USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

An un-cataloged item [C01-00052] from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
An un-cataloged item C01-00052 from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications USF.
Physical Description:
Book

Subjects

Genre:
letter   ( marcgt )

Notes

General Note:
Full cataloging of this resource is underway and will replace this temporary record when complete.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - C01-00052
usfldc handle - c1.52
System ID:
SFS0032174:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00052
2 USFLDC DOI
0 245
[An un-cataloged item [C01-00052] from Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].]
500
Full cataloging of this resource is underway and will replace this temporary record when complete.
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF]
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.52



PAGE 1

Miami -Dade Transit Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Phas e II M etromo ver & Operational Review Final R e por t This research was conducted pursuant to an intcrlocal agree m ent be t ween M i ami-Dade T r ansit and the Center for U rban T rans p orta tion Research The report was prepared by: Jan e t l. Davis S t ephen L. R ei c h Center for U rban T ransporta ti on Research University of South F lorida Co llege of E ngineering 4202 E Fowler Ave., C U T 100 Tampa F L 336 2 0-5375 April I 0, 2002

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Rail & J'dover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll -Metromover The p ro j ect t e am from the Center for U rb an Tran sportation Research included Janet L. Davis and Stephen L. Reich The team worked closely with a Mover Rehabilitation Task Force made up of Agency Rail D i vision personnel in cluding Hannie Woodson (Chair), Danny Wilson, George Pard e e, W illia m Truss, Gregory Robinson, B u d Butch e r, C olleen Juli us Syl vester Jo h nson, and Cath y Lew i s. A special acknowledgmen t of the Rail Maintenance Contro l Divisio n is made for their s ignificant assistance i n assembling m u ch of the data required Page2 ofJ46

PAGE 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Purpose Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover The work was i ntended to assist Miami -Dade Transit (MDT ) in documenting its rail rehabili ta t i on ne eds and develop a plan to address th ose nee ds. The assessment included a rev i ew of the current condition of the Metrorail and Metromover systems, a comparison w i t h other transit properties' heavy rail and people mover systems, and a recommended plan o f action t o carry the Ag enc y forward into the next five years Special detail was devoted to the provis i ons of the labor agreements of the comparable tr ansit properties a s they rela t ed to contrac t ing for outside services and the recruitment, s election and advancement o f employe es. Specific attentio n was give n to those contrac t provisions res ulting from the provisions of Section 13(c ) of the Urban Mass Trans port ation Act of 1964. Project Schedule Phase of the project began on Ma rch 2 4 2000 and foc u sed on Metrorail. The Phase [ Fina l Report was compl eted on January 9, 2001. Phase II commenced 011 August 25 ,2000. Project Approach The approach to the projec t included the forma t ion of a Mover Rehabilitation Task Force composed of key personne l w i thi n MDT in add ition to the project t eam S t atus reports and presentation of data collected to dat e occurred monthly. FT A Sect i on 1 5 data for Miami-Dade Tra ns it ( M DT) Metromover, J a ck sonville Skyway (Skywa y ) and Detroit Downtown People Mover (DDPM) were analyzed and reviewed. Numero u s Metromover a n d MDT staff wer e i n terviewed and all divisions were toured The initial p l an included site visits to other comparable people m over systems Given the disparity in size and sy stem type of the two sy s t ems for wh i c h Section 15 data were available, the Mover Task Fo rce determined site visi t s t o people mover systems emp l oying vehic les similar to MOT's would be more a pp r opriate. The priva t e concern con tra cted to operate and maintain those systems was concemed with proprietary information and, therefore, relucta n t to provide the project team with any i n fonnation that c ould be used to dctenninc operating expenses and manpower req uir ements Since those t wo factors were a t the heart of the purpose of the visi ts, th e p l an t o visit those properties was discarded. Similar vehic le data were not availab l e for comparison. PageJof/46

PAGE 4

Findings Comparison with Othe r Systems Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II J'4etromover After rev ie wing other people move r systems, CUTR determined that a system comparable to the Metromover system does not exist. Airport people-mover systems lack the complex switching and loop configurations employed at Metromover, and the two aut omated guideway systems in operation in Detroit, Michigan and J acksonville, Florida lack the bread th and scope of the Miami Metromover. DDPM the larger of the two systems, is less than hal f the size ofM etromover. Incident Analysis Metromover incidents occur in no consistent pattern-time of year, day of week, or time of day, although the time of occurrence has gradually grown to be earlier in the day. Although most deboardings occur at Government Center, this number appears to be disproportionately h igh because, when possible, passengers are transported to Government Center for deboarding to facilitate transfer to other destinations In 2000, Third Street Station and Bayfront Park Station show the highest numbers of deboardings w hil e most other stations either maintained 1998 and 1 999 levels or had very few deboardings Stations with the highest numbers of incidents are Government Center, College North Stat ion, Knight Center, Third Street S tation, and Omni Stat ion. College Bayside and Bayfront Park, which are not in c luded in this lis t, recorded high incidents during 1998 and 1 999. No apparent trends in terms of loops or high in c ide nt corridors were identified. There i s no indication that the Omni Recovery Technician response time is longer than response time for technicians at other locations. Response time for the Brickell Recovery Technician appeared to be the longest. Over ha l f of the time service was resumed in one minute or less, and 90 percent of the time, service was restored wi thi n ten minutes or less Page 4 of/46

