bnsf railway line capacity planning: san joaquin double track projects

1

BNSF Railway Line Capacity Planning: San Joaquin Double Track projects

San Joaquin ValleyCapacity Analysis

October 8, 2010

Summary of

RTC Simulations

Modeling completed byWillard Keeney

Summary prepared byGary Agnew

2

Line Capacity Planning: San Joaquin DT projects

The State of California approached BNSF in March 2010 about potential changes to the San Joaquin passenger train services. There is no funding available at this time to add more train services, but the State wanted to identify future capacity needs in order to prepare for required environmental, permitting, and engineering design work.

Current San Joaquin passenger train plan: 6 trains per day each way on the Bakersfield – Stockton segment (total of 12 trains). 4 trains per day each way on the Stockton – Port Chicago segment (total of 8 trains).

Four different schedule proposals were analyzed: 8 trains per day each way on the full Bakersfield – Port Chicago segment (total of 16 trains) with the

passenger trains operating at a maximum speed of 79 mph (the 5/10 year 79 mph plan). 11 trains per day each way on the full Bakersfield – Port Chicago segment (total of 22 trains) with the

passenger trains operating at a maximum speed of 79 mph (the 25 year 79 mph plan). 8 trains per day each way on the full Bakersfield – Port Chicago segment (total of 16 trains) with the

passenger trains operating at a maximum speed of 90 mph (the 5/10 year 90 mph plan). 11 trains per day each way on the full Bakersfield – Port Chicago segment (total of 22 trains) with the

passenger trains operating at a maximum speed of 90 mph (the 25 year 90 mph plan). Each of the 5/10 cases reflects a scenario where 1 passenger train pair is an “express” schedule,

with only a Fresno intermediate stop. The other 5/10 cases reflect all trains stopping at all stations. In the 5/10 cases the freight counts were increased by 14 trains per week (2 intermodal Z1-7,

10 intermodal Q/S and 2 unit). The freight counts were then kept at those levels for the 25 year cases (in order to identify just the scope of projects needed for the changed passenger services beyond the 5/10 year plan).

3


The following 5 projects were assumed to be part of the “base case”: Double track Guernsey - Hanford, with crossovers in between. Retains Shirley siding (6 miles). Convert Gregg siding to double track segment milepost 1008.9 to 1013.9 (5 miles). Double track LeGrand to Planada with crossovers in between (9 miles). Double track milepost 1107.0 to Walnut with associated crossover and power turnout work (9 miles). Convert Pittsburg siding to double track and extend east to milepost 1152.7 (5 miles).

With regard to the above listed projects: Grading is complete for 4 miles of new double track in the Guernsey - Hanford segment. This 4 mile segment

is expected to be completed by January 2011. Funding is in place for the design work for the Gregg siding project. Funding is in place for the design work for the LeGrand - Planada project.

4


RTC results: Measured trains per week

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

Passenger 84 138 138 236 137 137 236

Z1-7 31 33 33 33 33 33 33

Z8-9 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Other Imdl 76 86 86 86 86 86 86

Other freight 193 195 195 195 195 195 195

Base case5/10 year 79 mph plan (1 express

schedule)

5/10 year 79 mph plan (no express

schedules)25 year 79 mph plan

5/10 year 90 mph plan (1 express

schedule)



5


RTC results: Average speed (mph)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

Passenger 56.1 58.2 57.7 57.8 61.2 61.1 60.6

Z1-7 34.3 32.5 33.7 33.6 33.5 33.7 33.4

Z8-9 33.8 34.2 35.0 34.2 34.7 34.6 34.6

Other Imdl 30.4 31.2 31.0 31.0 31.7 31.1 31.9

Other freight 17.9 18.6 18.3 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.3


schedule)




schedule)



6


RTC results: delay per 100 train miles

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Passenger 2.23 3.51 3.77 3.57 4.29 3.82 3.50

Z1-7 27.11 34.55 27.69 28.72 28.55 25.89 29.22

Z8-9 25.28 24.79 20.81 24.81 21.72 22.36 21.74

Other Imdl 41.18 44.07 45.07 44.83 40.44 43.47 39.52

Other freight 60.50 60.38 65.94 60.00 58.66 60.08 65.51


schedule)




schedule)



7


Passenger train on time percentage

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

110%

% on time - no failures 95.2% 99.2% 98.4% 99.0% 97.6% 98.4% 99.5%

% on time with failures 91.5% 95.5% 94.7% 95.3% 93.9% 94.7% 95.8%


schedule)


schedules)

