 Federal Triangle 2005 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000
Alleviating crowded conditions will also maintain the safety of Metrorail service. To further enhance safety, Metro plans to install bumpy dome tiles on the rail platform edge. This bumpy surface provides a tactile indicator of the edge of the platform to elderly and disabled customers traveling on the
70 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-72 Passenger Facilities
system. Ensuring the Metrorail system is accessible to all customers is a top priority of Metro. Given that a single elevator outage can make an entire transfer station and all the lines it serves inaccessible, Metro has planned to build a second set of elevators at six key transfer stations. For Metro’s riders Customer/Demand – that arrive by automobile, additional credit card readers are needed to ease Passenger Facilities Needs by Project the use of parking structures. Type ($1.4 Billion)
Metrorail passenger facilities are not the only part of the transit system facing $21.6 $40.3 increasing demand. Demand for bus service is also increasing. Metrobus Rail Station: Capacity/Enhancements ridership is expected to grow from about 440,000 trips daily in FY 2009 to $120.4 Bus Priority Corridor Improvements about 510,000 in 2020, or 16%. Meanwhile, traffic congestion in the region remains among the worst in the nation, which slows down Metro’s buses, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities especially on heavily traveled routes in the region’s core. In order to speed up bus travel times and provide better service to our customers, Metro has Rail Station Equipment identified a network of priority corridors that are targets for improvements $1,184.3 such as transit signal priority, queue jumpers, bus bulbs, painted lanes, and left-turn enhancements. These investments will improve service, reliability, capacity, and system access. YOE, $ Millions Changing land use patterns around some rail stations have increased the need $21.6 for better access points. In response to factors such as increased$40.3 population, Rail Station:Station Capacity/Enhancements Capacity Enhancements denser development and new employment centers around rail stations, the demand for access to the rail system for cyclists and pedestrians$120.4 is increasing Bus PriorityPriority Corridor Corridor Improvements Improvements every year. Metro staff routinely receives requests for more bicycle parking Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities at suburban stations (e.g. Vienna, West Hyattsville) and at stations closer to Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities the system core (e.g., Georgia Ave – Petworth). Field observations conducted Rail Station Station Equipment Equipment in 2008 showed multiple stations with bicycles locked to any available fixed structure (e.g. sign posts, light poles, phone booths)$1,184.3 which is illegal in some jurisdictions. Metro plans to respond to growing demand by constructing new bicycle facilities and improving pedestrian access to stations. Providing bicycle parking at stations is a highly cost-effective means of improving access to rail stations.
In light of the rail system’s high profile within the nation’s capital, Metro has taken many steps to secure the system from modern threats. The PROTECT system is Metro’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosives (CBRNE) detection system installed in rail stations. Metro plans to expand the capabilities of this system and install additional evacuation and medical emergency equip- ment. These safety and security enhancements are included in Metro’s rail station equipment needs.
The figure to the right shows a breakdown of Metro’s Customer/Demand - Passenger Facilities needs by project type ($1.4 billion over 10 years). A brief description of each project type follows.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-73 71 Passenger Facilities
Rail Station: Capacity/Enhancements ($1,184.3 Million)
As ridership grows over time, high volume stations will face overcrowded condi- tions making it difficult for customers to transfer and navigate the system. Improve- ments are needed to move passengers from the platform to the mezzanine area and to the street level in order to ensure platforms are clear before the next train arrives. Additionally, capacity improvements will address pedestrian bottlenecks and separate customers waiting on the platform from those leaving the station. At stations with the highest entry and exit demand (Metro Center, Gallery Place/ Chi- natown, L’Enfant Plaza, Farragut North, Union Station, and Farragut West), Metro has identified needed capacity improvements including entrance escalators/stairs, passageways to mezzanine, fare collection equipment, mezzanine to platform es- calators/stairs, platform widening, escalators/stairs between upper/lower platform, and lower level platform occupancy. Over the next ten years, Metro estimates that 16 new sets of stairs, 17 new escalators, 11 new elevators and more than 12 new fare gates are needed.
Core Station Capacity Enhancements
Increase Additional New Fare Extend Pedestrian Vertical Widening Entrances Collection Mezzanines Connection Circulation Platforms
Metro Center
Gallery Place Metro Center-Gallery Place Interconnection Farragut West
Farragut North Farragut North-Farragut West Interconnection Union Station
L’Enfant Plaza
2003-2006 2006-2014 2015-2020
Other capacity enhancements include a 400 foot long pedestrian tunnel between Farragut North and Farragut West stations. This pedestrian connection would shorten the travel time going from Virginia toward northwest Washington and vice versa by eliminating the need to go to Metro Center to transfer. On a weighted average basis across all markets, the pedestrian tunnel is expected to shorten each
72 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-74 Passenger Facilities
user’s travel time by 2 minutes. Tunnel users would collectively save about 900 hours per day or 260,000 hours per year in travel times based on 2003 ridership data. Besides saving customer time, the Farragut tunnel would free up space in Metro Center and reduce the transfer demand by up to 11 percent.
Metro has also identified a pedestrian Major Transfer Stations — AM Peak Hour Tranfer Increases (2005-2030) tunnel between Gallery Place/China- town and Metro Center as an effective 7000 strategy to connect the system’s two largest transfer points, relieving the most 6000 congested segment in the rail system. The pedestrian tunnel connects the east 5000 mezzanine at Metro Center to the west mezzanine at Gallery Place. The connec- 4000 tion would be a level path supported on 3000 top of the existing track vaults. The length of the passageway is approximately 750 2000 feet and the passageway area would Increase of Peak Transfers of Peak Increase be about 18,000 square feet. As part of 1000 this project a mezzanine to mezzanine bridge connection is proposed in Gal- 0 lery Place Station to ease congestion on Metro Center Gallery Place - L’Enfant Plaza Rosslyn East Falls the Red Line Platforms for patrons walk- Chinatown Church ing from Gallery Place to Metro Center and vice-versa. When an event is taking Dulles Rail Extension, also known as Silver Line place at Verizon Center, the Red Line Platforms become very crowded. The bridge over the platforms will prevent people pushing their way from one end of the station to the other to walk toward Metro Center. In addition, this connection would reduce the number of transfers at L’Enfant Plaza station. The pedestrian tunnel would allow patrons to transfer between the Blue, Orange, Red, Yellow and Green lines without taking a one stop ride on the Red Line. When the Dulles extension opens, the need for this pedestrian tunnel will increase.
Other station enhancements include the installation of station entrance canopies to protect customers from inclement weather and prevent damage to escalators and stairs. Metro has already installed entrance canopies at several stations but canopies are still needed at: Court House, Brookland East, Capital South, Foggy Bottom, Metro Center 12th&G, Potomac Avenue, Minnesota, Tenleytown, Smith- sonian North and South, Judiciary Square North and South, Deanwood, Gallery Place West, U Street East, Bethesda, College Park East, Shady Grove, Huntington South, Dupont North, Arlington Cemetery North and South, and Archives. The average cost of a canopy is $1.5 million, but the unit cost will vary dramatically based on size, shape and location. For example, the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial located at Judiciary Square puts severe constraints on the size and type of canopy that can be installed.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-75 73 Passenger Facilities
Platform canopies also protect customers from the elements and protect assets from additional wear and tear. As Metro transitions from 6-car trains to 8-cars trains, addi- tional platform area at outdoor stations is exposed. Under this project, platform canopies would be extended to cover the full length of the platform at 20 Orange/Blue/Yellow line stations, 8 Red line stations and 7 Green/Yellow line stations. Covered platforms provide a dry environment, improve the walking surface, enhance safety and reduce customer complaints. In addition, canopies lower platform and tile maintenance costs.
Truncated domes or “bumpy tiles” have been installed at 60 of Metro’s 86 stations. To increase passenger safety and accessibility, truncated domes are needed at the remaining 26 stations. This bumpy surface provides a warning to customers of the location of the platform edge. At a cost of $500,000 per station, Metro plans to schedule four installations per year.
To further improve the accessibility of the Metrorail system, Metro has plans to in- stall a second set of elevators at the following six key transfer stations: Metro Center, L’Enfant Plaza, Gallery Place/Chinatown, Fort Totten, Pentagon and Stadium-Armory. Currently a single elevator outage can make an entire transfer station and all the lines it serves inaccessible to people with disabilities, travelers with luggage and customers with other devices such as strollers. The 2002 Core Capacity Study sup- ports increasing access via entrances and passages at major key stations as a means of increased ability for all customers to enter and exit stations. The cost to build the dual access elevators may be borne by the local jurisdictions.
Providing adequate vehicle-related facilities is important to support passengers ar- riving by automobile. Currently, parking fees at several facilities can only be paid using a SmarTrip card. Infrequent users of the daily parking facilities find the cash-less SmarTrip-only payment requirement frustrating and confusing. Customers who arrive at a parking gate without a SmarTrip card must re-park and return to the station to purchase a SmarTrip card for the sole purpose of exiting the parking facility. Currently, Metro only has 14 credit card readers at six out of 35 stations with parking facilities. To make these facilities more convenient and accessible to all patrons, Metro plans to install at least one bank card/credit card reader at the remaining parking facilities.
Rail Station: Capacity/Enhancements includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 039: Core Station Capacity Enhancements $612.1 CNI 079: Extend Platform Canopies $317.0 CNI 041: Gallery Place/ Metro Center Pedestrian Connection $100.0 CNI 040: Farragut North/ Farragut West Pedestrian Connection $72.0 CNI 088: Station Entrance Canopies $34.9 CNI 012: Dual Accessible Pathways – Core Elevator Project $34.0 CNI 017: Platform Edge Bumpy Dome Installation S11.0 CNI 074: Installation of Parking Lot Credit Card Readers $3.3 Total $1,184.3
74 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-76 Passenger Facilities
Bus Priority Corridor Improvements ($120.4 Million)
The Bus Priority Corridor Plan, presented to the Metro Board in October 2008, outlined Metro’s strategy for improving bus service travel times, reliability, capac- ity, productivity and system access through investments in bus stops, runningway enhancements, and street operations management. Twenty-four priority corri- dors covering 246 miles have been identified which represent 14% of Metro’s bus lines and 50% of bus ridership. Metro will work with local governments and state Departments of Transportation to implement transit signal priorities, queue jumpers (additional travel lanes at signalized intersections allowing buses to move to the front of traffic), bus bulbs (extending the sidewalk for a bus stop into the parking lane so the bus can remain in the traffic lane), painted markings on lanes, and left-turn priorities. Enhancements are also planned for bus stops, transit centers and customer information displays. Together these improvements are estimated to increase the average speed of buses on these corridors by up to 30% which is equivalent to putting 100 additional buses on the road. This strat- egy improves service and expands capacity. In addition, this project is estimated to yield $50 million in capital cost savings and $40 - $50 million in avoided operating costs.
Bus Priority Corridor Improvements includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 037: Bus Priority Corridor Network Enhancements $120.4 Total $120.4
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ($40.3 Million)
The demand for access to the rail system for cyclists and pedestrians is increasing every year. Options to increase bicycle parking capacity at rail stations include free-standing bicycle parking structures with double-decked parking and key / swipe-card entry bicycle cages in existing garages. Current analysis suggests that Metro should expand bicycle capacity at rail stations by constructing 5 bike cages (150 bike capacity, swipe card access with canopy) and 2 bike stations (150 bike capacity, vendor-operated with services). Metro is currently conduct- ing a Bicycle and Pedestrian facilities study to determine the best bike parking solutions and locations.
In a number of stations, the connection between the community and the station is lacking. Customers have brought specific pathways to Metro’s attention that with improvements could provide more direct access for the surrounding communities. By improving this access, Metro may encourage customers to walk (or bike) to a
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-77 75 Passenger Facilities
station rather than drive or ride the bus. Connections could include tunnels, bridges, at-grade sidewalk construction and safety improvements (e.g., light- ing). Metro’s current project includes pedestrian walkways at 5 – 10 stations.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 035: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Capacity Improvements $40.3 Total $40.3
Rail Station Equipment ($21.6 Million)
In order to secure the rail system, Metro has installed safety equipment within each station. The PROTECT system is the Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosives (CBRNE) detection system installed within the track beds at select stations within the rail system. Metro will expand this system to include additional capabilities. Metro will also upgrade other safety equipment within rail stations, including Emergency Tunnel Evacuation Carts (ETECs) and Automatic External Defibrillators (AEDs). The ETECs allow emergency person- nel to travel through tunnels to reach an emergency scene and to transport cus- tomers and employees to safety. The AEDs are used to automatically diagnose and treat life-threatening cardiac conditions, and are located in most Metro stations. The AEDs need to be replaced every 8 years, and the batteries need replacement every 5 years. This rail station equipment is critical to not only prevent incidents, but also respond to emergency situations.
Rail Station Equipment includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 105: Chemical Detector Enhancements $20.4 CNI 099: Police Emergency Management Equipment $1.2 Total $21.6
76 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-78 Asset Category: Fleet Maintenance Facilities
As Metro’s vehicle fleet expands so will the need for additional fleet maintenance facilities. Over the next ten years, Metro plans to continue moving from a combina- tion of 6- and 8-car trains to all 100% 8-car trains to accommodate projected rider- ship growth. In addition to replacing and rehabilitating older rail cars, Metro’s fleet While Metro stations are plan calls for the purchase of 220 new rail cars in order to deploy 100% 8-car trains. While Metro stations are designed to accommodate longer 8-car trains, additional designed to accommodate lon- capacity is needed at rail yards to maintain, store and rehabilitate the new rail cars. ger 8-car trains, additional capac- ity is needed at rail yards to Similar to Metro’s rail yards, Metro’s bus fleet maintenance facilities are at capacity, and some are so old that they cannot accommodate the profile of maintain, store and rehabilitate newer, cleaner technology vehicles. Therefore additional space is necessary for the new rail cars. regular fleet maintenance/rehabilitation and adequate fleet storage facilities to serve Metro fleet expansion needs through 2020 and beyond.
