HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 March 4, 1992 Budget & Finance053770
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE
(COMMISSIONERS RUSS BEIRICH, KAY CENICEROS,
CORKY LARSON, PAT MURPHY)
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1992
10:30 A.M.
LUND & GUTTRY
39-700 BOB HOPE DRIVE, THE BOB HOPE BUILDING, SUITE 309
RANCHO MIRAGE, CALIFORNIA
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2. GENERAL ITEMS.
2A. SELECTION OF AUDITORS FOR 1992 FISCAL AUDIT
Staff Recommendation
Review and discussion.
2B. MEASURE A RCTC/CALTRANS LOGO.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission:
1) Approve the expenditure of Measure A funds in the amount of $15,000 for FY
91/92 to uesign and purchase project signs displaying the Measure A logo;
2) Authorize the Executive Director to conduct a competitive bid process for
purchase of Measure A signs, select the successful bidder based on unit price,
and enter into a sign purchase agreement;
3) Direct staff to:
Develop a family of Measure A signs around the new logo which allow for
customization based on a projects funding partners;
4. COMMUTER RAIL.
4A. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ACCELERATED RAIL ELECTRIFICATION PROGRAM - DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission receive the draft Executive Summary of the Southern California
Accelerated Rail Electrification Program and possibly take action.
4B. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (SCRRA) ACTION TO PURCHASE
ADDITIONAL LOCOMOTIVES TO DEMONSTRATE LOWER NOX EMISSIONS AND
METHANOL.
Staff Recommendation
That the Commission review and possibly take action.
5. FINANCIAL ITEMS.
5A. MONTHLY COST/SCHEDULE REPORT.
Staff Recommendation
Receive and file.
5B. CONTINUATION OF B&F PRESENTATION ON PROJECT STRUCTURE (SCHEDULING
AND CONTRACTS).
Staff will continue the presentation of project structure (scheduling and contracts).
6. RCTC EXPENDITURE PLAN AMENDMENT.
Staff and Legal Counsel will provide material and make presentation at the Budget & Finance
Committee meeting.
7. ADJOURNMENT.
AGENDA ITEM #2A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 4, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget and Finance Committee
FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Selection of Auditors for 1992 Fiscal Audit
When the Commission hired the firm of Ernst & Young to perform our annual fiscal audit,
it was for a period of three years. The time has arrived to consider either extending that
contract or soliciting new bids. There appears to be some value to extending the E & Y
contract for an additional two years. I will be prepared to discuss with you further the
basis for that conclusion and to present my recommendation(s) with respect to our audit
services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Review and discussion.
DM:sc
f: userslpreprintmar.82\audirpf.dm
AGENDA ITEM #2B
DATE:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
March 5, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Marilyn Williams, Senior Staff Analyst
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Measure A RCTC/Caltrans Logo
As Measure A projects entered the implementation phase, Riverside County voters began
to see the results of their voter mandate. However, it became clear from public inquiries
that the few words on the highway and freeway funding signs did not create adequate
public recognition that Measure A projects were being delivered. To address the issue
a joint Commission/Caltrans effort was initiated to develop a Measure A logo. Staff will
unveil the new logo selected by the cooperative process at the Commission's March
meeting.
A logo is a proven mechanism used by the marketing world to enhance public
recognition of an entity or product. It is also the image used to convey an array of ideas
about the entity or product. What should a Measure A logo communicate? Guidelines
were set early on in the design development process to focus staff's efforts. In general,
it was felt that the logo should:
represent transportation in its broadest context;
convey a sense of action, direction and professionalism;
reflect partnership between agencies (local, regional, state) having responsibility
for or participation in delivery of Measure A projects and programs; and
create visual recognition of Measure A in different applications such as freeway
signage or stationary letterhead.
The new logo will provide high visibility for all Measure A efforts. Given that, the
Commission, in partnership with Caltrans, should retain approval rights over use of the
logo to ensure consistency of application and use.
f Ausers\preprint\mer.82\Jolnlogo. mw
.:" 3
DATE:
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Local Transportation Fund Estimate 1992-1996
The Commission has been advised that LTF Revenues are running below prior estimates.
