Content deleted Content added
Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 3 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (Hey man im josh - 20898 |
m →Inaugural service: spelling |
||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
Line 21:
| funding =
| budget = US$2.44 billion
| current_status =
| website = {{URL|calmod.org}}
}}
The '''Caltrain Modernization Program''' ('''CalMod'''), sometimes referred to as the '''Caltrain Electrification Project''', was a $2.44 billion project which added a [[positive train control]] (PTC) system and [[Railway electrification|electrified the main line]] of the U.S. commuter railroad [[Caltrain]], which serves cities in the [[San Francisco Peninsula]] and [[Silicon Valley]]. The electrification included installation of a 25 kV catenary system over the double-tracked line from San Francisco to San Jose, and acquisition of new rolling stock, consisting of [[Stadler KISS]] double-decker [[electric multiple unit]]s (EMU). Caltrain
CalMod electrified {{convert|51|mi|km}} of tracks between [[San Francisco 4th and King Street
Proposals for electrifying the line began as early as 1992 when the [[California Department of Transportation]] conducted an early feasibility study. For two decades, the project lay dormant due to lack of funding until Caltrain agreed to share its tracks with the CHSRA, which was looking for a route for the legally mandated San Jose–San Francisco segment. The Authority agreed to partially fund the electrification project in exchange for rights to share the track. Construction contracts for electrification were awarded in July 2016 and [[groundbreaking]] was expected to occur in March 2017, but was delayed when the new [[United States Secretary of Transportation]] [[Elaine Chao]] indefinitely deferred federal funding just before construction was about to begin. That same month, Caltrain removed the contractor responsible for implementing PTC for failure to perform on budget and schedule. In May 2017, the [[Federal Transit Administration]] (FTA) announced its intention to sign the grant and reversed Secretary Chao's deferment
▲CalMod electrified {{convert|51|mi|km}} of tracks between [[San Francisco 4th and King Street Station|4th and King station]] and [[Tamien station]] and installed a PTC management system along the tracks. PTC is designed to fulfill federal safety mandates for passenger rail and is part of the [[Federal Railroad Administration]] (FRA) waiver to use EMUs on tracks shared with freight traffic. Funding for the project came from various federal, state, and local sources, including from the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA).
Construction for CalMod began with a groundbreaking ceremony at Millbrae station on July 21, 2017, and completed in April 2024.<ref name="april2024">{{cite news |title=Caltrain fully energizes electrified corridor |url=https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/caltrain-fully-energizes-electrified-corridor/ |access-date=April 10, 2024 |work=[[Trains (magazine)|Trains]] |publisher=[[Kalmbach Media]] |date=April 10, 2024}}</ref> Stadler KISS units began delivery in March 2022, and system testing started in June 2023. Caltrain began public revenue service using the Stadler EMUs on August 11, 2024, with two trainsets, adding more gradually until fully transitioning to all-electric trainsets on September 21.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Caltrain Welcomes First Passengers on New Electric Trains|publisher=Caltrain|___location=San Carlos, California|date=August 10, 2024|accessdate=August 10, 2024|url=https://www.caltrain.com/news/caltrain-welcomes-first-passengers-new-electric-trains}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release|title=The Future of Caltrain is Here|publisher=Caltrain|___location=San Carlos, California|date=September 21, 2024|accessdate=September 21, 2024|url=https://www.caltrain.com/launchparty}}</ref> Some of the newer diesel locomotives and conventional passenger coaches will be retained for service south of Tamien. Switching to EMUs is intended to improve service times via faster acceleration and shorter [[headway]]s, and reduce air and noise pollution. CalMod also enabled planning and implementation to proceed for [[The Portal (San Francisco)|The Portal]], a planned tunnel to extend Caltrain and future [[California High-Speed Rail]] service approximately {{cvt|1|mi}} to downtown San Francisco's [[Salesforce Transit Center]].
▲Proposals for electrifying the line began as early as 1992 when the [[California Department of Transportation]] conducted an early feasibility study. For two decades, the project lay dormant due to lack of funding until Caltrain agreed to share its tracks with the CHSRA, which was looking for a route for the legally mandated San Jose–San Francisco segment. The Authority agreed to partially fund the electrification project in exchange for rights to share the track. Construction contracts for electrification were awarded in July 2016 and [[groundbreaking]] was expected to occur in March 2017, but was delayed when the new [[United States Secretary of Transportation]] [[Elaine Chao]] indefinitely deferred federal funding just before construction was about to begin. That same month, Caltrain removed the contractor responsible for implementing PTC for failure to perform on budget and schedule. In May 2017, the [[Federal Transit Administration]] (FTA) announced its intention to sign the grant and reversed Secretary Chao's deferment. Construction formally began two months later.