MetroAccess vehicles are currently stored at six vendor owned facilities. Facing re- cord ridership growth, Metro is evaluating the operating cost savings associated with moving the maintenance of these vehicles to existing Metro properties. The capital cost of this new maintenance strategy is included in this Capital Needs Inventory.
The figure below shows Metro’s Customer/Demand - Fleet Maintenance Facilities needs ($1.05 billion over the next 10 years) by project type. A brief description of each project type follows. Customer/Demand – Fleet Maintenance Facilities Needs by Project Type ($1.05 Billion) $16.0 Rail Maintenance Facilities
Expansion of Bus Garages $16.0 Rail Maintenance Facilities ExpansionRail Maintenance of MetroAccess GaragesFacilities $595.9 $444.9 Expansion of of Bus Bus Garages Garages Similar to Metro’s rail yards, Expansion of of MetroAccess MetroAccess Garages Garages Metro’s bus fleet maintenance $595.9 $444.9 facilities are at capacity, and YOE, $ Millions some are so old that they can- not accommodate the profile of Rail Maintenance Facilities ($595.9 Million) newer, cleaner technology vehicles. Metro’s 1,100+ trains are maintained and stored among 9 rail yards, all of which are at capacity. In light of anticipated ridership growth over the next decade, Met- ro plans to purchase 220 new rail cars (130 cars to reach 75% 8-car trains and
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-79 77 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
90 additional cars to implement 100% 8-car trains). These new rail cars generate a demand for additional rail yard storage and maintenance capacity. Rail mainte- nance facilities include service and inspection shops and maintenance, operations and yard control buildings. In these facilities, Metro employees complete regular maintenance of the rail car fleet, conduct vehicle safety inspections clean the vehicles for customer comfort and store vehicles when not in use. Rail fleet main- tenance covers the following: automatic train controls, brakes, communication devices, doors, lighting, heating and cooling systems, power, propulsion, signs and signals.
To accommodate 75% 8-cars trains, plans call for additional rail car storage at Metro’s Shady Grove yard, twelve additional maintenance bays at Glenmont and additional rail car storage at New Carrollton yard. Implementing 100% 8-car trains will require storage for 90 – 110 rail cars and 15 – 20 maintenance bays. The 100% 8-car train maintenance facility project cost is high because a new yard is needed, including the purchase of land. The new yard would also include a service and inspection shop.
Rail Maintenance Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) To accommodate 75% 8-car CNI 083: 100% 8-Car Trains—Storage $401.5 CNI 082: 75% 8-Car Trains—Storage $194.4 trains, plans call for additional rail Total $595.9 car storage at the Shady Grove yard, twelve additional main- tenance bays at Glenmont and Expansion of Bus Garages ($444.9 Million) additional rail car storage at Metro’s approximately 1,500 buses are assigned to 9 bus operating garages New Carrollton yard. Imple- located throughout the region. To meet the growing bus ridership demand, menting 100% 8-car trains will Metro plans to purchase up to 325 additional buses (a 21% increase in fleet require storage for 90 – 110 size) by 2020. Currently, seven of Metro’s bus garages are at, or near, their rail cars and 15 – 20 mainte- practical storage capacity. The garages with storage capacity are not located near demand centers, meaning that high operating costs associated with time nance bays. “dead-heading” (the time a vehicle is “not in service” between the garage and the beginning or end of a route) would result if overflow buses were assigned to these garages. Additionally, many of the existing maintenance facilities are not designed to handle new articulated buses and other clean technology buses. Therefore the purchase of land and construction of two new bus garages with the capacity to store up to 250 buses each are needed to efficiently maintain, rehabilitate and store Metro’s expanding bus fleet. An alternative approach under consideration is to add capacity when exist- ing facilities are replaced, including the Royal Street, Southern Avenue and Western bus facilities.
78 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-80 Fleet Maintenance Facilities
Employees complete regular maintenance of the bus fleet at Metro garages, conduct vehicle safety inspections, clean the vehicles for customer comfort, and store buses that are not in service. Bus maintenance work includes the vehicle power train (engine and transmission), brakes, electrical components, body/doors and heating and cooling system. New bus garages will be located near demand centers in order to reduce deadhead time and will be designed to handle larger, clean technology articulated buses. An articulated bus uses a pivoting joint in the center to extend the bus length and passenger capacity, while still allowing it to turn on city streets. At 62-feet, articulated buses are considerably longer and require more maintenance and storage space than a standard Metrobus (37-feet or 42-feet).
The reconfiguration of space in the Bladensburg Bus Garage in the District of Columbia is also planned over the next ten years. Space at Bladensburg was freed when the Heavy Overhaul Shop relocated to the Carmen Turner facility in Hyattsville, MD. Once reconfigured, the Bladensburg bus garage will provide additional maintenance capacity for 15 buses and storage for 145 more buses.
Expansion of Bus Garages includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 038: Bus Garage Capacity Enhancements $405.7 CNI 078: Bladensburg Shop Reconfiguration $39.1 Total $444.9
Expansion of MetroAccess Garages ($16.0 Million)
MetroAccess vehicles are currently stored at six vendor owned facilities. Current estimates show a need for approximately 900 MetroAccess vehicles by 2013 (up from about 500 today) and 1,300 vehicles by 2020. To cost-effectively fuel, main- tain and store the existing and future vehicles, Metro is evaluating moving these vehicles to existing Metro properties. To do this, paving and facility improvements are needed at an estimated cost of $2 million per facility. MetroAccess anticipates the need for 8 operating garages for a total of $16 million.
Expansion of MetroAccess Garages includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 016: MetroAccess Operating Garages $16.0 Total $16.0
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-81 79 Asset Category: Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
As Metro’s rail, bus and paratransit ridership grows, additional vehicles will be needed to address overcrowding and keep services safe, reliable and com- fortable. In order to meet projected growth in rail ridership, Metro will need to move from running a combination of 6- and 8-car trains to running 100% 8-car trains at peak periods. Increasing the percentage of 8-car trains from 50% to 75% will require 130 new cars and expand the rail fleet capacity by 7%. Similarly, expanding service from 75% to 100% will require 90 new cars Customer/Demand – and will increase rail fleet capacity by another 7%. A higher number of cars Vehicles/Vehicle Parts Needs by is needed to reach 75% 8-car trains to account for the rehabilitation schedule Project Type ($1.02 Billion) of rail cars. $44.2 Rail Car Fleet Expansion Without rail fleet expansion, most rail lines will be congested by 2020, with the $115.7 Orange/DullesBus Fleet ExpansionLine exceeding capacity (120 passengers per car). With expansion to 100% 8-car trains during peak periods, most rail lines will have adequate ca- Bus Enhancements pacity through 2030, though the Orange/Dulles Line will exceed 120 passengers $605.1 per carMetroAccess as 2030 approaches. Fleet Expansion For more information, see the Overview of Future $255.4 Demand section of this report.
Over the next ten years, Metro anticipates that the bus fleet will need to expand by 325 buses (from approximately 1,500 today) to address ridership growth, the backlog of expansion buses, provide service improvements along priority cor- YOE, $ Millions ridors and make up for the seating capacity lost due to conversion to low-floor buses (approximately seven seats are lost per bus conversion). Today’s buses $44.2 Rail Car Fleet Expansion also employ a wealth of technology that improves service and the customer Bus Fleet Expansion experience onboard. Metro plans a number of enhancements to the bus fleet, $115.7 such as Automatic Vehicle Location equipment so that the Operations Control Bus Enhancements Center can see the location of each bus in real-time (the equipment has a life cycle of between seven to ten years, while a bus life cycle is 15 years). Other bus $605.1 MetroAccess Fleet Expansion technology improvements will benefit the customer with faster travel time and $255.4 better travel information.
The demand for MetroAccess service is increasing at a very high rate, and is projected to continue to do so as the regional population’s average age increases and riders switch to MetroAccess from other providers. Demand for service is projected to increase from 2.1 million trips in 2009 to 4.5 million trips in 2020. In order to provide the same high level of service that paratran- sit customers currently receive, the MetroAccess fleet will need to expand by over 800 vehicles by 2020.
The figure to the left shows a breakdown of Metro’s Customer/Demand - Vehicle and Vehicle Parts needs ($1.02 billion over 10 years) by project type. A brief description of each project type follows.
80 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-82 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Rail Car Fleet Expansion ($605.1 Million)
The Metrorail fleet currently consists of more than 1,100 railcars that are run in a combination of 6-car trains and 8-car trains. When the system began operat- ing in 1976, Metro ran 4- and 6-car trains. During the past five years, Metro has purchased the 184 new 6000-Series railcars to operate 50% of peak period trains as 8-car trains. $2.6 million is required from 2011 to 2014 to complete final acceptance of the 6000-Series rail car purchase.
In order to meet continued projected growth in rail ridership, Metro is planning to run 100% 8-car trains during the peak period. To get to 75% 8-car trains, Metro will need to purchase 130 new 7000-Series railcars, totaling $352.2 million, or $2.7 million per car. To move from 75% to 100% 8-car trains, 90 additional 7000-Series railcars will be required, totaling $261.2 million or $2.9 million per car. Of the total funding required to implement 100% 8-car trains, $10.8 million will be incurred after FY 2020. Metro will link options to purchase all the 220 rail cars necessary for 100% 8-car trains to the 7000-Series rail car procurement contract. By creating a single contract to purchase 520 rail cars (300 cars to replace the 1000-Series rail cars and 220 rail cars to reach 100% 8-car trains), Metro will realize nearly a half billion dollars in capital and operating cost sav- ings through the elimination of a repetitive design, procurement, development and engineering costs, improved design and technology enhancements. The end result will be a new rail car fleet with increased capacity and lower maintenance and operating costs.
Metro officials envision the 7000-Series rail cars to have a brand new design and look. The rail car would have a stainless steel exterior. Gone would be In order to meet continued the wide brown exterior paint stripes. Fiberglass seats would be replaced with projected growth in rail ridership, stronger, yet thinner stainless steel for more leg room and carpet would be Metro is planning to run 100% eliminated from the rail cars. All of these new features would substantially decrease maintenance costs. Passengers may also be provided with overhead, 8-car trains during the peak spring loaded grab handles. Other possible features include interactive linear period. To get to 75% 8-car trains, maps, automated announcements stating the station names that the trains are Metro will need to purchase 130 servicing and security cameras. new 7000-Series railcars, total- Rail Car Fleet Expansion includes the following CNI projects: ing $352.2 million, or $2.7 million
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) per car. To move from 75% to CNI 069: 75% 8-Car Train – Rail Cars (7000 Series) $352.2 100% 8-car trains, 90 additional CNI 068: 100% 8-Car Train – Rail Cars (7000 Series) $250.4 7000-Series railcars will be CNI 062: 6000 Series Rail Car Procurement $2.6 required, totaling $261.2 million Total $605.1 or $2.9 million per car.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-83 81 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
Bus Fleet Expansion ($255.4 Million)
Bus fleet expansion is needed for a number of reasons. Metro has developed a bus priority corridor network plan that will involve enhancement of service on specific corridors as well as possible extension of service lines, to help reduce demand on segments of the rail system that are approaching capacity constraints. Additional buses will be needed to provide these service enhance- ments. Regardless of service enhancements or additional market penetration, bus ridership is expected to grow 10-15% between 2010 and 2020. Consequently, additional buses will be required to meet these needs and deliver a similar qual- ity of service experienced on existing routes. Metro also needs to make up for the seating capacity lost due to conversion to low-floor buses (approximately seven seats are lost per bus conversion). Finally, Metro also has deferred some of its previous expansion bus needs, so additional buses are needed to catch up with planned fleet expansion.
Metro plans to expand its current fleet by purchasing approximately 30 additional buses each year, for a total of 325 expansion buses by the year 2020. The total cost of these vehicles is $255.5 million.
Bus Fleet Expansion includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 003: Bus Capacity Enhancements: Fleet Expansion $255.4 Metro has developed a bus Total $255.4 priority corridor network plan that will involve enhancement Bus Enhancements ($115.7 Million) of service on specific corridors
as well as possible extension Metro uses Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) equipment to track the location of of service lines, to help reduce its bus fleet and enables the bus operations control center to monitor each bus’s demand on segments of the rail adherence to its schedule and to locate it in an emergency. AVL equipment is also necessary to run the NextBus application, which provides customers with real system that are approaching time predictions of bus arrival times. This equipment has a life cycle of between capacity constraints. Additional seven to ten years. AVL and communication equipment will cost $60.4 million buses will be needed to provide over the next ten years. these service enhancements. To further enhance the safety of Metro’s bus service, Metro also plans to install cameras fleet-wide. Newly purchased buses already have camera systems in- stalled. These camera systems can protect customers by deterring crime, reducing vandalism and graffiti, reducing the frequency and detrimental impact of fraudu- lent injury claims, helping to effectively prosecute perpetrators when crimes are committed, and assisting with customer concerns or complaints. Metro plans to install camera systems on approximately 100 buses each year (approximately
82 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-84 Vehicles/Vehicle Parts
$10,000 per bus). In addition, camera systems will be retrofitted on an 8-year cycle. The total cost to install, maintain and replace bus cameras over the next ten years is $31.4 million. Demand for MetroAccess Advanced bus technologies such as Traffic Signal Priority (which provides con- service is projected to increase ditional signal priority when a bus is behind schedule), Mesh Network (which from 2.1 million trips in FY 2009 enables the bus system to send customer information to technology enabled bus stops), and wireless internet access require antennas on bus roofs and a high level to 4.5 million trips in 2020 as of security. The Antenna Reduction/Security Enhancements project will support the regional population’s aver- these advanced technologies and will combine the wireless data from multiple age age increases, and riders on-board devices to manage wireless bus data transmissions via a single roof- mounted Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) antenna. In addition to reducing switch to MetroAccess from the number of antennas, this program reduces the possibility of roof leaks and other providers. would result in lower maintenance costs. The benefits to the customer include faster travel time, better traveler information, and internet access on the bus. The cost of this project is $23.9 million.