The original revenue estimate for FY 1991 /92 was $26,000,000, an increase of 5% over
the actual revenues received in FY 1990/91 of $24,544,000. Our revised FY 1991 /92
estimate for LTF revenues based on receipts to date is $ 21,506,000, a decrease of
$4,494,000 from our prior estimate. The revised estimate represents a decrease of 17%
from our prior estimate and is 5% below actual receipts for last year. The attached TABLE
I shows our five year estimates for LTF revenues for FY 1992-96. The estimates for FY
1991 /92 and 1992/93 have been reviewed and agreed with by the County Auditor and
SCAG. The remaining years were estimated using percentage increases from our
Measure A Financial Plan ranging from 7% in 1992/93 to 9% in 1994/95.
While revenues for FY 1991 /92 will be lower than expected by $4.49 million, there will be
adequate funding to meet the allocations approved by the Commission for transit and for
streets and roads as shown on the Table, there was a carry-over of $ 3.83 million in
unapportioned funds from prior years, and there is another $5+ million in apportioned
but unallocated funds from prior years which was not included in the Table ( approx. $1.8
million for the Western County and $3.2 million for the Coachella Valley). In addition, the
Commission reserved $3 million in the Western County for bus replacement which will not
be entirely claimed and disbursed this year.
Staff from the Commission, the RTA and a subcommittee of the WRCOG Technical
Advisory Committee met recently to evaluate the continued availability of funds for streets
and roads in the Western County Area, TABLE II was prepared and presented at that
meeting. The LTF revenues reflected in this Table agree with the estimated revenues
from Table I for the Western Riverside County Area. Transit expenses for LTF funding
were taken from the FY 1992-96 Short Range Transit Plan and were adjusted to reflect
a recently completed Five Year Financial Plan developed by the RTA. The table indicates
that all of the LTF funds available to the Western County Area will be needed for transit
in the next few years.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
March 5, 1992
f Ausers\preprint\mer.92Uftest. pb
3e/0El10 (SO
eeump 01 Pe{9ne leeodmd auluumld Jo1 eimume3:9310N
OLVrEA'OZ! Zee'8L9'YZ r99'eW'ZZS Ll9'900'lZ!
LL9'00r! Lll'L9ES r£E'9EES ZLVZlE!
9Z9'L0►'9, EW'r9e'r! Z£Z'eE9'rS Ltl'L1Z'rS
rL£'9Zl'In Z6l'L9E'el! 88049EL1S 90e'9L1e91!
WL'meta!
Zio'BeZ!
Zl9'eW'r!
Kr lOL'e it
%00'OOl
469Lfr' l
%9YL0'OZ
%e9c►'SL
Plol !o %
NOI1V111d0d
319Y11VAV 1V101
RMlell ePilll1 pled
RNRA eIM4•00
kunoo > eM
YAM
0L9'rEe'9Z! Zee'81.944 1991e09'ZZ! Ll9'900'lZS WCedD'EZ! 319V11VAV 3001V1V9
999'e1r9S £99'£091 ZZ1,'1914 1,89'8Zr! 81,9'£9r4 eWIIIPAV 1ZS99
OS OS OS O! OS •Punlekl 1Z8 9S
989'er9S E99'£09! ZZr' 19r! 1,89'env! er9'£8rS (%Z) lZ8 9S
99Z'rer'LZS 91P9'Z81'93 9L0'lL0'£Z! 10Z'rEr'1ZS Llr'Z81'rZS 3ONV1V8
atr'rtS aLr'rLs eLr'res eLr'ra acr'rc!
