mbta-keolis commuter rail contract: report on year 1 july 21, 2015

MBTA-Keolis Commuter Rail Contract: Report on Year 1

July 21, 2015

Commuter Rail contract history

MBTA Commuter Rail system operated by contractors since inception

Amtrak - 1987-2003Massachusetts Bay Commuter Railroad Company - 2003-2013Keolis - July 2014-Present

MBCR struggled with schedule adherence, passenger comfort, and other elements of contract performance.

In response to MBCR problems, Keolis contract is structured with penalties for failure to meet requirements.

DRAFT FOR BOARD REVIEW – Slide 2

Metrics for which there are requirements and penalties

On Time Performance (“OTP”) measured by schedule adherence

“On time” defined as within five minutes of scheduled time50% of potential penalties related to OTP

Non-OTP MetricsOther 50% of potential penalties relate to non-OTP issuesStaffing - requirement of one conductor per 300 passengersEquipment availability and reliability - baseline requirement of 65 locomotives and 359 coachesCleanliness/functionality of passenger amenities (HVAC, station condition, etc.) - assessed by periodic MBTA field inspections Equipment inspections - assessed by periodic MBTA audits and FRA inspections of locomotives and coachesFare Collection - assessed based on MBTA staff observations


Overview:Year 1 trends in Keolis performance

On Time Performance is not acceptable; while improving, OTP remains inconsistent

Staffing is a problem

Equipment availability and reliability is still an issue


On Time Performance

On Time Performance is not acceptable; while improving, OTP remains inconsistent Peak period service continues to be a major problemSome lines still lag Opportunity to improve OTP, particularly with trains 5-9 minutes latePeak period OTP will require more work Other performance failures (staffing shortages and equipment failures) contribute to delays and are fully within the control of Keolis


A decade of on-time performance results

10-year period of MBCR management (2003-2013): annual average actual OTP was 88.5%

July 2003 July 2004 July 2005 July 2006 July 2007 July 2008 July 2009 July 2010 July 2011 July 2012 July 2013 July 201430.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

On-time Performance, FY 2004 - FY 2015

OTP 6 month rolling avg.Remedial level in Keolis contract Changeover


OTP – How did Keolis do in Year 1?

OTP during Contract Year 1 has been inconsistent, but has generally fallen within historical range


Period Actual AdjustedJuly-December 88.3% 88.3%

January 26-March 30 58.1% 58.4%

Year 1 All 83.6% 84.7%

Year 1 Excl. Jan. 26-Mar. 30

87.5% 88.8%

April-June 85.7% 89.5%

June 87.9% 90.5%

Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-1530%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

90% 92%

85%

84% 9

0%

86%

39%

80% 82% 8

6%

88%

5% 5%

8% 9%

5%

5%

7%

10% 9% 8

% 7%

14%

14%

12%

14%

Monthly On-Time Performance (Actual)

On-Time 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 39 40+ Cancelled

How Close is Keolis to Meeting the OTP Requirements?


OTP during the peak period is unacceptable


Peak Off-peak30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

78%85%

10%

6%6%

4%

OTP (actual) by period type

0-5 5-10 10-20

20-40 40+ Cancelled

28%

72%

Percent of scheduled trains

Peak Off-peak

Peak period on-time performance


RKP NBP HVL LWL FCH WOR NDM FRK PVD STO FMT MDL KNG GRB30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

78%

79%

81%

79%

65%

83%

68% 7

7%

74%

75% 80% 87%

88%

90%

Peak Actual OTP by Line, FY15

0-5 5-10 10-20 20-40 40+ Cancelled

RKP NBP HVL LWL FCH WOR NDM FRK PVD STO FMT MDL KNG GRB30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

83%

84%

86%

83%

70%

87%

72% 8

2%

80%

80% 86% 93%

94%

95%

Peak Actual OTP by Line, FY15 (excl. Winter)

0-5 5-10 10-20 20-40 40+ Cancelled

LineAbbrv.

Rockport RKPNewburyport NBPHaverhill HVLLowell LWLFitchburg FCHWorcester WORNeedham NDMFranklin FRKProvidence PVDStoughton STOFairmount FMTMiddleborough MDLKingston KNGGreenbush GRB

Is performance affecting ridership?

Despite progress, post-winter loss of ridership continues

July

Augus

t

Sept

embe

r

Octob

er

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Janu

ary

Febr

uary

March

April

MayJu

ne1,500,000 1,700,000 1,900,000 2,100,000 2,300,000 2,500,000 2,700,000 2,900,000 3,100,000 3,300,000 3,500,000

Commuter rail ridership - all lines, FY 14 vs. FY15

FY 2014 FY 2015


July

Augus

t

Sept

embe

r

Octob

er

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Janu

ary

Febr

uary

March

April

MayJu

ne30,000 32,000 34,000 36,000 38,000 40,000 42,000 44,000 46,000 48,000 50,000

Commuter rail monthly pass sales, FY14 vs. FY15

FY '14 FY '15

Is performance affecting pass sales?

Increase in pass sales may indicate return of regular riders


Other performance criteria – Staffing Levels

Management – Key contract-specified positions are now filled (after a delay), but other staffing lags and affects customer experience.