Bus Enhancements includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 002: Automatic Vehicle Location Equipment $60.4 CNI 007: Bus Camera Installation $31.4 CNI 001: Antenna Reduction/ Security Enhancements $23.9 Total $115.7
MetroAccess Fleet Expansion ($44.2 Million)
Of all its modal services, MetroAccess is expected to experience Metro’s fastest growing ridership at 112% over the next ten years. Demand for MetroAccess service is projected to increase from 2.1 million trips in FY 2009 to 4.5 million trips in 2020 as the regional population’s average age increases, and riders switch to MetroAccess from other providers. In order to provide the same high level of service that paratransit customers currently receive, the MetroAccess fleet will need to expand by 803 vehicles by 2020. The total cost of these vehicles is $44.2 million.
MetroAccess Fleet Expansion includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 014: MetroAccess Fleet Expansion $44.2 Total $44.2
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-85 83 Asset Category: Systems and Technology
An extensive technology infrastructure works behind the scenes at Metro providing critical support to transit operations. Key examples include sched- uling software for Metrobus, Metrorail and MetroAccess and Metro Police Transit Department’s dispatch and records system. Other software is designed Customer/Demand – Systems and specifically to serve the customer, such as the Metrobus NextBus system Technology Needs by Project Type which uses Global Positioning System (GPS) software and route schedules ($355.6 Million) to predict bus arrival times. In addition, systems such as Metrorail’s traction- Power System Upgrades - Rail power ensure that trains have the electricity needed to power Metro trains. $32.4 This Customer/DemandOprations Support Software investment category includes operating systems and
$39.7 informationBusiness technology Support Software projects and necessary to enhance performance, improve communicationEquipment with customers and provide additional capacity to serve a $149.7 growingRail ridership. Fare Equipment
$133.8 Over the next ten years, a significant operating system investment is needed to improve Metrorail’s traction-power system to allow the deployment of up to 100% 8-car trains at peak periods (see Power System Upgrade – Rail). Operations Support Software projects will integrate and enhance Metro’s existing operation software to YOE, $ Millions better serve customers, including automated information sharing between Metro- PowerPower System System Upgrades Upgrades - Rail - Rail bus, Metrorail and MetroAccess. Building on recent improvements, Metro also plans to upgrade its website to encourage rider usage and information sharing (see $32.4 OprationsOperations Support Support Software Services Business Support Software and Equipment). To meet growing ridership, Metro has $39.7 BusinessBusiness Support Support Software Software and and identified new automatic fare collection system upgrades and equipment needs EquipmentEquipment $149.7 (see Rail Fare Equipment). RailRail Fare Fare Equipment Equipment The figure to the left shows Metro’s Customer/Demand - Systems and Technology $133.8 needs ($355.6 million over the next 10 years) by project type. A brief description of each project type follows.
Power System Upgrades – Rail ($149.7 Million)
To meet increasing ridership demand and avoid overcrowding, Metro is Upgrades are required to moving from a combination of 6- and 8-car trains to 100% 8-car trains. ensure that 8-car trains can This requires additional investment in the electrical system that powers the trains. 8-Car Trains Power Upgrades increases the power supply capacity of operate without risk of an the traction-power system at a cost of $149.7 million. Under this project, overload to the power system additional transformers, rectifiers, breakers, track feeder cables and negative which could cause damage to return cables will be installed in the Metrorail system. These upgrades are the power equipment, cabling required to ensure that 8-car trains can operate without risk of an overload to the power system which could cause damage to the power equipment, and/or trains. cabling and/or trains.
84 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-86 Systems and Technology
Power Systems Upgrades – Rail includes the following CNI project:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 077: 100% 8-Car Trains—Power Upgrades $149.7 Total $149.7
Operations Support Software ($133.8 Million)
Metro’s Operations Support Software investments will upgrade software and other technology infrastructure improvements to enhance transit operations and communications.
The Customer and Regional Integration project will automate information sharing between Metrobus, Metrorail and MetroAccess. This will enable Metro to integrate its customer, incident, response and performance information across the agency. For example, these improvements would enable MetroAccess customers faced with an elevator outage to take advantage of bus bridges (Metrobus service provided between two Metro stations due to elevator outages or service interrup- tions). In addition, this project will improve coordination and information sharing with regional partners.
The Enterprise Geographic Information System will create a single, agency-wide mapping function across departments to support more efficient and accurate as- set maintenance and management, transit routing and trip planning, emergency Metro’s Operations Sup- response, long-range planning and information sharing with the public. Benefits port Software investments would include an agency-wide bus stop inventory and an improved map of MTPD will upgrade software and jurisdictional limits for dispatch and crime analysis. other technology infrastructure Power Management Modernization will allow Metro to move toward a centralized improvements to enhance power management infrastructure that monitors and controls power consumption. Re- transit operations and com- search indicates that appropriate levels of power management automation can mini- munications. mize power spikes, brownouts and other problems and help Metro increase its total passenger throughput on the rail lines. Private industry uses centralized power man- agement to optimize use of electrical power and control power consumption costs.
Operations Support Software includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 044: Customer and Regional Integration $73.2 CNI 055: Power Management Modernization $45.9 CNI 047: Enterprise Geographic Information System $14.7 Total $133.8
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-87 85 Systems and Technology
Business Support Software and Equipment ($39.7 Million)
Website Update – Customer Communication will encourage interaction and information sharing within www.wmata.com through appropriate social media tools. Upgraded hardware to support new website features will cost $39.7 million over the next 10 years.
Metro’s website provides extensive information to riders, businesses and visitors about Metrorail, Metro- bus and MetroAccess service. First launched in 1996, the web site is now the primary source of informa- tion for most Metro customers. Web site usage has grown from 1 million page views per month in 1999 to an average of 16 million page views per month in 2009. Metro plans im- provements that will lay the ground- work for Web 2.0 collaborative technologies that could potentially create revenue-generating opportunities.
Business Support Software and Equipment includes the following CNI project: First launched in 1996, Metro’s web site is now the CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) primary source of information CNI 054: Website Update—Customer Communication $39.7 Total $39.7 for most customers. Web site usage has grown from 1 million page views per month in 1999 to an average of 16 million page Rail Fare Equipment ($32.4 Million) views per month in 2009. Metro is considering new technologies for fare collection, potentially adding a bank card (credit/debit) fare payment option known as an “open system.” The Metro Board approved solicitation of business proposals for an open fare payment system in May 2009. Metro estimates $10 million is needed for initial investments in such a system. An open fare payment system could mean lower fare collection costs if card companies would manage the collection system and customer inquiries. Revenue could also be raised by partnering with credit card companies or banks. The largest benefit would be to the customer who would have more payment choices increasing the convenience of using the
86 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-88 Systems and Technology
Metro system, particularly for tourists and occasional riders, who would no longer have to use the fare machines.
While the new open fare payment system is being evaluated, Metro will continue to support its existing Automatic Fare Collection (AFC) system. Currently, fare vending machines are located on each Metrorail mezzanine at all Metrorail stations and are of two types: standard vendors that only dispense limited- use paper fare cards and Express Vendors that also sell multiple farecards and passes, accept credit card payment, and allow reloading of SmarTrip cards (permanent, rechargeable farecards that operate like credit cards and are embedded with a special computer chip that tracks the value of each card). SmarTrip card dispensers are available only at stations with Metro-operated parking lots (but may also be purchased from Metro’s web site, retail outlets and commuter stores). With ridership projected to grow, Metro also plans to purchase 50 additional fare gates and to replace 30 of its standard vendors that only dispense limited use paper fare cards with Express Vendors. The cost of this additional AFC equipment is $6.0 million.
To expand the availability of SmarTrip card purchasing, Metro also plans to con- vert 224 fare vending machines to “universal vendors” (two conversions at each rail mezzanine) at a cost of $12.9 million. These universal vendors will dispense plastic SmarTrip cards as well as limited use paper SmarTrip cards. Purchasing the conversion kits and upgrading current equipment provides a less expensive option than purchasing all new fare equipment.
Other planned improvements include wiring upgrades ($1.3 million), new coin Investments in the Metro vaults and new revenue transfer carts ($2.2 million). The carts are used by Metro employees to collect currency from fare vending machines in preparation for de- fare collection system will make posit. Together these investments in the Metro fare collection system will make fare payment faster and easier fare payment faster and easier for daily riders and visitors. for daily riders and visitors. Rail Fare Equipment includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 090: Conversion of Fare Machines to Universal Vendors $12.9 CNI 097: Open Fare Payment System $10.0 CNI 091: Automatic Fare Collection Machines $6.0 CNI 094: Improvements to Coin Collection Machines $2.2 CNI 092: Ethernet Wiring for Rail Fare Machines $1.3 Total $32.4
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-89 87 Asset Category: Support Facilities
In addition to its rail stations, parking facilities, bus garages and rail yards, Metro owns and maintains support facilities that house administrative offices, training rooms, revenue processing activities, material storage, police work and print Customer/Demand – Support Facilities shops. While not highly visible to the public, Metro’s support facilities are critical Needs by Project Type for delivering transit service. Several of these facilities are at capacity, so expanded ($34.9 Million) and new facilities are planned to support growing service demands. Over the next ten years, supportMTPD facility Support capital Facilities needs include a new Metro Transit Police Depart- ment (MTPD) substation to serve the western-most part of Metro’s service area, $3.6 including the MetroAccessDulles Metrorail Operations extension, andFacility a police training facility. In order to transition from rented to permanent space, MetroAccess identified the need for a new commandBusiness center. BusinessSupport support Facilities facility capital needs include an expan- $8.0 sion of Metro’s revenue collection facility to serve new Dulles extension stations and improvements to the visitor management system at the Jackson Graham $23.3 administration building.
The figure to the left shows Metro’s Customer/Demand - Support Facilities needs ($34.9 million over the next 10 years) by project type. A brief description of each project type follows. YOE, $ Millions
MTPDPolice SupportFacilities Facilities Police Facilities ($23.3 Million) $3.6 MetroAccessMetroAccess OperationsOperations Facility Facility Metro Transit Police Department (MTPD) officers are responsible for providing law BusinessBusiness SupportSupport Facilities enforcement and public safety services on the Metrorail and Metrobus systems. $8.0 The service area extends 1,500 square miles within Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. MTPD has an authorized strength of 458 sworn police of- $23.3 ficers, 114 security special police and 4 armored vehicle guards. The Department is currently split into two patrol Districts, each covering one half of the system. A third district serves Metro’s revenue collection operation. A fourth district will be established with the opening of the Dulles Metrorail extension.
While not highly visible to MTPD’s current facilities include administrative offices in the Jackson Graham building, two substations, and offices for the Department’s Special Operations the public, Metro’s support bureau. The District 1 Substation is the Department’s newest facility (opened in facilities are critical for deliver- 2007), and is located near the Fort Totten Metro station. ing transit service. Several of Metro plans to construct a new District 4 Substation to serve as a base for officers these facilities are at capacity, patrolling the new Dulles Metrorail extension and to cover increased Metrobus so expanded and new facilities service in Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun and Montgomery counties. The substa- are planned to support growing tion will accommodate officer training, administrative functions, crime scene search technicians, evidence storage, police interview rooms, locker rooms and service demands. restroom facilities.
88 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-90 Support Facilities
Each year MTPD’s 458 sworn and commissioned members are required by state training mandates to qualify their firearms. Currently, MTPD officers qualify their firearms at ranges operated by local public safety agencies through cooperative agreement with these agencies. As the force of local police departments grows, available time at these facilities is becoming increasingly scarce. Consequently, MTPD officers are forced to qualify dur- ing off-hours, which can create overtime costs. Given that MTPD will also experience continued growth to match increasing ridership and regional expansion, a dedicated MTPD training facility is needed. A police training facility will provide MTPD officers with the resources needed to qualify their firearms semi-annually and to practice more frequently. The police training facility will include a firing range, classrooms, weapons cleaning and storage rooms.
Police Facilities includes the following CNI projects:
CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) CNI 102: Police Substation - New District 4 $12.5 CNI 100: Police Training Facility $10.8 Total $23.3
MetroAccess Operations Facility ($8 Million)
The current MetroAccess command center operates in rented space (annual cost of about $850,000 per year) near the Prince George’s Plaza Metro station. Use of rented space can require periodic relocation resulting in substantial costs for tele- phone transfers, backup power, heating/cooling systems and other requirements. To address growing ridership, provide operational stability and to realize long term cost reductions, Metro is considering constructing a permanent MetroAccess com- mand center. The cost for the building space, equipment and communications is $8 million.
MetroAccess Operations Facility includes the following CNI project: To address growing rider- ship, provide operational CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) stability and to realize long term CNI 013: MetroAccess Command Center $8.0 cost reductions, Metro is plan- Total $8.0 ning to construct a permanent MetroAccess command center.
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-91 89 Support Facilities
Business Support Facilities ($3.6 Million)
Metro will need to expand the Alexandria revenue collection facility (RCF) in order to maintain efficient handling of fare collections and to accommodate future ridership growth. Metrorail customers purchase farecards using vending machines located on rail station mezzanines. The currency is then collected in revenue service carts by Metro employees. At Metro’s RCF, employees pro- cess revenue carts in preparation for bank deposit. RCF has reached its maxi- mum capacity to house personnel and equipment. In addition, the new Dulles Metrorail extension will place new demand on the facility with the addition of 20 additional mezzanines and 40 new revenue service carts. The cost to expand the RCF is $2.5 million.
Because Metro’s Jackson Graham building in the District of Columbia houses not only administrative offices but also an Operations Control Center that monitors the movement of Metrovehicles, a high level of security is required. On a daily basis, Metro special police officers process hundreds of visitors. These visitors include participants in public meetings held at the building, MetroAccess’ Transit Acces- sibility Center clients, Metro contractors, consultants and other guests. A secure and efficient visitor management system is needed at the Jackson Graham build- ing in order to properly process and monitor visitors. The system will utilize the latest technology to screen visitors, create temporary photo identification cards and control access to the building. The cost of a Building Visitor Management System is $1.1 million.