euluu•ld OVOS
91 t'Z99$ 1Ee'063 9Z9'93LS 000'9L9S 9£e'e9LS (%E) BulUUeld MO
lZE'poet lZE'rOES IZE'ton lZE'r0£! IZE'r0£! uIWPV DVOS
000'ZIS 000'Z1$ 000'ZIS 000'Z1S 000'01S J011PnV
e9l'LEL'94 9LE'r9E'9Zs 009'Lltl S 000'009'ZZS 091'=VC* 1V101
e9l'LEL'SZS 9LE'r9E'9ZS OOB'Lel'rZ! 000'009'ZZ! 000'909' 1Z! a r3
Of O! O! OS 09l'9Ze'ES (peuowoddeun) xmoitinra
- - 99e1 9ee1 reel £eel Zee1
S1N3WNOl1HOddY 96--Z661
ALNn00 30/St13/1/!i - ONfld NOIlYlNOdSNYtll 7,007
AGENDA ITEM #3B
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 5, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Local Transportation Funds - Western County Streets and Roads - Revision
FY 1991 /92
In October, the Commission approved the allocation of $4,656,829 in Local Transportation
Funds (LTF) for streets and roads purposes. Due to a discussion regarding lower than
estimated receipts, the proposed allocations were recalculated during the meeting to
reduce the amount allocated. Because of a reduction and the handling of the reserve
for Bus Capital ($3,000,000) in the formula, the City of Banning was allocated $ 97,802
rather than $162,449 it should have received and the City of Riverside was allocated $0
rather than $23,642 it should have received. This resulted in the remaining cities and the
county received a total of $88,289 more than they should have received. The most recent
fiscal audit shows approx. $1.8 million in available funding for the Western County Area
from prior year apportionments that were not claimed and could be used to provide these
funds to the two cities. The Commission has two options to provide the appropriate
amount of streets and roads funds Banning and Riverside: (1) allocate funds to Banning
and Riverside from prior year carryover funds or; (2) reduce the allocations to the
remaining cities and the county for FY 1991 /92 to provide the additional funds for these
two cities.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission allocate $64,647 to the City of Banning and $23,642 to the City of
Riverside from LTF funds available to the Western County from prior year unclaimed
apportionments for street and road purposes in FY 1991 /92.
PB:sc
AGENDA ITEM #3C
DATE:
TO:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
March 5, 1992
Administrative Committee
Budget and Finance Committee
FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Staff Analyst III
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Request for Additional Local Transportation Funds
Commission staff has received a request from the City of Beaumont for $63,900 in
additional local transportation funds to cover increased operating expenses on their Bial-
a -ride system. The City experienced a prior year budget shortfall, higher than expected
costs for salaries and benefits with the addition of four full time equivalent positions
(+$26,500), as well as increased maintenance costs of $37,650.
In addition, the City is requesting an additional $57,000 in capital assistance funds to
purchase a replacement bus. The vehicle to be replaced is a 1984 Ford van with over
180,000 miles. The industry standard for the useful life of a van is 5 years or 100,000
miles. The cost to maintain the older buses is rapidly increasing and the van is needed
to maintain service integrity.
In previous years, the cities have funded operating deficits out of their general fund.
However, due to current budgetary problems experienced by all local governments, it
would be difficult, if not impossible, for the city to continue to fund the deficit out of their
general fund. The Western County Area has approximately $1.8 million available in prior
year apportioned but unclaimed LTF funds which can be used to accommodate this
request.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission allocate to the City of Beaumont Dial -A -Ride an additional $63,900
in local transportation funds for operating assistance, and $57,000 in local transportation
funds for capital assistance to purchase a 17 passenger, lift -equipped replacement bus
from prior year carry-over funds available in the Western County Area.
PB:sc
Musers\preprl nt\mtv.82\beaum. cb
FEB 26 '92 T6:15 CITY OF BEAIMONT, CA
act of Bzaumont
560 East Win Street
P.O. Box 158
Beaumont mont CA 93223-0158
Frvralihs0Office of:
February 26, 1992
Paul iilaikwelder
Deputy ,Executive .Director •
Riverside CountyTransportationCommission
3$60 ln# exsity Avenue, - Suite 100
Riversid*, CA 92501
•
Dear W . Blackwelder:
The City'of Beaumont is requesting an additional $63,900,in
operating :assistance funds to cover higher than expectad iex-
pauses to operate our dial -a -ride transit service. During
fiscal; ylar 1992 We experienced higher salary and benefits
coots of $26, 250. The increases to our benefits package ;con=
tain increasing medical premiuma and workers' eaupensatidn
• coverage Also, .our maintenance costa are higher by $17,450'
due to r}sing parr costs as well as the increased maintanr�ancai
required vu our older fleet of vehicles (avers ■ ago is 5.7).,
It is critical that we receive these additional operating
dollars to Continue the provision of a successful transit prd-
8=am: r •
I
In addti.xi:on, the City ie .requesting an additional $57 , 00 in
capital assistance funds co purchase a 17 pessenge7r,' lif
equipped bus. Ridership on our system hoe eteadily incr ased
and wir care experiencing excessive down time and higher int-.