==History==
Line 82 ⟶ 79:
===Federal funding interruption===
[[File:Elaine Chao
In early 2016, the CHSRA had selected a route that required extensive and costly tunneling in [[Southern California]] and revised its initial operating plans for high-speed rail to include the Bay Area.<ref name=SFC-160218>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/High-speed-rail-on-fast-track-to-Bay-Area-6830444.php |title=High-speed rail on fast track to Bay Area |author1=Matier, Phil |author2=Ross, Andrew |date=February 18, 2016 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |access-date=March 25, 2017}}</ref> By February 2017, the electrification project had secured $1.3 billion in state, local, and regional funding, with the remaining funding gap to be closed by a $647 million grant from the FTA's Core Capacity program.<ref name=PCEP-CCE>{{cite web |url=https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/CA%20San%20Carlos%20Caltrain%20Peninsula%20Corridor%20Electrification%20Project%20Profile.pdf |title=Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Core Capacity Engineering |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=August 2016 |publisher=[[Federal Transit Administration]] |access-date=April 4, 2017}}</ref> The grant had undergone a two-year review process starting in November 2015 under the [[Obama Administration]] and received a "medium-high" rating from the FTA in August 2016,<ref name=PCEP-CCE /> and was waiting for a signature from the newly appointed [[First presidency of Donald Trump|Trump Administration]] Secretary of Transportation [[Elaine Chao]] after a 30-day review period to secure a grant approval.<ref name="contractextension">{{cite news|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02/28/caltrain-agreement-with-contractors-to-extend-deadline-keeps-electrification-project-alive/|title=Caltrain: Agreement with contractors to extend deadline keeps electrification project alive|newspaper=[[San Jose Mercury News]]|author=Green, Jason|date=February 28, 2017|access-date=March 29, 2017}}</ref><ref name=SFC-170317>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Trump-transportation-plan-could-derail-Bay-Area-11009336.php |title=Trump transportation plan could derail Bay Area transit projects |author=Brekke, Dan |date=March 17, 2017 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |access-date=March 25, 2017}}</ref> However, during the review period, the fourteen [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican party]] [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House]] representatives from California sent a letter to Secretary Chao, urging her to deny funding due to the project's ties with high-speed rail, which they opposed.<ref name=SFC-170206>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/With-Trump-in-charge-Republicans-target-Caltrain-10907794.php |title=With Trump in charge, Republicans target Caltrain |author=Matier, Phil |author2=Ross, Andrew |date=February 6, 2017 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |access-date=April 4, 2017}}{{subscription required}}</ref> The letter went on to call the project "an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars".<ref name=RepublicanLetter>{{cite letter |url=http://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2017_01_24-ca-delegation-letter-to-secretary-chao-on-high-speed-rail-1.pdf |author1=Denham, Jeff |author2=McCarthy, Kevin |author3=Walters, Mimi |author4=Lamalfa, Doug |author5=Royce, Ed |author6=McClintock, Tom |author7=Hunter, Duncan |author8=Rohrabacher, Dana |author9=Issa, Darrell |author10=Cook, Paul |author11=Valadao, David G. |author12=Calvert, Ken |author13=Knight, Steve |author14=Nunes, Devin |date=January 24, 2017 |recipient=The Honorable [[Elaine Chao]], Secretary of Transportation |subject=CA Republican Delegation HSR Letter to Secretary Chao |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref>
The ''[[Sacramento Bee]]'' pointed out that despite regularly soliciting campaign funds from Silicon Valley business leaders, Representative and House Majority Leader [[Kevin McCarthy]], the author of the Republican letter to Secretary Chao, was targeting a project that benefited the region directly.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/dan-morain/article134903629.html |title=Kevin McCarthy displays his clout, for good and ill |author=Morain, Dan |date=February 24, 2017 |newspaper=[[Sacramento Bee]] |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> Another Republican signatory, Representative [[Devin Nunes]], was unmoved by arguments on infrastructure benefits, saying in late February that he would not "feel too bad about one of the richest places on the planet not having a train."<ref>{{cite web |url=