Business Support Facilities includes the following CNI projects: A secure and efficient visitor management system is needed CNI Project Total (YOE, $ Millions) at the Jackson Graham building CNI 034: Revenue Collection Facility (RCF) Building Expansion $2.5 CNI 098: Jackson Graham Building Visitor Management System $1.1 in order to properly process Total $3.6 and monitor visitors. The new system will utilize the latest technology to screen visitors, create temporary photo iden- tification cards and control access to the building.
90 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-92 Customer/Demand Project Index
Project Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type Budget
Antenna Reduction/ Security 001 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Bus Enhancements $ 23,860 Enhancements
Automatic Vehicle Location 002 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Bus Enhancements $ 60,434 Equipment
Bus Capacity Enhance-ments: 003 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Bus Fleet Expansion $ 255,450 Fleet Expansion
007 Bus Camera Installation Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Bus Enhancements $ 31,400
Dual Accessible Pathways - Core Elevator/Escalator 012 Passenger Facilities $ 33,955 Elevator Project Facilities
MetroAccess Command 013 MetroAccess Command Center Support Facilities $ 8,000 Center
MetroAccess Fleet 014 MetroAccess Fleet Expansion Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts $ 44,165 Expansion
Expansion of 016 MetroAccess Operating Garages Maintenance Facilities $ 16,000 MetroAccess Garages
Platform Edge Bumpy Dome Rail Station: Capacity/ 017 Passenger Facilities $ 11,000 Installation Enhancements
Revenue Collection Facility (RCF) Business Support 034 Support Facilities $ 2,522 Building Expansion Facilities
Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities: Bicycle & Pedestrian 035 Passenger Facilities $ 40,301 Capacity Improvements Facilities
Bus Priority Corridor Network Bus Priority Corridor 037 Passenger Facilities $ 120,449 Enhancements Improvements
Bus Garage Capacity Fleet Maintenance Expansion of Bus 038 $ 405,723 Enhancements Facilities Garages
Core Stations Capacity Rail Station: Capacity/ 039 Passenger Facilities $ 612,112 Enhancements Enhancements
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-93 91 Customer/Demand Project Index
Project Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type Budget
Farragut North/West Pedestrian Rail Station: Capacity/ 040 Passenger Facilities $ 72,035 Connection Enhancements
Gallery Place/Metro Center Rail Station: Capacity/ 041 Passenger Facilities $ 100,001 Pedestrian Connection Enhancements
Operations Support 044 Customer & Regional Integration Systems and Technology $ 73,161 Software
Enterprise Geographic Operations Support 047 Systems and Technology $ 14,713 Information System Software
Website Update — Customer Business Support 054 Systems and Technology $ 39,716 Communication Software & Equipment
Power Management Operations Support 055 Systems and Technology $ 45,931 Modernization Software
062 6000 Series Rail Car Procurement Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rail Car Fleet Expansion $ 2,581
100% 8-Car Train — Rail Cars 068 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rail Car Fleet Expansion $ 250,377 (7000-Series)
75% 8-Car Train — Rail Cars 069 Vehicles/ Vehicle Parts Rail Car Fleet Expansion $ 352,170 (7000-Series)
Installation of Parking Lot Credit Rail Station: Capacity/ 074 Passenger Facilities $ 3,278 Card Readers Enhancements
100 % 8-Car Trains — Power Power System Upgrades 077 Systems and Technology $ 149,735 Upgrades - Rail
Bladensburg Shop Fleet Maintenance Expansion of Bus 078 $ 39,129 Reconfiguration Facilities Garages
Rail Station: Capacity/ 079 Extend Platform Canopies Passenger Facilities $ 317,035 Enhancements
92 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-94 Customer/Demand Project Index
Project Number Project Name Asset Category Project Type Budget
Fleet Maintenance Rail Maintenance 082 75% 8-Car Train — Storage $ 194,415 Facilities Facilities
Fleet Maintenance Rail Maintenance 083 100% 8-Car Train — Storage $ 401,465 Facilities Facilities
Rail Station: Capacity/ 088 Station Entrance Canopies Passenger Facilities $ 34,918 Enhancements
Conversion of Fare Machines to 090 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 12,900 Universal Vendors
Automatic Fare Collection 091 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 5,980 Machines
Ethernet Wiring for Rail Fare 092 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 1,300 Machines
Improvements to Coin Collection 094 Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 2,208 Machines
097 Open Fare Payment System Systems and Technology Rail Fare Equipment $ 10,000
Jackson Graham Building Visitor Business Support 098 Support Facilities $ 1,100 Management System Facilities
Police Emergency Management 099 Passenger Facilities Rail Station Equipment $ 1,150 Equipment
100 Police Training Facility Support Facilities Police Facilities $ 10,818
102 Police Substation — New District 4 Support Facilities Police Facilities $ 12,500
105 Chemical Detector Enhancements Passenger Facilities Rail Station Equipment $ 20,421
Attachment 4 Investment Category: Customer/DemandA4-95 93 List of Capital Needs
Project Page Number Project Name Number 001 Antenna Reduction/ Security Enhancements 83 002 Automatic Vehicle Location Equipment 83 003 Bus Capacity Enhancements: Fleet Expansion 82 004 Bus Repair Equipment 55 005 Bus Rehabilitation 31 006 Bus Replacement 31 007 Bus Camera Installation 83 008 Bus Rehabilitation Components 32 009 Service Vehicle Replacement 33 010 Environmental Compliance Projects 41 011 Underground Storage Tank Replacement 41 012 Dual Accessible Pathways - Core Elevator Project 74 013 MetroAccess Command Center 89 014 MetroAccess Fleet Expansion 83 015 MetroAccess Vehicles 33 016 MetroAccess Operating Garages 79 017 Platform Edge Bumpy Dome Installation 74 018 Track Welding Program 48 019 Track Floating Slab Rehabilitation 48 020 Replacement of Rail Track Signage 54 021 Track Pad/Shock Absorber Rehabilitation 48 022 Track Structural Rehabilitation 48 023 Third Rail Rehabilitation 47 024 Track Rehabilitation 47 025 Track Maintenance Equipment 54 026 Station/Tunnel Leak Mitigation 48 027 Switch Machine Rehabilitation Project 54 028 Materials Handling Equipment 55 029 Warehouse Vertical Storage Units/Shelving 55 030 Currency Processing Machines 44 031 Debit/Credit Processing Requirements 45 032 Fare Media Encoders 45 033 Replacement of Revenue Facility Equipment 58 034 Revenue Collection Facility (RCF) Building Expansion 90 035 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities: Capacity Improvements 76 036 Replacement of Bicycle Racks & Lockers 52 037 Bus Priority Corridor Network Enhancements 75 038 Bus Garage Capacity Enhancements 79 039 Core Stations Capacity Enhancements 74 040 Farragut North/Farragut West Pedestrian Connection 74
94 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-96 List of Capital Needs
Project Page Number Project Name Number 041 Gallery Place/Metro Center Pedestrian Connection 74 042 Bus & Rail Asset Management Software 43 043 Bus Operations Support Software 43 044 Customer & Regional Integration 85 045 Data Centers and Infrastructures 43 046 Document Management System 44 047 Enterprise Geographic Information System 85 048 Sensitive Data Protection Technology 44 049 Management Support Software 44 050 Metro IT OneStop and Office Automation 44 051 Police Dispatch and Records Management 43 052 Network and Communications 43 053 Network Operations Center (NOC) 43 054 Website Update — Customer Communication 86 055 Power Management Modernization 85 056 Rail Operations Support Software 43 057 1000-Series Rail Car Replacement 28 058 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation 29 059 2000/3000-Series Rail Car Replacement 28 060 4000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation 29 061 5000-Series Rail Car Mid-Life Rehabilitation 29 062 6000-Series Rail Car Procurement 81 063 Rail Rehabilitation Components 32 064 1000-Series Rail Car HVAC Rehabilitation 29 065 Geometry Vehicle 54 066 Rail Car Repair Equipment* 55 067 Rail Car Safety & Reliability Enhancements 29 068 100% 8-Car Train — Rail Cars (7000-Series) 81 069 75% 8-Car Train — Rail Cars (7000-Series) 81 071 Test Track & Commissioning Facility 41 072 Elevator Rehabilitation 51 073 Escalator Rehabilitation 51 074 Installation of Parking Lot Credit Card Readers 74 075 Parking Lot Preventive Maintenance 52 076 8-Car Train Power Upgrades 45 077 100 % 8-Car Trains — Power Upgrades 85 078 Bladensburg Shop Reconfiguration 79 079 Extend Platform Canopies 74 080 Jackson Graham Building Renovation 58 082 75% 8-Car Train — Storage 78 *CNI 066 was formerly known as “Heavy-Duty Track Equipment.”
Attachment 4 List of CapitalA4-97 Needs 95 List of Capital Needs
Project Page Number Project Name Number 083 100% 8-Car Train —Storage 78 084 Southern Avenue Bus Garage Replacement 38 085 Replacement of Additional Bus Garages 38 086 Southeastern Bus Garage Replacement 38 087 Station Enhancement Program 52 088 Station Entrance Canopies 74 089 Track Fasteners 48 090 Conversion of Fare Machines to Universal Vendors 87 091 Automatic Fare Collection Machines 87 092 Ethernet Wiring for Rail Fare Machines 87 093 Maintaining NEXTFARE System 45 094 Improvements to Coin Collection Machines 87 095 Automatic Fare Collection Machine Repairs 45 097 Open Fare Payment System 87 098 Jackson Graham Building Visitor Management System 90 099 Police Emergency Management Equipment 76 100 Police Training Facility 89 101 Police Substation- New District 2 59 102 Police Substation — New District 4 89 103 Police Portable Radio Replacement 44 104 Police Vehicle Replacement 33 105 Chemical Detector Enhancements 76 106 Special Operations Division Facility 59 107 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Dupont to Silver Spring 36 108 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: Dupont to Grosvenor 36 109 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: Grosvenor to Shady Grove and Silver Spring to Glenmont 36 110 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: National Airport to New Carrollton 36 111 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: Rosslyn to Vienna 36 112 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 3: National Airport to Huntington and Franconia Springfield 36 plus the Largo Extension 113 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 1: U Street to Anacostia 36 114 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 2: U Street to Greenbelt 36 115 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 3: Anacostia to Branch Avenue 36 116 Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 1: Alexandria, Brentwood and New Carrollton 40 117 Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 2: West Falls Church, Greenbelt and Shady Grove 40 118 Rail Yard Facility Repairs Tier 3: Branch Avenue, Glenmont and Largo 40 119 Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 1: Western, Northern and Landover 40 120 Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 2: Montgomery and Four Mile Run 40 121 Bus Garage Facility Repairs Tier 3: Bladensburg 40 122 Rail Rehabilitation Tier 4 36 ** CNI projects 070, 081, and 096 were combined with other projects during the development of this report.
96 CapitalAttachment Needs Inventory 4 A4-98 Attachment 4 A4-99 2011-2020
Capital Needs Inventory Executive Summary
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
600 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Printed February 2010
Prepared by WMATA Department of Planning and Joint Development, Office of Long Range Planning
This report can be downloaded from WMATA’s website at www.metroopensdoors.com Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Attachment 4 A4-100
Vital Signs Report
A Scorecard of Metro’s Key Performance Indicators (KPI) 2012 1st Quarter Results
Chief Performance Officer
Published: May 2012
Attachment 5 A5-1 Page Left Intentionally Blank
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-2 2
Introduction to this report
As a regional transportation system, Metro’s system-wide performance is captured in the Vital Signs Report. The Vital Signs Report provides analysis of a small number of key performance indicators (KPI’s) that monitor long term progress in the strategic areas of safety, security, service reliability and customer satisfaction.
The report is not designed to measure the experience of individual customers using Metro’s services. Instead, the Vital Signs Report communicates if the Metro system’s performance is improving, worsening or remaining steady.
Detailed performance analysis is presented in the Vital Signs Report through answers to two prime questions: Why did performance change? What actions are being taken to improve performance? Metro is focused on these two questions to continually drive improvement.
The Vital Signs Report demonstrates Metro’s commitment to be transparent and accountable to our Board of Directors, jurisdictional stakeholders and the public. This report documents performance results and strives to hold WMATA’s management accountable for what is working, what is not working, and why.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-3 3 Page Left Intentionally Blank
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-4 4 Table of Contents
Introduction to this report ...... 3
Strategic Framework ...... 6
KPI’s that Score How Metro is Performing ...... 7
Bus On-Time Performance (January - March) ...... 7
Bus Fleet Reliability (January - March) ...... 8
Rail On-Time Performance (January - March) ...... 9
Rail Fleet Reliability (January - March) ...... 10
MetroAccess On-Time Performance (January - March) ...... 11
Escalator System Availability (January - March) ...... 12
Elevator System Availability (January - March) ...... 13
Customer Injury Rate (December - February) ...... 14
Employee Injury Rate (December - February) ...... 15
Crime Rate (December - February) ...... 16
Customer Comment Rate (January – March) ...... 17
Definitions ...... 18
Performance Data ...... 20
Metro Facts at a Glance ...... 25
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-5 5 Strategic Framework Overview There are five strategic goals that provide a framework to quantify and measure how well Metro is performing. Each of the goals has underlying objectives intended to guide all employees in the execution of their duties. Although Metro is working on all goals and objectives only a select number of performance measures are presented in the Vital Signs Report to provide a high-level view of agency progress.