enance;c s�t on our older vehicles, This vehicle ppurchas
vill.rMpptace a vehicle that has in excess of 180,000 mil a
and is;ioeComing vary difficult to keep in reliable eervide,
We' make ivory effort to•route..as efficently as possible(
evi:den4e by our current productivity levels of over 9 pq°ss•
-
engers p r hour. ; Aowaver, the ridership growth coupled wiith-
our a in . high *usage fleet neceseit,ete* purchase of art
. additional vehicle to meet passenger demands.
Thank yoy- vary much fox.your thoughtful consideration.
L
Sincerely,•
P. 22
hn A': *soda
JDS: s
. 1
•l
AGENDA ITEM #3D
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
March 5, 1992
Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
Dean Martin, Controller
Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Murrietta Springs Mall - Measure A Loan
The Murrietta Springs Mall developers were referred to the Commission approximately
a year ago by the County of Riverside to determine if a Measure A Loan could be made
to assist in financing of improvements required for the Murrietta Springs Road/I-215
interchange. The Commission referred this item to the WRCOG for a recommendation.
Both the developers and the City of Murrietta are anxious to proceed with the project and
are asking for the Commission to enter into a business deal to loan Measure A funds for
the project. We have met with the City on several occasions and have requested specific
information the Commission will need to decide if the proposed business deal is
worthwhile should they decide to consider making this type of loan. The information
requested includes: the amount of funds needed based on alternative payback plans;
a commitment to a payback period not to exceed 5 years; and commitment from the city
to secure the loan with Measure A Local Streets and Road funds, General Funds, and
Gas Tax. We expect to have the information for presentation at the Committee meeting.
The City and the developer have been patient for months awaiting an opportunity to have
their request heard by the Commission. WRCOG had been waiting for the Measure A
Financial Plan Update prior to making a recommendation to the Commission. The
Update has been delayed for several legitimate reasons. Staff promised the developer
and the City that their proposal would be scheduled for the March Commission meeting
and the Executive Director of WRCOG was requested to obtain a "thumbs up" or "thumbs
down" recommendation on this proposal prior to the Commission meeting.
Attached is a Report containing a recommendation from the WRCOG Technical Advisory
Committee to be presented to the WRCOG Executive Committee for approval on
March 2, 1992. The recommendation does not provide a specific recommendation
regarding the Murrietta Mall Project as we had requested. The recommendation is for
development of a 'loan program" in which all of the cities and the County could
participate on an annual basis. We will work with the WRCOG to attempt to develop such
a program as well as the "Complimentary Programs" outlined in their Report if the
fAusers\preprinAmed.92\murrie. pb
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
County of Riverside • City of Banning * Ctty of Calimesa * City of Canyon Lake • City of Corona • Ctty of Hemet *
City of Lake Elsinore * City of INoreno Valley * City of Norco • City of Perris * City of Riverside * City of San Jacinto * City of Temecula *
FEBRUARY 25, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: WRCOG EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
FROM: A.J. WILSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
RE: AGENDA ITEM 3B, MEASURE "A" LOAN PROGRAM.
The attached report has been prepared to be included in your agenda for your
meeting of March 2, 1992. It is late due to the fact that the committee
preparing the recommendation could not meet until yesterday.
The concept of a loan program to expedite regional projects funded with local
Measure "A" allotments is under consideration because local communities
cannot commit their local Measure "A" funds for the purpose of securing debt
due to the fact that all measure "A: funds are pledged to secure the debt of
RCTC.
The matter is further complicated by the fact that their exists s cap on the
debt that ROTC may incur, even if it's revenue stream
was capable of supporting additional financing.
Considering those factors, the special committee has focused on a Measure "A"
loan program structure and has also considered other
financing options we should pursue collectively to implement transportation
improvements in western Riverside County.