25 year 79 mph plan


schedule)


schedules)

25 year 90 mph plan

Note – the “% on time with failures” numbers reflect adjustment of RTC output to reflect impacts from:

-- signal failures

-- switch failures

-- service disruptions

8


Type Metric 5/10 year79 mphexpress

5/10 year79 mphNo express

25 year79 mph

5/10 year90 mphexpress

5/10 year90 mphno express

25 year90 mph

Z1-7 Speed xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

Z1-7 Delay / 100 xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

Z8-9 Speed

Z8-9 Delay / 100

Other Intermodal

Speed

Other Intermodal

Delay / 100 xxx xxx xxx xxx

Other Freight

Speed

Other Freight

Delay / 100 xxx xxx

“xxx” indicates those areas where freight performance metric degrades from base case

9


Notes for those areas where freight performance metrics degrade: Z1-Z7 train speeds degrade under all scenarios. The base case speed is 34.3 mph. The lowest the

Z1-Z7 speed gets in any of the scenarios is 32.5 mph. Z1-Z7 train delay per 100 train miles degrades under all but one of the scenarios. The base case

delay per 100 train miles is 27.11 minutes. The highest the Z1-Z7 delay per 100 train mile gets is 34.55 minutes (in the 5/10 year 79 mph plan with the express schedule), for a variance of 7.44 minutes. On a 225 mile run between Mariposa and Bakersfield, that represents about 17 minutes of additional delay per train. The other scenarios with degraded metrics have variances ranging from 0.58 to 2.11 minutes per 100 train miles. On the 225 mile run, that equates to 1 to 5 minutes of additional delay per train.

Other intermodal train delay per 100 train miles degrades under all but two of the scenarios. The base case delay per 100 train miles is 41.18 minutes. The highest the other intermodal delay per 100 train mile gets is 45.07 minutes (in the 5/10 year 79 mph plan with no express schedules), for a variance of 3.89 minutes. On a 225 mile run, that represents about 9 minutes of additional delay per train. The other scenarios with degraded metrics have variances ranging from 2.29 to 3.65 minutes per 100 train miles. That equates to 5 to 8 minutes of additional delay per train.

Other freight train delay per 100 train miles degrades in only two of the scenarios. The base case delay per 100 train miles is 60.50 minutes. The highest the other intermodal delay per 100 train mile gets is 65.94 minutes (in the 5/10 year 79 mph plan with no express schedules), for a variance of 5.44 minutes. On a 235 mile run between Stockton and Bakersfield, that represents about 13 minutes of additional delay per train. The other scenario with degraded metrics has variance from base case very similar, at 5.01 minutes per 100 train miles. That equates to 12 minutes of additional delay per train.

10


The following projects were modeled for the 5/10 year 79 mph plans: Double track Guernsey - Hanford, with crossovers in between. Retains Shirley siding (6 miles). Convert Gregg siding to double track segment milepost 1008.9 to 1013.9 (5 miles). Double track LeGrand to Planada with crossovers in between (9 miles). Double track milepost 1107.0 to Walnut with associated crossover and power turnout work (9 miles). Convert Pittsburg siding to double track and extend east to milepost 1152.7 (5 miles). Conejo drill track.

11


The following projects were modeled for the 25 year 79 mph plan: Double track Guernsey - Hanford, with crossovers in between. Retains Shirley siding (6 miles). Convert Gregg siding to double track segment milepost 1008.9 to 1013.9 (5 miles). Double track LeGrand to Planada with crossovers in between (9 miles). Double track milepost 1107.0 to Walnut with associated crossover and power turnout work (9 miles). Convert Pittsburg siding to double track and extend east to milepost 1152.7 (5 miles). Conejo drill track. Double track Jastro – Shafter. Retains Una siding (13 miles). Double track Angiola – Corcoran. Retains Corcoran siding (12 miles). Double track Figarden to milepost 1008.6 (5 miles). Double track milepost 1013.9 – Madera. Retains Madera siding (6 miles). Double track Planada to Merced (8 miles). Double track Escalon – Duffy (9 miles). Double track Pittsburg – Port Chicago (8 miles).

Although not initially modeled, BNSF recommends that the following be addressed from an environmental and permitting standpoint:

In addition to the Jastro – Shafter double track, extend double track out to Wasco (7 miles). In addition to the Gregg and Figarden double track projects, extend double track Figarden to Fresno, and

double track milepost 1008.6 to 1008.9, requiring new bridge across San Joaquin river (6 miles). Extend double track west from milepost 1090.8 to Riverbank (5 miles).