Goals 1. Create a Safer Organization 2. Deliver Quality Service 5 Goals 3. Use Every Resource Wisely 4. Retain, Attract and Reward the Best and Brightest 5. Maintain and Enhance Metro’s Image
Goal Objective
1.1 Improve customer and employee safety and security (“prevention”)* 1 1.2 Strengthen Metro’s safety and security response (“reaction”)
2.1 Improve service reliability
2.2 Increase service and capacity to relieve overcrowding and meet future demand
2 2.3 Maximize rider satisfaction through convenient, comfortable services and facilities that are in good condition and easy to navigate
12 2.4 Enhance mobility by improving access to and linkages between transportation options Objectives 3.1 Manage resources efficiently 3 3.2 Target investments that reduce cost or increase revenue
4.1 Support diverse workforce development through management, 4 training and provision of state of the art facilities, vehicles, systems and equipment
5.1 Enhance communication with customers, employees, Union leadership, Board, media and other stakeholders
5 5.2 Promote the region’s economy and livable communities
5.3 Use natural resources efficiently and reduce environmental impacts
*WMATA Board of Directors System Safety Policy states: 1. To avoid loss of life, injury of persons and damage or loss of property; 2. To instill a commitment to safety in all WMATA employees and contractor personnel; and 3. To provide for the identification and control of safety hazards, the study of safety requirements, the design, installation and fabrication of safe equipment, facilities, systems, and vehicles, and a systematic approach to the analysis and surveillance of operational safety for facilities, systems, vehicles and equipment. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-6 6 KPI’s that Score How Metro is Performing KPI: Bus On-Time Performance (January - Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability March)
Reason to Track: This indicator illustrates how closely Metrobus adheres to published route schedules on a system-wide basis. Factors which affect on-time performance are traffic congestion, inclement weather,
scheduling, vehicle reliability, and operational behavior. Bus on-time performance is essential to delivering quality service to the customer. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? First quarter (Q1/2012) on-time performance (OTP) averaged 78% which meant more than three out of four buses arrived on-time. This met Metro’s performance target for the quarter and was on par with performance in Q1/2011. The months of January through March historically outperform the remaining months of the year. In correlation with the National Capital Region Congestion Report, the first quarter results typically reflected lower delay per traveler. Although the performance outcomes were similar between Q1/2012 and Q1/2011, Metro had to address 29% more bus incidents in Q1/2012 than Q1/2011 including double the amount of bus detours (381 versus 164). When compared to the Q1/2011, buses running early decreased by 5% in Q1/2012; however, buses running late increased by 3%. The increase and decrease of earlies/lates nearly offset one another. To further improve OTP, Service Operation Manager assignments were continually realigned to provide the most effective coverage of bus service on the street. This effort attempted to address the key service disruptions and short delays that develop. Additionally, the OTP Center continued to focus on high ridership bus routes using new technology and this has proven effective at helping OTP on the 90’s and 74 lines.
Bus On-Time Performance
80%
75%
70%
65% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to identify alternative routes that provide the least inconvenience to customers during the occurrence of bus detours. Continue to conduct public meetings - such as the 14th Street Line community meeting- to solicit suggestions on how to resolve recurring service problems.
Develop plans to enhance OTP Center staffing to expand oversight of key routes throughout the system. Continue to conduct in-person traffic checks for 20 to 30 minutes (minimum of two per day are required) to identify and address service delivery challenges. Strategically place Service Operation Managers on routes that routinely run late.
Conclusion: First quarter on-time performance averaged 78%, meeting Metro’s performance target and matching Q1/2011 results. Effective deployments of Service Operation Managers assignments and OTP center enhancements have proven to have a positive impact on selected routes.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-7 7
Bus Fleet Reliability (January - March) KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability (Mean Distance Between Failures)
Reason to Track: This key performance indicator communicates service reliability and is used to monitor trends in vehicle breakdowns that cause buses to go out of service and to plan corrective actions. Factors that influence bus fleet reliability are the vehicle age, quality of a maintenance program, original vehicle quality, and road conditions affected by inclement weather and road construction. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Bus fleet reliability for the first quarter outperformed the target by 10% and exceeded Q1/2011 performance. In comparison to Q1/2011, buses ran on average an additional 281 miles in Q1/2012 before experiencing a mechanical failure that caused removal of a bus from service. During the months of January through March, performance tends to improve as there is less atmospheric condensation. Moisture in electrical connections tends to cause components to fail. Nevertheless, Q1/2012 bus fleet reliability results are impressive given Metro recently raised the bus fleet reliability target 4%, from 7,400 miles to 7,700 miles between failures to reflect the solid performance last year and future assumptions (e.g. the receipt of additional new Hybrid buses). During the month of March, which was a particularly good month, buses ran 7% farther between breakdowns compared to the prior month as a result of corrective actions (e.g. 319 out of 351 cooling system-related components were replaced on Metro’s new Hybrid buses).
Bus Fleet Reliability
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000 (Miles) 5,000
4,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Distance between Failures
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to retrofit the energy storage system of 47 Hybrids which were voluntarily recalled to avoid electrical shorts; the retrofits will be complete by the end of May. Continue to retire older less reliable buses with new Hybrids, while also focusing on the preventative
maintenance of older diesel buses that are still in service. Continue to resolve CNG engine shutoff problems by retrofitting engines during the on-going midlife overhaul. Approximately 46% of this initiative has already occurred.
Conclusion: Bus fleet reliability for the first quarter outperformed the target by 10% and exceeded Q1/2011
performance due to corrective and preventive maintenance actions.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-8 8 Rail On-Time Performance (January - KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability March)
Reason to Track: On-time performance measures the adherence to weekday headways, the time between trains. Factors that can affect on-time performance include track conditions resulting in speed restrictions, the number of
passengers accessing the system at once, dwell time at stations, equipment failures and delays caused by sick passengers or offloads. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Rail on-time performance in Q1/2012 improved slightly compared to the same three months in 2011 despite more train delays (up 8%) and more planned track work. Proactive management of OTP enabled Metro to accomplish solid Q1/2012 results. During this quarter, delay minutes were highest in January 2012, due to 4 cracked rails, a broken track part (“frog”) and a train losing a friction ring (part of the brake assembly). These events required single-tracking around the incidents, dragging down OTP. Track work intensified this quarter, expanding from primarily during late nights to all non-rush weekday periods (mid-day and early evening) and at multiple locations in the core where service is more frequent. For example,
Red Line OTP decreased in January and February as trains single-tracked around work areas during mid-day and in two locations in the evenings. In contrast, Red Line OTP improved 4% in March during the “spring break” from track work. Despite these challenges, Metrorail delivered solid on-time performance this quarter by focusing on improving OTP during “track work free” rush service. Staff identified areas of low OTP, determined the cause and implemented solutions. For example, after identifying issues with Blue Line trains arriving at terminal stations interacting with Yellow line trains, placing supervisors at strategic locations resulted in Yellow Line OTP improvements in March.
Rail On-Time Performance 100%
95%
90%
85%
80% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to conduct mid-day and early evening track-work. As track work is increasingly located in core/interlined areas, OTP will reduce more significantly due to the frequency of service in these areas. Long- term, track work will improve safety and reliability of the rail system. Short-term this will be an inconvenience to our customers as headways are widened to accommodate single-tracking around work areas. Utilize newly installed clocks at terminal locations so that operators may synchronize their watches with OCC to encourage on-time terminal departure and on-time arrivals at stations. Expand access to a real-time OTP tracking tool so that OCC controllers can direct operators to improve performance. Supervisors will monitor operators and provide additional training as needed to new operators who begin work in May and June. New operators are more likely than experienced operators to have trouble maintaining schedules while they build their skill with experience, reducing OTP.
Conclusion: Despite more train delays and more planned track work, rail on-time performance for Q1/2012 was
higher than last year due to more proactive management of OTP.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-9 9
Rail Fleet Reliability (January - March) KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability (Mean Distance Between Delays)
Reason to Track: Mean distance between delays communicates the effectiveness of Metro’s railcar maintenance program. This measure reports the number of miles between railcar failures resulting in delays of service greater than three minutes. Factors that influence railcar reliability are the age of the railcars, the amount the railcars are used and the interaction between railcars and the track. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Railcar reliability steadily improved during the first quarter of 2012, but was 7% worse overall than Q1/2011. During Q1/2011 there was a brief, temporary uptick in reliability as troubles with brakes decreased but brake troubles returned the following quarter. Brake delays dropped after electronic control units were replaced. Brake related delays were consistent between Q1/2012 and Q1/2011, with only one more delay for the quarter. During Q1/2012, there were 17% more delays due to railcar issues than in Q1/2011. This increase was mainly due to persistent door problems. During Q1/2012 new troubleshooting procedures were implemented and door failures decreased. Two thirds of delays on the 2-3K fleet, and 47% of delays on the 6K fleet were door- related delays, which after peaking in December 2011 have continued to be the single most frequent type of delay > 3 minutes in the rail system. The 6K fleet continued to be the most reliable in the system although slightly down from the same quarter last year, operating 20% of the miles (21% last year) while contributing only 11% of the delays (10% last year). In March 2012, the 6K fleet delivered over 93,000 miles before experiencing a mechanical issue that caused a delay of > 3 minutes. The 5K fleet has experienced notable improvement in reliability with 13% of the delays (compared with 19% for the quarter last year) while operating 16% of the miles. Rail Fleet Reliability 65,000 60,000 55,000 50,000 45,000
40,000 35,000
Mean Distance 30,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Between Delays (Miles) CY 2011 CY 2012 Target Actions to Improve Performance Continue to adjust the door system troubleshooting procedure and track the outcomes, including repeat failures and average time in service between failures to identify which new actions are improving reliability. Complete installation of new sealed door relays for the 2-3K and 6K fleets by summer 2012. Meanwhile, continue testing of the door control mechanism for a long-term solution to correct door problems. Testing under live operating conditions helps engineers to see how the components perform over time. Once the testing phase is completed successfully, the components can be specified, procured and installed throughout the fleets.
Continue to assign railcar technicians to critical locations throughout the system to respond quickly to calls of railcar problems to minimize the impact on customers. New, stronger hubs are being delivered and installation is underway on the 6K railcars. Replacement of brake discs on the 2-3K railcars is also ongoing. This process will continue throughout 2012. Complete seasonal HVAC preparation on all railcars to improve performance during high temperature months, which includes cleaning and optimization of each HVAC system, by May. Continue overhauling the 5K and 1K HVAC systems to improve reliability. Conclusion: Railcar reliability steadily improved in Q1/2012 due to fewer brake and door delays, but was 7%
worse than Q1/2011.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-10 10
MetroAccess On-Time Performance KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability (January - March)
Reason to Track: On-time performance is a measure of MetroAccess service reliability and how well service meets both regulatory and customer expectations. Adhering to the customer's scheduled pick-up window is comparable to Metrobus adhering to scheduled timetables. Factors which affect on-time performance are traffic congestion, inclement weather, scheduling, vehicle reliability and operational behavior. MetroAccess on-time performance is essential to delivering quality service to customers, and meeting service criteria established through Federal Transit Administration regulatory guidance. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? MetroAccess’ on-time performance averaged slightly above the target of 92% for Q1/2012, outperforming the same period last year which was impacted by an ice storm in January, and service disruptions due to flooding in February 2011. During Q1/2012, MetroAccess made efficiency improvements while maintaining its service standards. Using a higher percentage of dedicated vehicles resulted in more consistent service delivery and improved scheduling efficiency, which can impact on-time performance. Ridership continued to track below last year falling 10% below the Q1/2011 level with average weekday ridership down 13% from the first quarter of 2011. Lower, steadier demand allows more efficient schedules to be developed, and operated. Active management of call center activities and communication with drivers throughout the service day has reduced the number of late trips.
MetroAccess On-Time Performance 100%
95%
90%
85% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to strive for an optimal balance between on-time performance and efficiency. Educate customers about the importance of communicating their personal schedule changes as soon as they are known, including cancelations, so adjustments can be made by dispatchers. Communicate broader transit accessibility issues through the Accessibility Advisory Committee to improve system accessibility of all modes of service.
Conclusion: MetroAccess delivered 92% of trips provided on-time in Q1/2012 outperforming last year’s results
due to efficiency improvement and lower ridership.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-11 11 Escalator System Availability (January - KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability March)
Reason to Track: Customers access Metrorail stations via escalators to the train platform. An out-of-service escalator requires walking up or down a stopped escalator, which can add to total travel time and may make stations inaccessible to some customers. Escalator availability is a key component of customer satisfaction with Metrorail service. This measure communicates system-wide escalator performance (at all stations over the course of the day) and will vary from an individual customer’s experience. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Escalator availability was on target in Q1/2012 giving evidence to prove that actions taken last year are improving performance. Availability in Q1/2012 improved 2% compared to the same three months in 2011 showing the positive impact of Metro’s preventive maintenance practices, better work planning and more modernization work. Escalator preventive maintenance (PM) compliance improved 49% compared with Q1/2011. By proactively identifying and fixing problems, unexpected repairs are less time intensive reflecting an improved baseline condition of Metro’s escalators. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) was 29% better than the same three months in 2011.
Schedules were revised so that minor repairs (e.g., new handrail, step replacement) were completed at the same time as PM inspections (typically conducted when the system is closed) to minimize the impact on customers and further increase availability. In Q1/2012, maintenance work shifted away from addressing unscheduled issues (unscheduled work hours down 26% from Q1/2011) towards scheduled work (hours up 14%). Hours to modernize/replace escalators increased significantly from 2011 as Metro worked to improve long-term reliability. In January-March 2012, 34% of out-of-service hours were due to modernization/replacement compared to 23% in 2011. This critical work took 36 units out of service at 14 stations.
Escalator System Availability 100%
95%
90%
85%
80% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to improve work planning and scheduling, focusing on reducing the time escalators are out of service for major repairs (e.g., reducers, chains, rack and axle). Enhance information sharing among inspection and maintenance technicians in order to further reduce the time necessary to make repairs identified in inspections (Mean Time to Repair). Continue work at Dupont Circle station south entrance through October 2012 to replace three escalators with new, industrial-strength units. These escalators were among the least reliable and most difficult to maintain of Metro’s 588 escalators. Provide on-site maintenance support to quickly resolve any unexpected escalator and elevator outages at the North Entrance. Begin escalator modernizations at Pentagon City and L’Enfant Plaza stations.