The 39-member House and Senate [[Democratic Party (United States)|Democratic]] congressional delegation from California wrote a rebuttal letter to Secretary Chao on February 3, noting "a material misstatement of fact" in the Republican delegation's letter, which stated that the grant was being sought by the CHSRA, while in reality it is being sought by Caltrain. The rebuttal letter further delineated the separation between the electrification project and CHSRA and urged Secretary Chao to approve the grant by citing past precedent that only one low-rated project failed to receive a signature from the Secretary of Transportation over the prior twenty-year history of the Core Capacity program.<ref name=DemocraticLetter>{{cite letter |url=http://cal.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2017/02/CA-Delegation-letter-to-Secretary-Chao-re-Caltrain-2.3.17.pdf |author1=Eshoo, Anna |author2=Lofgren, Zoe |author3=Feinstein, Dianne |author4=Harris, Kamala |author5=Bass, Karen |author6=Bera, Ami |author7=Correa, Luis |author8=Brownley, Julia |author9=Chu, Judy |author10=Aguilar, Pete |author11=Lee, Barbara |author12=Davis, Susan |author13=Peters, Scott |author14=Torres, Norma |author15=Thompson, Mike |author16=DeSaulnier, Mark |author17=Lieu, Ted |author18=Takano, Mark |author19=Swalwell, Eric |author20=Costa, Jim |author21=Speier, Jackie |author22=Panetta, Jimmy |author23=Khanna, Ro |author24=Roybal-Allard, Lucille |author25=Carbajal, Salud O. |author26=Barragán, Nanette Diaz |author27=Huffman, Jared |author28=Lowenthal, Alan |author29=Cárdenas, Tony |author30=Matsui, Doris O. |author31=Sánchez, Linda T. |author32=Waters, Maxine |author33=McNerney, Jerry |author34=Napolitano, Grace F. |author35=Garamendi, John |author36=Sherman, Brad |author37=Ruiz, Raul |author38=Vargas, Juan |author39=Schiff, Adam B. |date=February 3, 2017 |recipient=The Honorable [[Elaine Chao]], Secretary of Transportation |subject=CA Democratic Delegation Letter to Secretary Chao |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> The Democratic letter went on to note the infrastructure benefits of the project and the creation of 9,600 jobs, including 550 jobs at a new Stadler USA plant in Salt Lake City.<ref name=SMDJ-170208>{{cite news |url=http://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/dems-fight-for-electrification-congressional-debate-centers-on-funding-for/article_85cd9996-3d01-593f-bab0-3daadc2d2cd8.html |title=Dems fight for electrification: congressional debate centers on funding for Caltrain modernization |author=Weigel, Samantha |date=February 8, 2017 |newspaper=San Mateo Daily Journal |access-date=April 1, 2017}}</ref>
Line 91 ⟶ 88:
In the end, Secretary Chao heeded the Republican letter's arguments, and deferred the grant in a letter written by FTA Executive Director Matthew Welbes to Caltrain which stated the FTA needed "additional time to complete review of this significant commitment of Federal resources".<ref name=SMDJ-170218>{{cite news |url=http://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/electrification-funds-in-peril-federal-transit-administration-delays-million-caltrain/article_16d7f9d6-7ea3-52b7-992d-cf3528c708fe.html |title=Electrification funds in peril: Federal Transit Administration delays $647 million Caltrain decision |author=Weigel, Samantha |date=February 18, 2017 |newspaper=[[San Mateo Daily Journal]] |access-date=April 4, 2017}}</ref><ref name=SFC-170217>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Trump-administration-deals-a-big-setback-to-10941880.php |title=Trump administration deals a big setback to Caltrain |author1=Matier, Phil |author2=Ross, Andrew |date=February 17, 2017 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |access-date=March 25, 2017}}</ref> Caltrain had expected Secretary Chao to approve the grant and sign the grant agreement by March 1, which is normally a ''[[pro forma]]'' step performed after the thirty-day comment period for a highly rated project, and had already awarded construction contracts.<ref name="contractextension"/><ref name="SV">{{cite news|url=http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/24/trump-chao-get-an-earful-on-caltrain-funds/|title=Trump, Chao get an earful on Caltrain funds from Silicon Valley leaders|newspaper=[[East Bay Times]]|author=Richards, Gary|date=March 24, 2017|access-date=March 29, 2017}}</ref> [[Balfour Beatty Construction]] and [[Stadler Rail]] had already begun preparations to upgrade the existing tracks and build electrical trainsets, respectively. Caltrain negotiated an emergency four-month contract extension at a potential cost of $20 million.<ref name="contractextension"/><ref name=SFC-170227>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Caltrain-acts-to-keep-electrification-plan-alive-10964012.php |title=Caltrain acts to keep electrification plan alive |author=Cabanatuan, Michael |date=February 27, 2017 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]] |access-date=March 25, 2017}}</ref> Under the preliminary budget proposal released in mid-March 2017, the [[United States Department of Transportation]]'s Capital Investment Grant Program would be eliminated, although approved projects would continue to be funded.<ref name=SFC-170317 /> Since Secretary Chao had withheld grant approval for the electrification project, its future fell into doubt.<ref name=SFC-170317 />
In response to the grant deferral, various local officials traveled to [[Washington, D.C.]], to lobby federal officials to release the money. Editorials in local and national newspapers urged approval of the grant, including the ''[[Sacramento Bee]]'', which called the deferral "a petty attack",<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article140446843.html |title=House Republicans launch a petty attack on a smart rail project |author=Editorial Board |date=March 24, 2017 |newspaper=[[Sacramento Bee]] |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> the ''[[East Bay Times]]'', a noted CHSRA detractor,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/02/24/editorial-feds-should-electrify-caltrain-kill-bullet-train/ |title=Editorial: Feds should electrify Caltrain, kill bullet train |author=Editorial Board |date=February 24, 2017 |newspaper=[[East Bay Times]] |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> and ''[[The New York Times]]'', which called the delay "counter to Mr. Trump's campaign promises of increased infrastructure spending."