12


The following projects were modeled for the 5/10 year 90 mph plan: Double track Guernsey - Hanford, with crossovers in between. Retains Shirley siding (6 miles). Convert Gregg siding to double track segment milepost 1008.9 to 1013.9 (5 miles). Double track LeGrand to Planada with crossovers in between (9 miles). Double track milepost 1107.0 to Walnut with associated crossover and power turnout work (9 miles). Convert Pittsburg siding to double track and extend east to milepost 1152.7 (5 miles). Conejo drill track. Double track Jastro – Una. Retains Una siding (13 miles). Double track Planada to Merced (8 miles). Double track Escalon – Duffy (9 miles) .

13


The following projects were modeled for the 25 year 90 mph plan: Double track Guernsey - Hanford, with crossovers in between. Retains Shirley siding (6 miles). Convert Gregg siding to double track segment milepost 1008.9 to 1013.9 (5 miles). Double track LeGrand to Planada with crossovers in between (9 miles). Double track milepost 1107.0 to Walnut with associated crossover and power turnout work (9 miles). Convert Pittsburg siding to double track and extend east to milepost 1152.7 (5 miles). Conejo drill track. Double track Jastro – Una. Retains Una siding (13 miles). Double track Planada to Merced (8 miles). Double track Escalon – Duffy (9 miles). Double track Una – Shafter (8 miles). Wasco siding extended. Double track Elmo – Sandrini (8 miles). Double track Allensworth - Angiola – Corcoran. Retains Corcoran siding (22 miles). Double track Figarden to milepost 1008.6 (5 miles). Double track milepost 1013.9 – Madera. Retains Madera siding (6 miles). Double track Fluhr – Ballico (11 miles). Double track Pittsburg – Port Chicago (8 miles).

Although not initially modeled, BNSF recommends that the following be addressed from an environmental and permitting standpoint:

In addition to the Jastro – Shafter double track, extend double track out to Wasco instead of the Wasco siding (7 miles). In addition to the Gregg and Figarden double track projects, extend double track Figarden to Fresno, and double track milepost

1008.6 to 1008.9, requiring new bridge across San Joaquin river (6 miles). Extend double track west from milepost 1090.8 to Riverbank (5 miles).

14

BixlerOakleySandoPittsburgPt. Chicago Orwood Trull Holt

Denair

Stockton

Escalon

DuffyWalnut Mariposa

Planada Merced Fluhr Ballico MP 1087.2 MP 1090.8 Riverbank

GreggMadera FigardenKismetSharon

Le Grand

ConejoBowlesCalwaFresno

Corcoran Guernsey

HanfordShirley

Elmo Sandrini Allensworth AngiolaBakersfield Jastro Una Shafter Wasco

= sidings= double track= single track


MP 1098.5

Current Track structure

15


Denair

Stockton

Escalon




Le Grand


Corcoran Guernsey

HanfordShirley


= sidings= double track= single track= put in to base case= added double track (5/10 year @ 79 mph)


MP 1098.5

Potential track additions to support 5 / 10 year passenger case (79 mph trains)

16


Denair

Stockton

Escalon




Le Grand


Corcoran Guernsey

HanfordShirley


= sidings= double track= single track= put in to base case= added double track (5/10 year @ 79 mph)= added double track (25 year @ 79 mph)


MP 1098.5

Potential track additions to support 25 year passenger case (79 mph trains)

17


Denair

Stockton

Escalon




Le Grand


Corcoran Guernsey

HanfordShirley


= sidings= double track= single track= put in to base case= added double track (5/10 year @ 90 mph)


MP 1098.5

Potential track additions to support 5 / 10 year passenger case (90 mph trains)

18


Denair

Stockton

Escalon




Le Grand


Corcoran Guernsey

HanfordShirley


= sidings= double track= single track= put in to base case= added double track (5/10 year @ 90 mph)= added double track (25 year @ 90 mph)


MP 1098.5

Potential track additions to support 25 year passenger case (90 mph trains)

19


Percent of double track mileage Bakersfield - Port Chicago

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

110%

Bakersfield 18% 26% 55% 38% 71%

Stockton 17% 35% 55% 40% 61%

Combined 17% 32% 55% 39% 65%

Base case 5/10 year 79 mph plan 25 year 79 mph plan 5/10 year 90 mph plan 25 year 90 mph plan

bnsf railway line capacity planning: san joaquin double track projects

Documents

passenger trains

mph plan

double track segment

year plan

double track milepost

double track legrand

miles of new double

mile segment