Conclusion: Escalator availability improved 2% compared to last year, exceeding Metro’s performance target (89%) for two months of Q1/2012. Maintenance work shifted from reactive to proactive as a result of increased emphasis on preventive maintenance and improved work planning.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-12 12 Elevator System Availability (January - KPI: Objective 2.1 Improve Service Reliability March)
Reason to Track: Metrorail elevators provide an accessible path of travel for persons with disabilities, seniors, customers with strollers, travelers carrying luggage and other riders. When an elevator is out of service, Metro is required to provide alternative services, which may include a shuttle bus service to another station. For this measure higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Elevator availability in Q1/2012 was on par with the same period in 2011, particularly notable given the increase in scheduled modernizations. Systemwide availability remained stable due to better preventive maintenance that improved the condition of elevators and led to fewer, less time-intensive unscheduled outages. Elevator preventive maintenance compliance improved 49% compared with Q4/2011 and 42% compared to Q1/2011 as technicians proactively identified and fixed problems. Unscheduled maintenance calls were down 8% from Q1/2011 and unscheduled out-of-service hours were down 26%, indicating that the baseline condition of Metro’s elevators is improving due to better preventive maintenance. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) was 16% better than Q1/2011 as mechanics received specialized training on trouble-shooting the cause of elevator outages. Hours to modernize elevators accounted for 38% of out-of-service hours from Q1/2012 as Metro worked to improve long-term reliability. There were no elevator modernizations in Q1/2011. Elevator System Availability
100%
95%
90% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2011 CY 2012 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue modernizations at Metro Center and Cleveland Park stations and elevator cab replacement at Congress Heights station (unit significantly damaged in September while in use). Provide on-site maintenance support at Dupont Circle station to quickly resolve any unexpected escalator and elevator outages at the North Entrance during South Entrance escalator replacement.
Promote adoption of FY13 Proposed Operating Budget that includes additional elevator maintenance technicians to resolve outages more quickly with reduced use of overtime (currently 1 technician per 48 elevators, compared with the proposed 1 per 14 escalators). Maintain two additional elevators with the opening of a new parking garage at the Glenmont station.
Conclusion: Elevator availability was on-par with last year, which is particularly notable given the significant
increase in scheduled modernization work to improve long-term reliability of units.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-13 13 Customer Injury Rate Per Million Objective 1.1 Improve Customer and KPI: Passengers (December - February) Employee Safety and Security
Reason to Track: Customer safety is the highest priority for Metro and a key measure of quality service. Customers expect a safe and reliable ride each day. The customer injury rate is an indicator of how well the service is meeting this safety objective. For this measure lower is better.
Why Did Performance Change? The customer injury rate continues to be better than target and performance for Q1/2012 improved slightly (1%) compared to Q1/2011. The improvement was driven by the reduction of MetroAccess and rail/parking facility customer injuries. Rail/parking facility customer injuries are generally related to slips and falls; MetroAccess customer injuries are generally collision and/or slip and fall related. A number of initiatives such as the rail station audits (where Safety Officers look for potential safety hazards) and the Safety Communication Campaign (reminding customers to remain alert) have helped to reduce customer injuries. This winter was the fourth warmest on record, according to NOAA. Winter hazards such as snow and ice generally cause customers to slip/fall. These typical winter hazards did not occur this year, which may account for the improvement in this injury rate. Although the overall customer injury rate improved, the bus customer injury rate increased by slightly less than 1 more injury per million passengers compared to Q1/2011. These injuries were driven by an increase in preventable collisions.
Customer Injury Rate 5
4
3
2
Passengers 1
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Customer Injuries per Million Customer CY 2012 CY 2011 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Metro Safety Officers will continue to conduct bus confidential ride along audits in response to various customer complaints. Safety Officers will report safety concerns and follow-up to ensure that the concerns have been addressed. Continue to broadcast safety messages on the public address system to increase customer awareness and avoid injuries. For example, WMATA initiated a safety communication campaign that will focus on risky customer behavior and inform customers on how to avoid routine injuries. Continue to trim back trees near bus stops that block customer visibility and continue to work with jurisdictions to repair various street storm grates (some street storm grates have caused unexpected jolts on board buses) to help prevent customer injuries.
Conclusion: The customer injury rate for Q1/2012 improved slightly by 1% when compared to the performance of
Q1/2011. The improvement was driven by the decline in rail/parking facilities slip and fall injuries.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-14 14 Employee Injury Rate (December - Objective 1.1 Improve Customer and Employee KPI: February) Safety and Security
Reason to Track: Worker's compensation claims are a key indicator of how safe employees are in the workplace. For this measure lower is better.
Why Did Performance Change? The employee injury rate for the months of December 2011 – February 2012 improved compared to the same period of the prior calendar year from 6 employee injuries to 5 employee injuries for every 200,000 hours worked. A particularly notable decline in employee injuries occurred in January 2012 compared to January 2011; there were 14 more injuries in January 2011 than January 2012. The calendar year started off with straining as the #1 cause of injuries (32% of all injuries). However, compared to the same period of the prior year, straining injuries declined by 18%.
The observable decline in the February 2012 employee injury rate was caused by a drop across multiple employee injury categories. For example, “struck by” injuries declined 57% and “overexertion/lifting injuries declined by 83% when compared to January 2012. The SAFE Department conducted Body Mechanic training classes (which were filled to capacity) during the month of February. The overall objective of this course is to ultimately reduce straining injuries by educating employees on how to prevent back injuries.
Employee Injury Rate 8
6 Hours
4
Employee Injuries per 200,000 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CY 2012 CY 2011 Target
Actions to Improve Performance As of January 2012, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) closed out all Metro safety recommendations. Metro addressed and/or is addressing identified safety deficiencies and will continue commitment to addressing FTA concerns and re-building a strong safety culture. Deploy blood borne pathogen training program to field personnel who may be expected to come into contact with blood during the performance of their duties.
Perform Roadway Worker Protection safety blitz in March to ensure roadway employees are aware of safety mechanisms in place to protect them as well as to answer any field employee questions. Host Health and Safety Fairs in March at Brentwood Yard and the Northern Bus Division. Continue to develop safety newsletters and share with attendees of local safety committee meetings. The newsletter is used to highlight injury trends and possible ways to prevent those injuries in the future.
Conclusion: The employee injury rate for the months of December 2011 – February 2012 improved compared to the same period of the prior calendar year from 6 employee injuries to 5 employee injuries for every 200,000 hours worked.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-15 15 Crime Rate (December - February) Objective 1.1 Improve Customer and KPI: Per Million Passengers Employee Safety and Security
Reason to Track: This measure provides an indication of the perception of safety and security customers experience when traveling the Metro system. Increases or decreases in crime statistics can have a direct effect on whether customers feel safe in the system. For this measure lower is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Parking crime hit an unprecedented low in February 2012 of .78 crimes/million riders and was down 53% for the three month period (December 2011-February 2012) from last year. MTPD used a variety of tactics to reduce crime: patrolling on Gators and bikes, installing variable messaging signs to advise customers to secure valuables in vehicles out of sight and notifying customers via mail outs when valuables were observed in vehicles. On-the-spot arrests by plain clothes officers were up during the three month period as MTPD targeted individuals who snatch small electronic devices on the Metrorail system using decoy operations. This resulted in
a higher Metrorail crime rate as suspects were arrested (128 snatch/pickpocket arrests December 2011- February 2012, up from 14 similar arrests the previous year). Bus crime rate was slightly higher in Q1/2012 (Dec. 2011 - Feb. 2012) than Q1/2011 (Dec. 2010 - Feb. 2011) to 1.04 crimes per million riders, led by an increase in snatches of electronic devices and aggravated assaults. In January, MTPD shifted enforcement resources to the D12-14 routes as a result of an increase in crime on that route. New procedures were established to encourage bus operators to share incidents and security concerns directly with MTPD, contributing to more crimes being reported.
10 8 Crime Rate 6 CY 2011 4 Metrobus 2 CY 2012 - Metrobus Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
10 8 6 CY 2011 4 2 Metrorail - CY 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Metrorail Passengers Passengers 10 Crimes per Million Crimes per 8 6 CY 2011 4 Parking 2 - CY 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Parking
Target: Less than 2,050 Part I Crimes in CY 2012 Actions to Improve Performance Continue undercover police decoy operations targeting snatches of small electronic devices on the Metrorail system. Identify physical vulnerabilities at high-crime stations, including bus bays, and apply solutions that minimize the opportunity for crime.
In anticipation of warm weather and historical spikes in parking lot crime, examine potential redeployment of officers to parking facilities. Increase police visibility during spring special events (e.g., Cherry Blossom Festival, Nationals baseball). Conclusion: Parking crime hit an unprecedented low, and decoy operations lead to an increase in arrests for snatches on the Metrorail system. The bus crime rate was slightly higher in Q1/2012 (Dec. 2011 - Feb. 2012) than Q1/2011 (Dec. 2010 - Feb. 2011).
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-16 16
Customer Comment Rate (January – KPI: Objective 2.3 Maximize Rider Satisfaction March) Per Million Passengers
Reason to Track: Listening to customer feedback about the quality of service provides a clear roadmap to those areas of the operation where actions to improve the service can best help to maximize rider satisfaction. For the Customer Complaint Rate lower is better. For the Customer Commendation Rate higher is better.
Why Did Performance Change? Metro’s commendation rate averaged 10.7 commendations per million customers for the first quarter of 2012, nearing the target rate of 10.8. Compared with the same period last year, however, the overall commendation rate was driven lower due to fewer commendations for Metrobus (down 33%) and Metrorail (down 23%). MetroAccess showed improvement with an 8% increase over Q1/2011. The lack of commendations is consistent with the mild winter this year, with no major severe weather incidents. Metro’s commendation rate grew steadily in Q1/2012, led by MetroAccess which had an 8% increase. The Metrobus customer complaint rate was steady throughout Q1/2012, but up 9% from last year. The largest change was in the category “failure to service stop,” which increased by 62%. Delay/Late complaints, which were up 38% from last year, have been trending downward since this past summer, reflecting the changes in
schedules and the focus placed on improving on-time performance. These increases were offset by a decrease in complaints about no-shows of 4%. The Metrorail complaint rate declined throughout Q1/2012, but was up 7% from 2011. This was driven by 435 calls in reaction to advertising during February and March, making up 16% of all complaints for the quarter. In Q1/2011, there was an increase in security complaints due to the announcement of random bag checks. Since that time, safety and security complaints are down by half (52%). MetroAccess’ complaint rate decreased by 11% from the first quarter in 2011, but has been trending upward throughout the quarter. Complaints about driver conduct have decreased 23% since last year, and early/late complaints are also down 15%.
Customer Complaint Customer Rate Commendation Rate
200 15 180 10 160 140 5 120 100 0 Customer Complaints per Million Passengers Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec per Million Passengers
CY 2012 CY 2011 Target Customer Commendations CY 2012 CY 2011 Target
Actions to Improve Performance Continue to increase communication with customers about maintenance activities and weekend track work. As more visitors come to the Washington Metropolitan Region over the summer, these communications, including MetroAlerts for specific service information and MetroForward for larger capital project information, will be more important for helping customers navigate the system.
Increase customer communication regarding upcoming service changes, especially Rush Plus, which will impact commuters during the peak hours on the Blue, Orange, Green and Yellow Lines. Building on several focus groups, develop ongoing customer satisfaction measures to ensure that customers’ needs are being addressed, and that Metro has the tools to assess its communication strategies.
Conclusion: Both the commendation and complaint rates trended upward throughout Q1/2012. Metrorail
complaints were significantly impacted by specific complaints about advertising this year compared to last year.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-17 17 Vital Signs Report Definitions for Key Performance Indicators
Bus On-Time Performance – Metrobus adherence to scheduled service. Calculation: For delivered trips, difference between scheduled time and actual time arriving at a time point based on a window of no more than 2 minutes early or 7 minutes late. Sample size of observed time points varies by route.
Bus Fleet Reliability (Bus Mean Distance between Failures) – The number of total miles traveled before a mechanical breakdown. A failure is an event that requires the bus to be removed from service or deviate from the schedule. Calculation: Total Bus Miles / Number of failures.
Rail On-Time Performance by Line – Rail on-time performance is measured by line during weekday peak and off-peak periods. During peak service (AM/PM), station stops made within the scheduled headway plus two minutes are considered on-time. During non-peak (mid-day and late night), station stops made within the scheduled headway plus no more than 50% of the scheduled headway are considered on-time. Calculation: Number of Metrorail station stops made up to the scheduled headway plus 2 minutes / total Metrorail station stops for peak service. Number of Metrorail station stops made up to 150% of the scheduled headway / total Metrorail station stops for off-peak service.
Rail Fleet Reliability (Railcar Mean Distance between Delays) – The number of revenue miles traveled before a railcar failure results in a delay of service of more than three minutes. Some car failures result in inconvenience or discomfort, but do not always result in a delay of service (such as hot cars). Calculation: Total railcar revenue miles / number of failures resulting in delays greater than three minutes.
MetroAccess On-Time Performance – The number of trips provided within the on-time pick-up window as a percent of the total trips that were actually dispatched into service (delivered). This includes trips where the vehicle arrived, but the customer was not available to be picked up. Vehicles arriving at the pick-up location after the end of the 30-minute on-time window are considered late. Vehicles arriving more than 30 minutes after the end of the on-time window are regarded as very late. Calculation: Number of vehicle arrivals at the pick-up location within the 30-minute on-time window / the total number of trips delivered.
Elevator and Escalator System Availability – Percentage of time that Metrorail escalators or elevators in stations and parking garages are in service during operating hours. Calculation: Hours in service / operating hours. Hours in service = operating hours – hours out of service. Operating hours = operating hours per unit * number of units.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-18 18 Customer Injury Rate (per million passengers1) – Injury to any customer caused by some aspect of Metro’s operation that requires immediate medical attention away from the scene of the injury. Calculation: Number of injuries / (number of passengers / 1,000,000).