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/13/opinion/a-silicon-valley-train-gets-stuck.html |url-access=subscription |title=A Silicon Valley Train Gets Stuck |author=Editorial Board |date=March 13, 2017 |newspaper=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=April 5, 2017}}</ref> Henry Grabar noted the grant deferral could be "an early test of a simmering fear that the state's outspoken political opposition to the Trump administration might come with a price".<ref name=Slate-Grabar>{{cite web |url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2017/02/16/will_elaine_chao_axe_federal_funding_for_caltrain.html |title=If Elaine Chao Axes This Bay Area Rail Funding, We'll Know She's Politicizing Transportation |author=Grabar, Henry |date=February 16, 2017 |work=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]]: Moneybox (blog) |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> San Jose Mayor [[Sam Liccardo]] met with Department of Transportation officials, urging them to upgrade a system that "was built under the presidency of [[Abraham Lincoln]]". Additionally, more than 120 Silicon Valley business leaders sent a letter to Secretary Chao, asking her to explain "the last-minute attempt to derail two decades of work".<ref name="SV"/> In early March, California Governor [[Jerry Brown]] sent a letter to Secretary Chao, asking to discuss the funding grant,<ref name=EBT-170303>{{cite news |url=http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/03/call-me-jerry-brown-urges-trump-administration-to-fund-caltrain-project/ |url-access=subscription |title=Call me? Jerry Brown urges Trump administration to fund Caltrain project |author=Murphy, Katy |date=March 3, 2017 |newspaper=[[East Bay Times]] |access-date=March 28, 2017}}</ref> and subsequently met with Secretary Chao and Representative McCarthy, urging them to reconsider the funding deferral, saying afterward that he was "cautiously optimistic" that the money would be released.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article139943463.html |first1=Christopher |last1=Cadelago |title=Jerry Brown meets with Republicans, 'cautiously optimistic' about Caltrain approval|newspaper=[[Sacramento Bee]]|date=March 21, 2017|access-date=March 29, 2017}}</ref>
On April 30, legislators in the U.S. Congress released the proposed 2017 federal budget, which included partial funding for the electrification project, but restricts its distribution unless Secretary Chao signs off on the grant.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://rules.house.gov/sites/republicans.rules.house.gov/files/115/OMNI/DIVISION%20K%20-%20THUD%20SOM%20OCR%20FY17.pdf|title=Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017 |publisher=U.S. House of Representatives|access-date=May 2, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170502011347/https://rules.house.gov/sites/republicans.rules.house.gov/files/115/OMNI/DIVISION%20K%20-%20THUD%20SOM%20OCR%20FY17.pdf|archive-date=May 2, 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> The proposed budget includes $100 million of the $647 million grant, with the balance expected in future years. Secretary Chao claimed she could not sign the grant without the full grant being budgeted, which was disputed by Caltrain and both California Senators [[Dianne Feinstein]] and [[Kamala Harris]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/17/elaine-chao-caltrain-grant-hearing/ |title=Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao says she can't approve Caltrain electrification grant yet |author=Tolan, Casey |date=May 17, 2017 |newspaper=San Jose Mercury News |access-date=May 19, 2017}}</ref> On May 22, the FTA announced its intent to sign the funding grant, restoring the final piece of funding for the electrification project.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sfexaminer.com/feds-flip-will-approve-funding-caltrain-electrification/ |title=Feds flip, will approve funding for Caltrain electrification |author=Rodriguez, Joe Fitzgerald |date=May 22, 2017 |newspaper=San Francisco Examiner |access-date=May 22, 2017 |archive-date=May 23, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170523152650/http://www.sfexaminer.com/feds-flip-will-approve-funding-caltrain-electrification/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> The official grant was finally signed on May 23.<ref>{{cite news|title=It's officially done. Caltrain's GM, Jim Hartnett, signed the FFGA @USDOT this morning.|url=https://twitter.com/Caltrain/status/867083183820611584|access-date=May 28, 2017|work=Official Caltrain [[Twitter]] Account|date=May 23, 2017}}</ref>
Line 185 ⟶ 182:
=== Inaugural service ===
On August 10, 2024, Caltrain concluded its tests of the Stadler KISS on the line with a non-revenue special run from 4th and King to Diridon Station and back.<ref name="First Pax 2024">{{cite web | title=Caltrain Welcomes First Passengers on New Electric Trains | website=Caltrain | date=August 10, 2024 | url=https://www.caltrain.com/news/caltrain-welcomes-first-passengers-new-electric-trains | access-date=August 11, 2024}}</ref> Caltrain Board Chair Dev Davis, Governor [[Gavin Newsom]], [[Federal Railroad Administration]] chair [[Amit Bose (government official)|Amit Bose]], U.S. Senator [[Alex Padilla]], U.S. Representatives [[Nancy Pelosi]], [[Kevin Mullin]] and [[Anna Eshoo]], [[California State Transportation Agency]] chief Toks Omishakin, noted transit advocates and state legislators [[Phil Ting]] and [[Scott Wiener]], and the mayors of San Francisco and San Jose, [[London Breed]] and [[Matt Mahan]], respectively, were among the passengers.<ref name="Forrest 2024">{{cite web | title=Press Kit |last=Forrest|first=Julia| website=Canva | date=August 10, 2024 | url=https://www.canva.com/design/DAGLyjeLzxo/d_tHBkjd5J-6WIAvchWrOQ/view?utm_content=DAGLyjeLzxo | access-date=August 11, 2024}}</ref> Revenue service began the next day, and