Problem increased in 2015 due to lack of training offered before and after transition to Keolis in 2014 Lack of staffing has caused cancellations (>30 in May), as well as delays and difficult fare collectionNew staff now being trained by Keolis and being licensed per Federal law

Lack of staffing generated $1,031,250 in potential penalties during Year 1 , separate from delay penalties.


Oct. 2014 Nov. 2014 Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 Feb. 2015 Mar. 2015 Apr. 2015 May 20150

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Number of trains understaffed, FY15

Other performance criteria - Staffing


Other performance criteria – Equipment availability and reliability

65 locomotives (including 2 spares) and 359 coaches (or equivalent number of seats using double decker coaches) expected daily

Equipment that is available but unreliable contributes to poor OTP Maintenance facilities being operated with only 2 shifts; backlog of maintenance and repair work to be done MBTA reviews maintenance records to track completion of work ordered

MBTA periodically audits maintenance records and locomotives’ condition Locomotive availability currently 98%

MBTA worked with supplier of new locomotives to fix warranty defects 24 of 40 new locomotives have been delivered and are being integrated into service; delivery of balance expected by October 5 locomotives leased by MBTA also available as needed

Coach availability not fully recovered since Winter Was 100% 5 of 6 months before winter Reduced to 95%-98% in months 10-12


Other performance criteria – Fare collection

Consistent reports from riders about uneven fare collection; little data

Pass sales (but not usage) recorded automatically Access not controlled as with subwayPasses checked visually only10-ride tickets punched manually only

Fare revenue is down despite increase in pass sales, which may indicate that non-pass revenue is not being collectedFare collection penalty applied relatively rarely since inspection is ad hoc and not systematic MBTA urging Keolis to reinvest a portion of penalties in training/hiring new Fare Agents, especially for crowded trains Need better data on fare collectionDRAFT FOR BOARD REVIEW – Slide 16

Contract penalties – How are they used to produce better

performance?Complex penalty structure built to be driver of better performance in OTP, staffing, equipment availability/reliability, and customer comfort/amenities

Dollar amounts set for each instance of each fault. Illustrative penalty amounts in year 1:

$500 for a peak period train that is 5-10 minutes late$2000 for non-working HVAC $5000 for a peak period train that is cancelled

On Time Performance (OTP) has penalties for any train >5 minutes late, but establishes 92% OTP as “remedial” level generating maximum penalty Monthly cap on penalties

50% of cap can be assessed for late trains (OTP penalties) 50% of cap for other faults, including equipment, staffing, customer amenities, fare collection, etc. (non-OTP penalties)Year 1 monthly penalty cap (OTP and non-OTP) was $868,850Year 2 monthly penalty cap (OTP and non-OTP) will be $1,098,040


How many penalties in Year 1?

The contract provides for a four-month start-up period (July-September 2014), during which MBTA could not assess penaltiesTotal assessed October-June: $7,531,125

OTP penalty cap reached every month Non-OTP penalty cap reached six months out of nine Delays after monthly OTP cap is reached do not generate additional penalties that month If the OTP is between 92% and 99%, each OTP penalty is reduced by a set percentage (up to 40%), according to a sliding scale tied to the overall OTP


Oct. 2014 Nov. 2014 Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 Feb. 2015 Mar. 2015 Apr. 2015 May 20150

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

OTP - 5-10 min OTP - 10-20 min

OTP - 20-40 min OTP - 40+ min

Terminated / Cancelled (Other Reason) Terminated / Cancelled (lack of fuel)

Non-OTP (Comfort and Service Amenities) Non-OTP (Staffing)

Non-OTP (Consist)

Total Penalized Trains, All Penalties


About 13,000 trains run each month. In Feb-Mar, this was about 10,000 each month

What the MBTA will be doing in Year 2

Dedicate portion of penalties assessed in Year 1 to fund improvements for passengers

Steam cleaning of equipment - underwayHire new Fare Agents to help with boarding process and fare collection - awaiting Union concurrenceHire new Passenger information staff to provide real time information through on-line systems and at stations - underway

Reinvest future penalties in ways that will improve customer experience

Community partnerships to improve station appearance – in development for 2015

No penalty reinvestment will go to any items to which Keolis is contractually obligated


What the MBTA will be doing in Year 2

Identify and begin to implement technology to provide reliable ridership counts Provide more peak period and line by line focus in on-line “report cards”Explore and implement improved customer information systems at stations Continue to reinvest penalties in customer focused initiatives (ex: community partnerships to enhance station conditions)Use of ‘mystery shoppers’ to check on fare collection.


What MBTA has asked of Keolis

5 month Performance Improvement PlanSubstantial agreement between Keolis and MBTA on provisionsSpecific goals and commitments for training new staff (engineers and conductors)Monthly OTP target of at least 92% (adjusted) average Expedited implementation of initiatives to improve utilization of maintenance shopsImplementation of Winter Resiliency Plan Cooperation in implementing new schedule to reflect actual passenger demands and current operational practices Test effectiveness of penalties calculated on daily (not monthly) basis to make every day count


mbta-keolis commuter rail contract: report on year 1 july 21, 2015

Documents

board review slide

time performance otp

time performance draft

keolis performance

otp requirements

otp nonotp metrics

peak period otp

time performance results