Employee Injury Rate (per 200,000 hours) – An employee injury is recorded when the injury is (a) work related; and, (b) one or more of the following happens to the employee: 1) receives medical treatment above first aid, 2) loses consciousness, 3) takes off days away from work, 4) is restricted in their ability to do their job, 5) is transferred to another job, 6) death. Calculation: Number of injuries / (total work hours / 200,000).
Crime Rate (per million passengers1) – Part I crimes reported to Metro Transit Police Department for Metrobus (on buses), Metrorail (on trains and in rail stations), or at Metro parking lots in relation to Metro’s monthly passenger trips. Reported by Metrobus, Metrorail, and Metro parking lots. Calculation: Number of crimes / (number of passengers / 1,000,000).
Customer Comment Rate (per million passengers1) – A complaint is defined as any phone call, e-mail or letter resulting in investigation and response to a customer. This measure includes the subject of fare policy but excludes specific Smartrip matters handled through the regional customer service center. A commendation is any form of complimentary information received regarding the delivery of Metro service. Calculation: Number of complaints or commendations / (number of passengers / 1,000,000).
1 Passengers are defined as follows: o Metrobus reports unlinked passenger trips. An unlinked trip is counted every time a customer boards a Metrobus. In an example where a customer transfers between two Metrobuses to complete their travel two trips are counted. o Metrorail reports linked passenger trips. A linked trip is counted every time a customer enters through a faregate. In an example where a customer transfers between two trains to complete their travel one trip is counted. o MetroAccess reports completed passenger trips. A fare paying passenger traveling from an origin to a destination is counted as one passenger trip.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-19 19 Vital Signs Report Performance Data May 2012
KPI: Bus On-Time Performance -- Target = 78%
Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 78.5% 76.9% 77.5% 76.3% 74.5% 74.1% 75.5% 76.4% 72.2% 72.6% 73.7% 75.2% 77.6% CY 2012 78.3% 77.8% 76.5% 77.6%
KPI: Bus Fleet Reliability (Bus Mean Distance Between Failures) -- Target = 7,700 Miles YTD Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 8,681 8,144 7,794 7,171 7,277 6,916 6,312 6,651 6,206 7,727 6,649 7,766 8,206 CY 2012 8,704 8,230 8,527 8,487
Bus Fleet Reliability (Bus Mean Distance Between Failure by Fleet Type) Type (~ % of Fleet) Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Avg. CNG (30%) 7,790 8,657 7,835 7,875 7,392 6,946 8,066 7,625 8,246 8,205 8,102 7,184 7,827 Hybrid (27%) 9,536 11,235 8,058 7,321 8,731 8,900 8,792 8,346 12,249 11,371 11,180 12,681 9,867 Clean Diesel (8%) 9,442 7,081 9,866 9,151 6,380 6,021 10,168 5,872 6,852 11,951 8,232 9,897 8,409 All Other (35%) 5,012 4,839 5,102 4,423 4,899 4,300 6,066 4,834 5,066 6,197 5,678 5,973 5,199
KPI: Rail On-Time Performance by Line -- Target better than 90% 12-Month Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar OTP Red Line 90.7% 90.6% 89.8% 87.8% 91.0% 90.5% 89.6% 89.9% 89.2% 86.4% 86.3% 90.6% 89.5% Blue Line 88.8% 87.7% 88.2% 85.9% 89.1% 89.2% 87.8% 85.1% 89.8% 87.8% 89.0% 88.2% 88.2% Orange Line 93.3% 92.5% 92.4% 91.3% 93.2% 93.4% 92.1% 91.7% 93.3% 92.1% 92.7% 91.9% 92.6% Green Line 91.2% 92.4% 91.1% 90.1% 92.3% 90.5% 90.9% 89.6% 90.4% 91.6% 91.4% 92.3% 91.1% Yellow Line 92.6% 92.4% 92.4% 87.9% 91.9% 91.3% 90.1% 88.0% 91.6% 91.1% 92.1% 92.6% 91.2% Average (All Lines) 91.0% 90.9% 90.4% 88.6% 91.4% 90.8% 90.0% 89.3% 90.3% 89.0% 89.2% 91.0% 90.2%
KPI: Rail Fleet Reliability (Rail Mean Distance Between Delays by Railcar Series) -- Target = 60,000 miles 12-Month Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar MDBD 1000 series railcars 29,118 28,997 29,206 26,680 35,194 37,775 56,142 32,581 62,224 47,930 47,408 46,781 37,525 2000/3000 series railcars 4 1,760 31,047 38,769 36,041 44,908 44,777 37,194 27,023 26,800 29,179 30,131 32,197 33,855 4000 series railcars 31,054 52,372 21,733 17,248 22,381 68,341 30,147 26,240 21,426 25,538 34,345 22,688 26,881 5000 series railcars 46,561 45,038 35,451 37,320 38,170 47,304 75,724 58,799 56,294 51,995 43,848 65,551 48,317 6000 series railcars 57,550 61,979 81,549 56,000 110,735 112,619 68,429 60,631 74,084 77,198 64,069 93,097 73,001 Fleet average 39,302 37,355 36,963 33,112 42,475 50,829 47,654 35,135 39,356 40,253 40,399 43,537 40,097
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 20 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-20
Vital Signs Report Performance Data (cont.) May 2012
KPI: MetroAccess On-time Performance -- Target = 92% Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 90.1% 89.0% 91.3% 91.2% 92.2% 93.2% 93.1% 92.7% 91.8% 93.0% 93.0% 93.1% 90.1% CY 2012 93.4% 92.3% 91.7% 92.5%
KPI: Escalator System Availability -- Target = 89% Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 88.8% 86.6% 86.9% 86.2% 82.5% 82.0% 81.9% 80.7% 84.4% 87.4% 90.1% 88.6% 87.4% CY 2012 88.6% 89.4% 89.3% 89.1%
KPI: Elevator System Availability -- Target = 97.5% Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 96.3% 96.0% 96.9% 96.4% 97.4% 98.0% 97.3% 95.2% 94.5% 94.9% 96.7% 96.4% 96.4% CY 2012 95.7% 96.6% 96.5% 96.2%
KPI: Customer Injury Rate (per million passengers)* -- Target = ≤ 1.9 injuries per million passengers QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 1.67 3.00 1.46 1.54 1.97 2.25 1.69 1.78 3.43 1.65 3.50 1.49 CY 2011 2.08 1.66 2.16 2.21 1.69 1.99 1.65 1.43 1.67 1.46 2.08 2.37 1.75 CY 2012 1.61 1.24 1.74 *Includes Metrobus, Metrorail, rail transit facilities (stations, escalators and parking facilities) and MetroAccess customer njuriesi
Bus Customer Injury Rate (per million passengers) QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 2.08 3.66 1.73 1.77 1.84 3.33 2.40 1.62 6.92 2.00 5.99 1.79 CY 2011 1.72 0.93 3.38 2.59 2.01 3.34 1.88 1.32 2.69 1.75 3.02 3.86 1.47 CY 2012 1.60 1.30 2.24
Rail Customer Injury Rate (per million passengers) QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 0.06 0.15 0.10 0.19 0.22 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.18 0.00 CY 2011 0.13 0.19 0.15 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.11 0.23 0.12 0.11 CY 2012 0.00 0.00 0.04 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 21 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-21
Vital Signs Report Performance Data (cont.) May 2012
Rail Transit Facilities Occupant Injury Rate (per million passengers)* QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 1.09 2.31 0.99 0.91 1.31 1.03 0.89 1.35 0.95 1.22 1.57 1.09 CY 2011 2.00 1.82 1.17 1.61 1.08 0.90 1.03 1.25 0.94 0.87 1.11 1.16 1.64 CY 2012 1.57 1.08 1.27 *Includes station, escalator and parking facility customer injuries.
KPI: MetroAccess Customer Injury Rate (per million passengers) QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 26.18 22.06 21.57 31.55 48.11 46.48 34.47 38.85 24.61 14.45 25.50 20.53 CY 2011 16.45 10.55 14.63 32.12 27.41 16.72 53.96 22.53 11.65 34.54 17.60 17.70 15.88 CY 2012 5.92 11.69 11.78
KPI: Employee Injury Rate (per 200,000 hours) -- Target = ≤ 5.3 injuries per 200,000 hours QTR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Feb. CY 2010 5.18 7.94 4.03 6.38 5.79 6.82 4.39 5.72 7.76 4.59 6.36 6.24 CY 2011 7.01 3.81 6.05 3.74 5.80 6.41 5.56 6.06 3.82 5.46 5.10 3.56 5.79 CY 2012 7.25 4.56 4.96 * Claims reconciled to reflect late reports and claims denied, effective February, 2012.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 22 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-22
Vital Signs Report Performance Data (cont.) May 2012
KPI: Crime Rate (per million passengers) -- Target = ≤ 2,050 Part I Crimes in Calendar Year 2012 QTR Thru Jan* Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Feb. CY 2010 Metrobus 0.52 0.23 0.74 1.23 1.46 0.96 0.86 0.66 1.50 1.51 0.90 0.89 CY 2011 Metrobus 0.86 0.31 0.95 0.65 0.18 0.45 0.47 0.79 0.80 0.37 0.57 0.77 0.68 CY 2012 Metrobus 1.41 0.93 1.04 CY 2010 Metrorail 7.59 6.11 4.68 5.06 6.11 5.26 6.19 4.91 6.95 4.97 6.38 6.71 CY 2011 Metrorail 6.39 4.68 3.96 4.72 7.32 5.16 6.06 4.02 4.16 5.41 9.03 6.76 5.93 CY 2012 Metrorail 7.99 8.31 7.69 CY 2010 Parking 2.79 2.53 3.05 2.39 4.53 3.94 4.06 5.40 2.75 2.17 2.89 4.54 CY 2011 Parking 2.82 2.50 1.78 1.24 1.19 3.50 3.39 3.15 2.66 1.57 1.57 2.25 3.28 CY 2012 Parking 1.64 0.78 1.55 *Minor correction made to Jan 2011 Metrorail and Parking crime rate.
Crimes by Type Avg. Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Thru Feb. Robbery 77 74 75 71 73 39 53 68 115 93 43 22 67 Larceny 41 47 70 87 105 92 69 69 66 60 123 130 80 Motor Vehicle Theft 64510114104516 2 6 Attempted Motor Vehicle Theft12082382033 1 3 Aggravated Assault 5 10 16 8 10 9 6 3 10 11 10 14 9 Rape 00000000000 0- Burglary 00001001000 0 0 Homicide 00000000000 0- Arson 00000000000 0- Total 130 137 166 184 202 147 146 147 196 168 185 169 165 *In October 2011, a homicide occurred on a Metrobus. Per DC law, the crime will be reported to the FBI by the DC Police Department. As such, the crime is not included in Metro's crime report. **Monthly crime statistics can change as a result of reclassification following formal police investigation. ***Beginning in January 2012, snatch and pickpocket crimes are recorded as larcenies in accordance with FBI reporting procedures.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 23 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-23
Vital Signs Report Performance Data (cont.) May 2012
KPI: Customer Commendation Rate (per million passengers) -- Target = ≥ 10.8 per million passengers YTD Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 13.8 12.9 13.2 10.6 6.9 12.3 8.4 10.2 8.7 8.8 10.1 12.7 13.3 CY 2012 10.1 10.5 11.4 10.7
KPI: Customer Complaint Rate (per million passengers) -- Target = ≤ 125 complaints per million passengers YTD Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 130 148 128 113 114 118 121 117 136 133 121 126 135 CY 2012 122 131 132 128
Metrobus Ridership (millions of unlinked trips) Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 9.3 9.7 11.5 10.8 10.9 11.1 10.6 11.4 11.2 10.9 10.6 10.4 10.2 CY 2012 10.6 10.7 11.6 11.0
Metrorail Ridership (millions of linked trips) Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 16.0 16.0 19.7 19.3 18.4 20.0 19.5 18.4 18.0 18.5 17.2 16.4 17.2 CY 2012 16.5 16.6 19.7 17.6
MetroAccess Ridership (100,000s of completed trips) Avg. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Thru Mar. CY 2011 1.82 1.90 2.05 1.87 1.82 1.79 1.67 1.78 1.72 1.74 1.70 1.69 1.92 CY 2012 1.69 1.71 1.85 1.75
Note: Targets are re-evaluated annually and based on changing operating conditions and performance.
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 24 2012 1stAttachment Quarter Results 5 A5-24
Metro Facts at a Glance
Metro Service Area
Size 1,500 sq. miles Population 5 million
Ridership
Mode FY 2011 Average Weekday Bus 125 million 451,371 (March 2012) Rail 217 million 762,653 (March 2012) MetroAccess 2 million 7,305 (March 2012) Total 344 million
Fiscal Year 2012 Budget
Operating $1.5 billion Capital $1.1 billion Total $2.6 billion
Metrobus General Information
Size 11,490 bus stops and 2,398 shelters Routes* 323 Fiscal Year 2012 Operating Budget $535 million Highest Ridership Route in 2009 30’s – Pennsylvania Ave. (16,330 avg. wkdy ridership) Metrobus Fare $1.70 cash, $1.50 SmarTrip®, Bus-to-bus Transfers Free Express Bus Fare $3.85 cash, $3.65 SmarTrip®, Airport Fare $6.00 Bus Fleet* 1,492 Buses in Peak Service 1,244 Bus Fleet by Type* Compressed Natural Gas (460), Electric Hybrid (548), Clean Diesel (117) and All Other (367) Average Fleet Age* 7.5 years Bus Garages 9 – 3 in DC, 3 in MD and 3 in VA *As of August 2011.