==Funding==
Line 195 ⟶ 192:
{{quote box|width=30.0em|align=right|quote=Modernizing Caltrain is a priority because we need an improved rail system that will help reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and serve our growing ridership. Not only will the electrification project reduce diesel emissions in this corridor by 96 percent by 2040, but it will also allow Caltrain to provide additional service to more stations, increasing ridership and providing faster service in Silicon Valley from San Francisco to San Jose.|author= —Jim Hartnett, Caltrain Executive Director<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.masstransitmag.com/article/12186524/caltrain-modernization-program-to-electrify-bay-areas-silicon-valley-rail-corridor|title=Modernization: Electrifying the Bay Area's Silicon Valley Rail Corridor|publisher=Mass Transit Magazine|date=21 April 2016|author=Tasha Bartholomew|access-date=29 March 2017}}</ref>}}
The Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) electrified the entire {{convert|51|mi|adj=on}} right-of-way owned by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB), which extends from the San Francisco terminus at [[San Francisco 4th and King Street
The second part of the CalMod project is a positive train control system, "CBOSS" (Communications Based Overlay Signal System), which is designed to meet federal safety requirements and as a condition set by the FRA to allow mixed traffic on the corridor. Key decisions in the development of CalMod can be traced back to the 1992 ''Feasibility Study'', which recommended 25 kV AC [[overhead line]]s;<ref name="Morrison Knudsen Corp. 1992 8"/> the 1998 ''Rapid Rail Study'', which recommended low-cost upgrades to first improve service and build demand;<ref name="Caltrain 1998 16"/> the 2006 ''Caltrain 2025'' proposal, which proposed the use of lightweight electric multiple units;<ref name=Project2025>{{cite report |url=http://www.caltrain.org/pdf/project2025/Project2025_REPORT_113006.pdf |title=Project 2025 |date=November 30, 2006 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=March 29, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071026221620/http://www.caltrain.org/pdf/project2025/Project2025_REPORT_113006.pdf |archive-date=October 26, 2007 |url-status=dead|pages=20–21}}</ref> the 2009 FRA waiver, which imposed certain conditions on mixed traffic;<ref>{{harvnb|Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board|2009|p=8}}</ref> and the 2012 memorandum of understanding with CHSRA, which resulted in a "blended" system to use the existing twin-track line as much as possible.<ref>{{harvnb|Caltrain|2012|pp=5–6}}</ref> The 2012 ''Blended Operations'' report concluded a new {{convert|8|mi|adj=on}} quad-track overtake section would allow Caltrain and CHSRA to coexist on the Peninsula Corridor with up to ten trains per peak hour: six Caltrain and four high-speed rail trains.<ref>{{harvnb|LTK Engineering|2012|pp=34–38}}</ref> Peak load on the system assuming twelve eight-EMU consists in each direction per hour was estimated to be approximately 75 MW, with the load generally remaining under 40-50 MW at any point.<ref>{{cite magazine |doi=10.1109/MVT.2009.932544 |author=Kneschke, Tristan A. |date=June 2009 |magazine=IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine |volume=4 |issue=2 |issn=1556-6072 |pages=44–52 |title=Caltrain electrification}} [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224468863_Caltrain_electrification alternate ResearchGate link with PDF]</ref>
Line 239 ⟶ 236:
|auto-caption=1
}}
Power is supplied to the trains through an [[overhead line|overhead contact system]] (OCS), consisting of a messenger wire, which assumes a
The [[25 kV AC railway electrification#2 x 25 kV autotransformer system|2×25 kV autotransformer electrification system]] includes a third energized parallel negative feeder wire which helps control [[electromagnetic field]] propagation.<ref name=DEIR-14-ch2 /><ref name=HSR-Sibal>{{cite report |url=http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/eir_memos/Proj_Guidelines_TM3_1_1_1R02.pdf |title=Technical Memorandum: Traction Power 2x25 kV Autotransformer Feed Type Electrification System & System Voltages, TM 3.1.1.1 |date=April 2010 |author=Sibal, Vinod |publisher=California High-Speed Rail Authority |access-date=14 June 2018}}</ref> The feeder wire is electrified at the same voltage and frequency, but is shifted 180° out of phase so the voltage difference between the contact wire and the feeder wire is always 50kV.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M169/K717/169717211.docx |title=Resolution SED-2 adopting safety requirements governing the design, construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of the 25 kV AC (Alternating Current) railroad electrification system of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) on the San Francisco Peninsula Rail Corridor |date=10 November 2016 |publisher={{DOClink}} Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Electric Safety and Reliability Branch, Safety and Enforcement Division |access-date=14 June 2018}}</ref> The choice of a 2×25 kV autotransformer system means more traction power facilities are required in total, but also requires fewer traction power substations.<ref name=HSR-Sibal />