3544 University Avenue, Riverside, CA 92501 * (714) 787-7985 * FAX (714) 787-7920
d. The loan amount should not exceed 80% of the projected local
Measure "A" funds which would be allocated to the jurisdiction
requesting the loan during the following 5 fiscal years.
e. 100% of the local Measure "A" funds should be retained by RCTC to
repay the loan at the earliest possible time.
f. The interest rate of the loan should be at no less than the "cost of money"
to RCTC.
g. RCTC would determine an annual amount of funds which could be
made available to this loan program without jeopardizing the
successful implementation of the Measure "A" program.
h. During the first year program, an application period should be
established which would allow all western Riverside County jurisdictions
to submit projects they would wish to expedite through this loan
program. The projects would be reviewed by the WRCOG transportation
Technical Committee who would prepare a priority report to be reviewed
by the WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee with final
recommendations to the WRCOG Executive Committee. The WRCOG
Executive Committee would then recommend a priority list for projects
to be funded through the loan program. RCTC would allocate the
available funds to the highest priority projects.
i. WRCOG would complete a prioritization study for the western Riverside
County regional network which would be used as the basis for priority
in subsequent years if funds should be available.
COMPLIMENTARY PROGRAM EFFORTS.
In an effort to assist member jurisdictions in expediting the implementation
of the regional network elements within their local are, the committee
recommends the following additional efforts be conducted by WRCOG in
cooperation with member jurisdictions and RCTC.
Recommended Action: Based upon these recommendations of the special
committee of the TAC, the following actions are recommended to the
Executive Committee.
1. That the Executive Committee endorses the recommendations of the
special committee on conditions and procedures to establish a
Measure "A" loan program and instructs the Executive Director to
communicate these recommendations to RCTC for their inclusion in any
loan program.
2. That the Executive Director be instructed to work with member
jurisdictions to develop a structure for a shared Pool program for
local Measure "A" funds.
3. That the Executive Director be instructed to develop the feasibility of
a financing pool which would serve to expedite local Measure "A" projects.
4. That the Executive Director be instructed to work with the City of Canyon
Lake to develop a financing package which would implement the
improvement of Railroad Canyon Road in the City of Canyon Lake.
AGENDA ITEM #3E
DATE:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
March 5, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Jerry Rivera, Staff Analyst
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Amendment to FY 1991-92 FTA Section 9 Program of Projects for Riverside
County
Annually, the Riverside County Transportation Commission prepares and adopts an
Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) Section 9 Program of Projects (POP)
for the three urbanized areas in Riverside County: Western Riverside County; Hemet; and
Palm Springs. The POP's are typically prepared using the previous year's final
apportionments because the proposed funding levels are not available at the time the
programs are developed. This allows the operators to proceed with filing their grant
application and avoid further delays.
Final apportionments approved under the new Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), were published in the December 23, 1991 Federal
Register, providing $1.44 million more in federal funds to Riverside County and created
another urbanized area, the Indio -Coachella Urbanized Area in the Coachella Valley.
Sunline Transit Agency has requested an amendment to the FY 1991-92 Program of
Projects for the Palm Springs Urbanized area to increase the federal funds for operating
assistance by $265,946 and capital assistance funds by $128,591. In addition, a Program
of Projects for the newly created Indio -Coachella Urbanized Area has been developed for
approval which provides an additional $274,015 in federal funds for operating assistance
and $63,440 in capital assistance.
The amount of additional federal funds available in the Western County area is $734,880.