WashingtonAttachment Metropolitan 5Area Transit Authority A5-25
Metrorail General Information
Fiscal Year 2012 Operating Budget $813 million Highest Ridership Day Obama Inauguration on Jan. 20, 2009 (1.1 million) Busiest Station in 2011 Union Station (760,000 entries in November 2011) Regular Fare (peak) Minimum - $2.20 paper fare card, $1.95 SmarTrip® Maximum - $5.25 paper fare card, $5.00 SmarTrip® Reduced Fare (non-peak) Minimum - $1.85 paper fare card, $1.60 SmarTrip® Maximum - $3.00 paper fare card, $2.75 SmarTrip® Peak-of-the-peak Surcharge $.20 - weekdays 7:30 – 9 a.m. and 4:30 – 6 p.m., depending on starting time of trip 1st Segment Opening/Year Farragut North-Rhode Island Avenue (1976) Newest Stations/Year Morgan Boulevard, New York Avenue, and Largo Town Center (2004) Rail Cars in Revenue Service 1,104 Rail Cars in Peak Service 860 Rail Cars by Series 1000 Series (278), 2000/3000 (358), 4000 (100), 5000 (184) and 6000 (184) Lines 5 – Red, Blue, Orange, Green, and Yellow Station Escalators 588 Station Elevators 239 Longest Escalator Wheaton station (230 feet) Deepest Station Forest Glen (21 stories / 196 feet) Rail Yards 9 – 1 in DC, 6 in MD and 2 in VA
MetroAccess General Information
Fiscal Year 2012 Operating Budget $116 million MetroAccess Fare Within the ADA service area – twice the equivalent SmarTrip-based fare up to a $7 maximum Paratransit Vehicle Fleet** 600 Average Fleet Age** 2.8 years Paratransit Garages 7 (1 in DC, 4 in MD and 2 in VA) Contract Provider MV Transportation **As of December 2011.
WashingtonAttachment Metropolitan 5Area Transit Authority A5-26 LOCAL TAX ON COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
In 2007, the General Assembly enacted a provision that allows a local tax on commercial and industrial property, to be used for transportation projects. The law applies to any county or city within the area included in the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority or the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area. The authority for the tax applies to Loudoun County. Copies of the statutes are attached. Please note that there are two versions. Effective until June 30, 2013, the tax is limited to $0.125 per $100 of assessed value. After that date, the tax rate may not exceed $0.25 per $100 of assessed value. The following summarizes the key provisions:
Classification of Property. Real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses is declared a separate class of real property for local taxation. This excludes “all residential uses and all multifamily residential uses, including but not limited to single family residential units, cooperatives, condominiums, townhouses, apartments.”
Scope of District. Subsections A and B provide for a commercial and industrial tax applied countywide. Subsections C and D allows the County to create one or more “special regional transportation tax districts” within which the commercial and industrial tax is applied. If the countywide option is used under Subsections A and B, you may not impose the special district tax under Subsections C and D. In addition, if the special district approach is used, you must generate at least 85% of the estimated revenues that would result from a countywide district at the maximum allowable rate.
Tax Rate. Until June 30, 2013, the tax is limited to $0.125 per $100 of assessed value. As of June 30, 2013, the limit increases to $0.25.
Use of Revenues. The revenues must be used for capital costs of new transportation projects. This includes construction of roads; public transit construction; costs of planning, design, right- of-way acquisition related to those projects; and issuance costs and service on debt issued to support capital costs of those projects. The statute authorizes the use of the tax revenues for “other capital costs related to new transportation projects that add new capacity, service, or access and the operating costs directly related to the foregoing.”
Procedure to Establish the Tax. The tax is to be imposed by ordinance. If the County adopts one or more special regional transportation tax districts,” these are also to be established by ordinance.
Attachment 6 A6-1 Administration of the Tax. The tax is levied, administered, enforced and collected in the same manner as the general real property tax.
Statutory Reference: Va. Code § 58.1-3221.3
Attachment 6 A6-2 § 58.1-3221.3. (Effective until June 30, 2013) Classification of certain commercial and industrial real property and taxation of such property by certain localities.
A. Beginning January 1, 2008, and solely for the purposes of imposing the tax authorized pursuant to this section, in the counties and cities that are wholly embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code, all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses is hereby declared to be a separate class of real property for local taxation. Such classification of real property shall exclude all residential uses and all multifamily residential uses, including but not limited to single family residential units, cooperatives, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, or homes in a subdivision when leased on a unit by unit basis even though these units may be part of a larger building or parcel of real estate containing more than four residential units.
B. In addition to all other taxes and fees permitted by law, (i) the governing body of any locality embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority may, by ordinance, annually impose on all real property in the locality specially classified in subsection A: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amount otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.125 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses; and (ii) the governing body of any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code may, by ordinance, annually impose on all real property in the locality specially classified in subsection A: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amount otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses. The authority granted in this subsection shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Upon appropriation, all revenues generated from the additional real property tax imposed shall be used to benefit the locality imposing the tax solely for (i) new road construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing roads that add new capacity, service, or access, (ii) new public transit construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing public transit projects that add new capacity, service, or access, (iii) other capital costs related to new transportation projects that add new capacity, service, or access and the operating costs directly related to the foregoing, or (iv) the issuance costs and debt service on bonds that may be issued to support the capital costs permitted in subdivisions (i), (ii), or (iii); and
(2) The additional real property tax imposed shall be levied, administered, enforced, and collected in the same manner as set forth in Subtitle III of Title 58.1 for the levy, administration, enforcement, and collection of local taxes. In addition, the local assessor shall separately assess and set forth upon the locality's land book the fair market value of that portion of property that is defined as a separate class of real property for local taxation in accordance with the provisions of this section.
Attachment 6 A6-3 C. Beginning January 1, 2008, in lieu of the authority set forth in subsections A and B above and solely for the purposes of imposing the tax authorized pursuant to this section, in the counties and cities wholly embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code, all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses is hereby declared to be a separate class of real property for local taxation. Such classification of real property shall exclude all residential uses and all multifamily residential uses, including but not limited to single family residential units, cooperatives, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, or homes in a subdivision when leased on a unit by unit basis even though these units may be part of a larger building or parcel of real estate containing more than four residential units.
D. In addition to all other taxes and fees permitted by law, (i) the governing body of any locality embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority may, by ordinance, create within its boundaries, one or more special regional transportation tax districts and, thereafter, may, by ordinance, impose upon the real property located in special regional transportation tax districts specially classified in subsection C within such special regional transportation tax districts: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amounts otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.125 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses; and, (ii) the governing body of any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code may, by ordinance, create within its boundaries, one or more special regional transportation tax districts and, thereafter, may, by ordinance, impose upon the real property specially classified in subsection C within such special regional transportation tax districts: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amounts otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses. The authority granted in this subsection shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law to the contrary, upon appropriation, all revenues generated from the additional real property taxes imposed in accordance with subsection C and this subsection shall be used for transportation purposes that benefit the special regional transportation tax district to which such revenue is attributable and solely for (i) new road construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing roads that add new capacity, service, or access, (ii) new public transit construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing public transit projects that add new capacity, service, or access, (iii) other capital costs related to new transportation projects that add new capacity, service, or access and the operating costs directly related to the foregoing, or (iv) the issuance costs and debt service on bonds that may be issued to support the capital costs permitted in subdivisions (i), (ii), or (iii);
Attachment 6 A6-4 (2) Any local ordinance adopted in accordance with the provisions of subsection C and this subsection shall include the requirement that the additional real property taxes so authorized are to be imposed annually in accordance with applicable law;
(3) Any locality that imposes the additional real property taxes set forth in subsections A and B shall not be permitted to also impose the additional real property taxes set forth in subsection C and this subsection. In addition, any locality electing to impose the additional real property taxes on all real property located in such locality that is specially classified in subsections A and B must do so in the manner prescribed in subsections A and B and not by creation of a special transportation tax district as set forth in subsection C and this subsection. The creation of such special regional transportation tax districts shall not, however, affect the authority of a locality to establish tax districts pursuant to other provisions of law;
(4) The total revenues generated from the additional real property taxes imposed in accordance with subsection C and this subsection shall not be less than 85% of the revenues estimated to be generated when imposing the additional real property taxes in accordance with subsections A and B at the rate of $0.125 per $100 of assessed value in any locality embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and at the rate of $0.10 per $100 of assessed value in any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code; and
(5) The additional real property taxes imposed pursuant to subsection C and this subsection shall be levied, administered, enforced, and collected, in the same manner as set forth in Subtitle III of Title 58.1 for the levy, administration, enforcement, and collection of all local taxes. In addition, the local assessor shall separately assess and set forth upon the locality's land book the fair market value of that portion of property that is defined as separate class of real property for local taxation in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(2007, c. 896; 2009, cc. 677, 822, 864, 871.)
§ 58.1-3221.3. (Effective June 30, 2013) Classification of certain commercial and industrial real property and taxation of such property by certain localities.
A. Beginning January 1, 2008, and solely for the purposes of imposing the tax authorized pursuant to this section, in the counties and cities that are wholly embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code, all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses is hereby declared to be a separate class of real property for local taxation. Such classification of real property shall exclude all residential uses and all multifamily residential uses, including but not limited to single family residential units, cooperatives, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, or homes in a subdivision when leased on a unit by unit basis even though these units may be part of a larger building or parcel of real estate containing more than four residential units.
B. In addition to all other taxes and fees permitted by law, (i) the governing body of any locality embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority may, by ordinance, annually
Attachment 6 A6-5 impose on all real property in the locality specially classified in subsection A: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amount otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.25 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses; and (ii) the governing body of any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code may, by ordinance, annually impose on all real property in the locality specially classified in subsection A: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amount otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses. The authority granted in this subsection shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Upon appropriation, all revenues generated from the additional real property tax imposed shall be used to benefit the locality imposing the tax solely for (i) new road construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing roads that add new capacity, service, or access, (ii) new public transit construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing public transit projects that add new capacity, service, or access, (iii) other capital costs related to new transportation projects that add new capacity, service, or access and the operating costs directly related to the foregoing, or (iv) the issuance costs and debt service on bonds that may be issued to support the capital costs permitted in subdivisions (i), (ii), or (iii); and
(2) The additional real property tax imposed shall be levied, administered, enforced, and collected in the same manner as set forth in Subtitle III of Title 58.1 for the levy, administration, enforcement, and collection of local taxes. In addition, the local assessor shall separately assess and set forth upon the locality's land book the fair market value of that portion of property that is defined as a separate class of real property for local taxation in accordance with the provisions of this section.
C. Beginning January 1, 2008, in lieu of the authority set forth in subsections A and B above and solely for the purposes of imposing the tax authorized pursuant to this section, in the counties and cities wholly embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority and the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code, all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses is hereby declared to be a separate class of real property for local taxation. Such classification of real property shall exclude all residential uses and all multifamily residential uses, including but not limited to single family residential units, cooperatives, condominiums, townhouses, apartments, or homes in a subdivision when leased on a unit by unit basis even though these units may be part of a larger building or parcel of real estate containing more than four residential units.
D. In addition to all other taxes and fees permitted by law, (i) the governing body of any locality embraced by the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority may, by ordinance, create within its boundaries, one or more special regional transportation tax districts and, thereafter, may, by
Attachment 6 A6-6 ordinance, impose upon the real property located in special regional transportation tax districts specially classified in subsection C within such special regional transportation tax districts: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amounts otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.25 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses; and, (ii) the governing body of any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code may, by ordinance, create within its boundaries, one or more special regional transportation tax districts and, thereafter, may, by ordinance, impose upon the real property specially classified in subsection C within such special regional transportation tax districts: an amount of real property tax, in addition to such amounts otherwise authorized by law, at a rate not to exceed $0.10 per $100 of assessed value as the governing body may, by ordinance, impose upon the annual assessed value of all real property used for or zoned to permit commercial or industrial uses. The authority granted in this subsection shall be subject to the following conditions:
(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law to the contrary, upon appropriation, all revenues generated from the additional real property taxes imposed in accordance with subsection C and this subsection shall be used for transportation purposes that benefit the special regional transportation tax district to which such revenue is attributable and solely for (i) new road construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing roads that add new capacity, service, or access, (ii) new public transit construction and associated planning, design, and right-of-way acquisition, including new additions to, expansions, or extensions of existing public transit projects that add new capacity, service, or access, (iii) other capital costs related to new transportation projects that add new capacity, service, or access and the operating costs directly related to the foregoing, or (iv) the issuance costs and debt service on bonds that may be issued to support the capital costs permitted in subdivisions (i), (ii), or (iii);
(2) Any local ordinance adopted in accordance with the provisions of subsection C and this subsection shall include the requirement that the additional real property taxes so authorized are to be imposed annually in accordance with applicable law;
(3) Any locality that imposes the additional real property taxes set forth in subsections A and B shall not be permitted to also impose the additional real property taxes set forth in subsection C and this subsection. In addition, any locality electing to impose the additional real property taxes on all real property located in such locality that is specially classified in subsections A and B must do so in the manner prescribed in subsections A and B and not by creation of a special transportation tax district as set forth in subsection C and this subsection. The creation of such special regional transportation tax districts shall not, however, affect the authority of a locality to establish tax districts pursuant to other provisions of law;
(4) The total revenues generated from the additional real property taxes imposed in accordance with subsection C and this subsection shall not be less than 85% of the revenues estimated to be generated when imposing the additional real property taxes in accordance with subsections A and B at the rate of $0.25 per $100 of assessed value in any locality embraced by the Northern
Attachment 6 A6-7 Virginia Transportation Authority and at the rate of $0.10 per $100 of assessed value in any locality wholly embraced by the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area as of January 1, 2008, pursuant to § 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code; and
(5) The additional real property taxes imposed pursuant to subsection C and this subsection shall be levied, administered, enforced, and collected, in the same manner as set forth in Subtitle III of Title 58.1 for the levy, administration, enforcement, and collection of all local taxes. In addition, the local assessor shall separately assess and set forth upon the locality's land book the fair market value of that portion of property that is defined as separate class of real property for local taxation in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(2007, c. 896; 2009, cc. 677, 864, 871.)
Attachment 6 A6-8