Line 267 ⟶ 264:
===Specific modifications===
The Santa Clara Drill track, an existing maintenance track approximately {{convert|1.5|mi}} long from CEMOF to Santa Clara station, was converted to an electrified test track.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/Caltrain_Construction_NSJ-FACT_15Mar_Final.pdf |title=San Jose Traction Power Substation and Test Track Fact Sheet |date=March 2018 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=5 June 2019 |archive-date=June 5, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190605164443/https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/Caltrain_Construction_NSJ-FACT_15Mar_Final.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> Testing is anticipated to take place during the daytime between late 2019 and spring 2022.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/PCEP_Community_Presentation_UNSCC_1.8.19_Final.pdf#page=32 |title=Caltrain Electrification Update: Presentation to the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County |date=January 9, 2019 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=5 June 2019 |archive-date=October 9, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211009191526/https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/PCEP_Community_Presentation_UNSCC_1.8.19_Final.pdf#page=32 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The rehabilitation of Santa Clara Drill track began in February 2018.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/Caltrain-Test-Track-Postcard.pdf |title=Caltrain Test Track postcard |date=January 2018 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=5 June 2019 |archive-date=June 5, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190605164442/https://calmod.org/wp-content/uploads/Caltrain-Test-Track-Postcard.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> In April 2019, the anticipated completion date for the test track was in May 2020
The four tunnels originally constructed for the Bayshore Cutoff were modified to accommodate overhead wires.<ref name=PCEP-Q4-15 /> The tunnel lining was notched at the crown to allow clearance under the wire for freight trains, which mainly removes [[shotcrete]] placed in 2004, but some of the historical brick lining was removed as part of the tunnel modification work. In addition, up to {{convert|21|in}} of the decorative stone portal was removed. In the FEIR, PCJPB noted they may exercise the option to lower tracks to minimize tunnel notching.<ref>{{cite report |chapter-url=http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/FEIR/3.4+Cultural.pdf |title=Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project, Final Environmental Impact Report |date=December 2014 |chapter=3.4: Cultural Resources |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=13 August 2018 |archive-date=May 14, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200514054241/http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain%20Modernization%20Program/FEIR/3.4%20Cultural.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>{{rp|3.4-19 to -21}} The tunnel notching work was performed during weekends, so service between Bayshore and 4th and King was replaced by buses starting on October 6, 2018, with a planned "late Spring 2019" resumption.<ref name=PCEP-Q4-15>{{cite web |url=http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Presentations/2018/2018-08-02+PCEP+Quarter+report.pdf |title=Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project, Q4 Quarterly Update #15 (April 1 – June 30, 2018) |date=2 August 2018 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=10 August 2018 |archive-date=August 1, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180801164108/http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Presentations/2018/2018-08-02+PCEP+Quarter+report.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/newsletterandnotices/Weekend_SF_Caltrain_Closure_Oct__6__2018___Late_Spring_2019.html |title=Weekend SF Caltrain Closure Oct. 6, 2018 – Late Spring 2019 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=25 September 2018 |archive-date=September 25, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180925180736/http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/newsletterandnotices/Weekend_SF_Caltrain_Closure_Oct__6__2018___Late_Spring_2019.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Line 282 ⟶ 279:
===Environmental effects===
Replacing the diesel locomotives with electric multiple units is expected to reduce air pollution and noise.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Swan|first=Rachel|date=2017-11-27|title=Some Mission Bay neighbors fuming over Caltrain's diesel dust|url=https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Some-Mission-Bay-neighbors-fuming-over-12383764.php|access-date=2022-02-04|website=San Francisco Chronicle|language=en-US}}</ref> The reduced air pollution would improve the health of [[El Palo Alto]], a coastal redwood tree