The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) has requested the Commission to amend the FY
1991-92 Program of Projects for the Riverside -San Bernardino and Hemet Urbanized
Areas and will provide specific details to staff prior to the Administrative Committee
meeting.
fAueen\preprinl\mer.92\eec9. rl
URBANIZED AREA:
APPORTIONMENT:
CARRYOVER FUNDS:
TRANSFER FUNDS:
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE:
RECIPIENTS:
SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY
PROGRAM OF PROJECTS:
(1) SUNLINE OPERATING ASSISTANCE
JULY 1,1991 TO JUNE 30, 1992
(2) SUNLINE PURCHASE ONE (1)
REPLACEMENT COACH
TOTAL PROGRAMMED
BALANCE AVAILABLE
UMTA SECTION 9
PROGRAM OF PROJECTS
FY 1991 /92
PALM SPRINGS
$697,397
$31,036
$0
$728,433
TOTAL
AMOUNT
SUBAREA APPORTIONMENTS
$741,299
FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED
SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT
$6,600,000 $549,299 0
$240,000 $192,000 C
$6,840,000 $741,299
($12,866)
• NOTE: Deficit will be funded using resources from the Indio/Coachella Urbanized Area.
APPROVED BY RCTC: July 10, 1991
REVISED BY RCTC:
JR: 02/25/92
STATE
STATE
FEH-25-1992 13:26 FROM RTA
TO 7877920 P.02
R77:4
p--1 r-•.
February 19, 1992 <
Mr. Jack Reagan
Executive Director
Riverside County Transportation Commission
3580 University, Suite 100
Riverside, CA 9250i
Re: Revised FY 1991-92 TA (UMTA) Section 9 Apportionments
Dear Jack:
Thank you for the information regarding the additional allocations
available to the Riverside -San Bernardino and Hemet urbanized are
as under the Section 9 program of projects.
At this time, RTA will apply for the additional allocations and will
amend our original applications to apply for the new amounts for the
April 1, grant cycle.
Please let me know if I or my staff can be of any assistance and
thank you for your attention in this matter.
Sincerely,
Susan J. Rainer
General Manager
SJH:dt
TOTRL P.02
AGENDA ITEM #4A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 5, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director of Planning and Programming
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Southern California Accelerated Rail Electrification Program - Draft Executive
Summary
Accelerated Electrification Task Force members will be present at the March 11, 1992
Commission meeting to present a summary report on the Task Force report findings and
recommendations. The Executive Summary is enclosed in your Administrative Committee
agenda package in order to allow time for your review.
This will be an approximate 40 minute presentation with a 20 minute question and answer
period. Please keep this report for the March 11 th meeting in Palm Desert and for future
reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission receive and possibly take action.
HS:sc
Musem\preprl nt\mer. BTrei lelec. h5
AGENDA ITEM #48
RIVERSIDE COUNTY 'TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 5, 1992
TO: Administrative Committee
Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director of Planning and Programming
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) Action to Purchase
Additional Locomotives to Demonstrate Lower NOx Emissions and Methanol
Attached is an item which was agendixed and approved by the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) at their February 14th meeting. This item requests RCTC
consideration of the purchase of locomotives to demonstrate technology to reduce NOx
emissions as well as demonstrate the feasibility of retrofitting a diesel locomotive to
operate on methanol fuel.
As you are aware, RCTC previously acted to not exercise an option for the purchase of
diesel locomotives in consideration of the rail electrification study effort. However, we are
still attempting to work out the possibility of leasing locomotives for the start up of
commuter rail service on the Union Pacific route.
At the time of this agenda preparation discussions were still on -going with the SCRRA
and the California Transportation Commission. Staff will report on any new developments
at the meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission review and possibly take action.
HS:sc
attachment
f:\userepreprintVneu.92\eltiusil.hs
.--C I ,
! l �! METRCUNK
Southern California Regional Rail Authority
February 7, 1991
Los Angeles County
Transportation Commission
Orange County
Transportation Authority
Riverside County
Transportation Commission
San Bernardino
Associate] Govemments
Ventura County
Transporation Commission
TO: SCRRA MEMBERS & ALTERNATES - 2/14 MEETING
FROM: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL LOCOMOTIVES TO DEMONSTRATE LOWER
NOx EMISSIONS AND IMPLEMENT NEW SERVICE
ISSUE:
SCRRA has the opportunity to reduce NOx emissions from the new
commuter rail locomotives further and simultaneously implement new
service. To accomplish this objective, two additional locomotives
must be purchased.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the SCRRA:
o Subject to funding approval by member agencies commit $250,000
as a matching grant for equivalent SCAQMD funds for a
demonstration of a methanol -fueled locomotives and
authorize the Executive Director to notify SCAQMD of SCRRA's
intent to participate in the methanol -fueled locomotive
demonstration.