▲Replacing the diesel locomotives with electric multiple units is expected to reduce air pollution and noise.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Swan|first=Rachel|date=2017-11-27|title=Some Mission Bay neighbors fuming over Caltrain's diesel dust|url=https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Some-Mission-Bay-neighbors-fuming-over-12383764.php|access-date=2022-02-04|website=San Francisco Chronicle|language=en-US}}</ref> The reduced air pollution would improve the health of [[El Palo Alto]], a coastal redwood tree that stands about {{convert|25|ft}} away from the Caltrain tracks and lends its name to [[Palo Alto, California|Palo Alto]]. Coal soot and [[diesel exhaust]] is presumed to have killed parts of the tree's crown since the 19th century.<ref>{{cite news|title=The Unlikely Survival of the 1,081-Year-Old Tree That Gave Palo Alto Its Name|first=Jim|last=Robbins|work=[[The New York Times]]|date=June 26, 2021|access-date=June 26, 2021|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/26/us/palo-alto-redwood.html}}</ref>
===Rolling stock===
Line 324 ⟶ 319:
| {{convert|6700|hp|disp=br()|abbr=on}}
| {{convert|5000|kW|hp|disp=br()|order=flip|abbr=on}}{{efn|Continuous rated power. Maximum power is {{convert|6400|kW|hp|order=flip|abbr=on}}.}}
| {{convert|0|–|2000|hp|disp=br()|abbr=on}}{{efn|name=Power|Only
| {{convert|
|-
! Starting<br />[[Tractive effort#Rail vehicles|tractive effort]]
Line 333 ⟶ 328:
| {{convert|72000|lbf|disp=br()|abbr=on}}
| N/A{{efn|name=Power}}
| {{convert|
|-
! References
Line 340 ⟶ 335:
|<ref>{{cite report |url=http://sonic.net/~mly/Caltrain-Electrification/2000-08-Rolling-Stock-Draft/4.pdf|title=Assessment of Electrically Powered Rolling Stock Equipment |section=Section 4: Electric Rolling Stock Equipment Power|page=7|author1=Raul V. Bravo and Associates |author2=Parsons Transportation Group |date=August 2000 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=May 23, 2017}}</ref>
|<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/sitecollectiondocuments/en/rail-solutions/locomotives/customspecific-solutions/amtrak-acs64-en.pdf |title=Amtrak Cities Sprinter ACS-64 Electric Locomotive |publisher=Siemens Mobility |access-date=18 January 2019 |archive-date=January 19, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190119121213/https://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/SiteCollectionDocuments/en/rail-solutions/locomotives/customspecific-solutions/amtrak-acs64-en.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>
| colspan=2 |<ref name=StadlerData>{{cite web|title=KISS Double-Decker Electric Multiple Unit EMU for Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (CALTRAIN), California, USA|url=https://www.stadlerrail.com/media/pdf/kcal0716us.pdf |access-date=October 16, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161006171237/https://wwwstadlerrailcom-live-01e96f7.s3-eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/filer_public/21/81/21816a39-9448-4b8a-8f2f-3811c6ee8006/kcal0716us.pdf |archive-date=October 6, 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=Stadler7>{{cite web |url=https://www.stadlerrail.com/media/pdf/kcal0220e_us.pdf |title=KISS Double-Decker Electric Multiple Unit EMU for Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (CALTRAIN), California, USA [7-EMU consist] |publisher=Stadler Rail Group |access-date=March 29, 2021}}</ref><ref name=Stadler2023>{{cite web |url=https://stadlerrail.com/media/pdf/kcal0823e_us.pdf |title=KISS double-decker electric multiple unit EMU for Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (CALTRAIN), California, USA [7-EMU consist] |publisher=Stadler Rail Group |date=August 2023 |access-date=October 17, 2024}}</ref>
|}
Line 351 ⟶ 346:
[[File:Caltrain EMU interior upper deck.jpg|thumb|The interior of the upper deck of a Caltrain Stadler KISS.]]
}}
The Stadler KISS double-decker EMU that Caltrain ordered are compliant with the [[Federal Railroad Administration|FRA]] alternative Tier-I crash-worthiness standard.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://rollingstockworld.com/passenger-cars/caltrain-introduces-the-kiss-double-deck-emus-by-stadler-for-california/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230604224222/https://rollingstockworld.com/passenger-cars/caltrain-introduces-the-kiss-double-deck-emus-by-stadler-for-california/ |archive-date=June 4, 2023 |url-status=live |title=Caltrain introduces the KISS double-deck EMUs by Stadler for California |publisher=Rolling Stock World |date=November 9, 2022}}</ref> Under the alternative standard, it has Crash Energy Management (CEM) features which allow parts of the EMU to collapse whilst keeping the passenger seating area intact in the event of collision, instead of relying on pure structural strength as in the traditional Tier-I standard.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/90/TR_RSAC_Report_final_2.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241130180117/https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/90/TR_RSAC_Report_final_2.pdf |archive-date=November 30, 2024 |url-status=live |title=Technical Criteria and Procedures for Evaluating the Crashworthiness and Occupant Protection Performance of Alternatively Designed Passenger Rail Equipment for Use in Tier I Service |publisher=U.S. Department of Transportation |date=October 2011 |pp=22-23}}</ref> The implementation of the alternative Tier-I standard results in a lighter train that will save energy and track maintenance cost. Coupled with the positive train control system that is being installed on the Caltrain line, Caltrain KISS trains will be allowed to operate in mixed traffic with heavier trains, such as Amtrak passenger trains and Union Pacific freight trains, instead of the temporal separation required in the 2009 waiver.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/intercity/for-caltrain-16-kisses-from-stadler-but-no-flirts/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240530000057/https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/intercity/for-caltrain-16-kisses-from-stadler-but-no-flirts/ |archive-date=May 30, 2024 |url-status=live |title=For Caltrain, 16 KISSes from Stadler (but no FLIRTs) |first=William C. |last=Vantuono |publisher=Railway Age |date=August 16, 2016}}</ref>
Because the existing Caltrain platforms are at a different [[railway platform height|height]] compared to proposed high-speed rail vehicles, the EMU trains will be equipped with doors at two heights, at {{convert|22|in|adj=on}} and {{convert|50.5|in|adj=on}} above-top-of-rail, allowing Caltrain to eventually transition from the existing {{convert|8|in|adj=on}} low platforms to CHSRA-compatible high platforms, enabling unassisted boarding of all passengers as specified by the [[Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990]].<ref name=StadlerData />
Line 380 ⟶ 375:
|}
In January 2018, PCJPB applied for $631.5 million in state funds for the Electrification Expansion Project (EEP), part of which would be used to exercise the option to purchase an additional 96 EMUs at a cost of $600M. The existing funding for PCEP includes the purchase of 96 EMUs, which would displace 75% of the current diesel-hauled passenger trains from the Peninsula Corridor. The additional funds requested for EEP would bring the electric fleet to 192 EMUs, enabling Caltrain to displace all diesel passenger locomotives between San Francisco and Tamien with a fleet of 24 8-EMU consists. $11.5M of the request would be used for station improvements: $8M to expand certain platforms to accommodate 8-EMU trains and $3.5M to increase secure bicycle storage. An additional $14M would be used to implement on-board WiFi for passengers. The remaining $6M would be used to support planning and policies along the Peninsula Corridor.<ref name=2018-TIRCP>{{cite web |url=http://www.tillier.net/stuff/caltrain/Caltrain_TIRCP_Application_Jan_2018.pdf |title=2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program Application for Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion |date=12 January 2018 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |access-date=31 January 2018}}</ref> The
{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible collapsed floatright" style="width:20em; text-align:right; font-size:80%;"
Line 433 ⟶ 428:
{{refbegin}}
*{{cite report |url=http://bayrailalliance.org/files/library/Caltrain_RRP_draft.pdf |title=Draft Caltrain Rapid Rail Study |author1=Caltrain |author2=STV Incorporated |date=October 1, 1998 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |ref={{harvid|Caltrain|1998}} }}
*{{cite report|url=http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/Bay+Area+HSR+Early+Investment+MOU-+JPB+Board+Resolution+2012.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130119014325/http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/Bay+Area+HSR+Early+Investment+MOU-+JPB+Board+Resolution+2012.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 19, 2013|title=Authorizing Approval of the High-Speed Rail Early Investment Strategy for a Blended System, Memorandum of Understanding|publisher=Caltrain|date=May 3, 2012|ref={{harvid|Caltrain|2012}}
*{{cite report|url=http://www.caltrain.com/projectsplans/CaltrainModernization/Modernization/PeninsulaCorridorElectrificationProject/PCEP_FEIR_2014.html|title=Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)|publisher=Caltrain|date=January 2015|ref={{harvid|Caltrain|2015}}|access-date=April 4, 2017|archive-date=May 7, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160507055222/http://www.caltrain.com/projectsplans/CaltrainModernization/Modernization/PeninsulaCorridorElectrificationProject/PCEP_FEIR_2014.html|url-status=dead}}
*{{cite report |url=http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/Final-Caltrain-California+HSR+Blended+Operations+Analysis.pdf |title=Caltrain/California HSR Blended Operations Analysis |author=LTK Engineering Services |date=March 2012 |publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board |ref={{harvid|LTK Engineering|2012}} |access-date=April 6, 2017 |archive-date=November 6, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141106225751/http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/Final-Caltrain-California+HSR+Blended+Operations+Analysis.pdf |url-status=dead }}
*{{cite report |url=http://bayrailalliance.org/files/library/Caltrans_feasibility_study_of_electrification.pdf |title=Feasibility Study for Electrifying the Caltrain/PCS Railroad |author=Morrison Knudsen Corporation |publisher=[[California Department of Transportation]] |date=October 1992 |ref={{harvid|Morrison Knudsen Corp.|1992}} }}
*{{cite report|url=http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/FRA+Waiver+2009/Caltrain+Mixed+Traffic+Request.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140701185415/http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/FRA+Waiver+2009/Caltrain+Mixed+Traffic+Request.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=July 1, 2014|title=Petition of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board/Caltrain for Approval of Mixed-Use and Waiver of Certain FRA Regulations|publisher=Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board|date=December 2009|ref={{harvid|Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board|2009}}
{{refend}}
Line 458 ⟶ 453:
[[Category:25 kV AC railway electrification]]
[[Category:Electric railways in California]]
[[Category:Railway electrification in the United States]]
| |||