o Subject to funding approval by member agencies, authorize the
Executive Director to exercise an option under General Motors
locomotive contract for three additional locomotives as
follows:
* 1 locomotive to be used by General Motors to design and
install electronic emission controls which will further
reduce NOx emissions to 70% of a regular passenger
locomotive (an FP-59). This clean diesel locomotive will
be available in 18 months.
n (�
• 818 West 7th Street. Suite 1100, Los Angeles. California 90017 Tel. 213-623-1194 Fax 213-489-1469 •
SCRRA - 2/14 MEETING
February 7, 1991
Page 3
A second proposal comes from Valley Detroit ❑iesel Allison at a
cost ❑f $500,O00• This project would demonstrate the feasibility
❑f retrofitting the SCRRA locomotives to operate on methanol fuel.
Durability and emission tests would be accomplished with this
locomotive. The budget for the methanol demonstration is shown in
Attachment 2.
SCAQMD staff have agreed to contribute half the funds for the
demonstration. The option would exist to return the locomotive to
clean diesel operations if the tests fail. If the tests are
successful, then the locomotive would be placed in service,
probably on the Riverside -Los Angeles (UP) line. A combined
retrofit program could subsequently begin converting all
locomotives to methanol fuel and electronic controls.
General Motors also suggested a natural gas demonstration program.
This proposal is still in the formative stage. A budget has to be
developed. Staff will return to the Board at a later date with a
report on this option including participation by other parties in
a natural gas demonstration.
Prepared by: James Ortner, PhD
LACTC Air Quality Transportation Administrator
RICHARD STANGEF3
Executive Director
attachments
3f
ATTACHNIENT 2
Valley
B7DGET °POJECT;CNS
Engineering
Design
Modeling
Re -location of auxiliaries
Parts/Procurement
Cylinder Components including
Piston crowns supplied by EHD
Air Management _Components
Turbocharger/Ratios
Air box bypass
175,000
$ 85,000
Evaluation to be conducted
with EHD and Valley; costs
included in Engineering,
Fuel System Components
Fuel cooling/filtration/storage
Fuel injectors (with EHD and
DTC)
Engine Modifications
Labor, z iaal :report, Training
Support
$ 55,000
$ 120,000
Head End Power
New Detroit Diesel 8V-149 methanol
engine; price includes trade-in of
removed diesel engine $ 51,000
Emissions 'eating $ 5,500
Spare Farts $ 5,000
TOTAL $ 496,500
Conversion back to diesel $ 135,000
(Delivery: 30 days)
DELIVERY
Delivery time is estimated at 90 days. Delivery time
could be influenced by vendor component delivery, although
vendors have tentatively committed to this timing.
AGENDA ITEM #5A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 4, 1992
TO: Budget & Finance Committee
FROM: Louie Martin, Project Controls Manager
Mark Massman, Measure A Project Manager
SUBJECT: Monthly Cost/Schedule Report
At the time of the agenda mailing, the monthly cost/schedule reports were not completed.
The will be distributed at the Budget & Finance Committee meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
AGENDA ITEM #5B
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: March 4, 1992
TO: Budget and Finance Committee
FROM: Mark T. Massman, Measure A Project Manager
THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Discussion of Measure A Project Structure
At the February meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee, Bechtel staff presented
a portion (Sections 1-3) of the project structure presentation requested by the Committee.
In March, Bechtel will present the remaining section (4) in a 40-45 minute presentation:
1. Overall Project Phases, Costs, and Timing
-Phase 0 (Environmental and Preliminary Engineering)
-Phase 1 (Final Design)
-Phase 2 (Right -of -Way Services)
-Phase 3 (Construction Management and Inspection)
-Phase 4 (Construction)
-Phase 9 (Utility Clearance and ROW Acquisition)
2. Technical Content of Project Phases
3. Measure A Program Management Systems
-Expenditure Plan
-Two Year Expenditure Plan
-Annual Budget
-Collecting and Reporting on Costs
-Collecting and Reporting on Schedule Performance
1:\users\preprint\mer.92\projstru. b8f