PAGE 5

Pa ssenge r Boa rdings Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover The highest weekday and weekend boardings we r e reported at Go v ernment Ce n ter. Boardings at Bayfront Park followed Government Center on weekdays while Brickell Station boardings followed Government Center on weekends. Governmen t Center and Bayfro nt Park both serve majo r employment centers. Gov e rnm e nt C e nter and Brickell provide connections to M etromil. Hig h volume stations occur throughout the en t ire sy stem The c u rren t configuration of five trains per loop provi des short h e ad ways, frequent service, and meets current se rvic e needs. Metromover Ways ide Hi-cycle switches reqUJre m ore labor, more repans, and more overhaul than Jo-cycle switches. While th e Wayside docs show a n increased need for PM and repair labor hours, CUTR and Bombardier Transportation were consistent in their posi t ive analysis of the wayside condition which is supported by wh ere the technicians are spe n ding their maintenance t ime on vehicle s and not on the wayside. No matter what measure is applied in the wayside overhau l a "hot spot" that includes some combination of Switch l Switch 2 Switch 3, Swit ch 8 and Third Street Sta t ion is consistently i dentified as an area of h i gh need. For rail over h au l additional high need a reas out side of the "hot spot" include: Omni Station College North Station, a nd State Plaza Station Wh ile the h ot spo t is in t h e area of Switch I, from an overall system perspective, a corr idor from Governmen t Center t o College Nort h Station emerges not only for the total overhaul but also for the rail overhaul. Low rail overhaul costs i nclude d Freedom Tower Park We s t, Switch 1 2, Switch 13, Switch 17, Switch 52, Switch 53, Switc h 55, School Board, Switch 4, Rive r walk, Fifth Street, Eighth Street, Switch 7, Eleventh Street, Switch I 0, Bice n tenn i al Park Bayfront Park, and Switch 2 1 Twel v e of the nineteen low cost raiJ overhaul areas wer e l oca t ed on the extensions Metrom over Fleet Exp ansion of the Maintenance Shop was not commensurate with increase in need, w b en the fleet expa n ded from 12 to 29 vehicles. Vehicle reliability ha s improved since 1 995 Since FY 1996, veh ic le ava i lability has improved but is below the bigh recorded in FY 1994 Vehic l es average 350,000 m i les, with an average of 437,000 miles fo r Phase I vehicles and 283 ,000 miles for Phase 2 vehicles. While the average Phase I m i leage is higher during the Page 5 of/46

PAGE 6

Rail & 1'-1over Rehabilitation Reporr Phase II M etromover study period it was observed that Phas e 2 vehicles were accumulati n g mileage at a faster rate Metromover staff have already started a rotat i on program i nvolving only hi gh mil e age Phase 2 vehicles to exte n d their useful life Actual 2001 mileage increased at a rate of 13.8 percent rather than the 9 8 percent reflected in the mileage projections. Vehicle PMs, including G In spections are not onl y completed I 00 percent of t h e tim e but also are completed on time. The decline observed in vehicle repair labor hours coincides with an increase in G inspection a nd wayside PM and repair hours. During the study period, Phase 2 vehicles out perfonned Phase I vehicles Phase I vehicles s how not only a great e r range in mi les between failures but al s o a great e r inconsistency in performance between vehicles. While Phase 2 were unable to exceed the maximum miles between failures logged by some Phase I vehicles Phase 2 vehicles consistently achieved the Phase I minimum miles logged All 17 Phase 2 vehicles exceeded 400 miles between failures, while only 9 of 12 Phase 1 vehicles achieved that level. Mothballing a portion of the fleet reduced vehicle availability; however, recovery from mothball i ng was faster than Metrorail's recovery. Metromover was able to retum mothballed vehicles to service with minimal need for extended time in the shop No consistent pattern was observed regarding removal of vehicles from service Since 1998, the six most frequent vehicle malfunctions have remained the same with similar rates of frequency, and include: door, Automatic Train Operation, overspeed no depart power and no arrive. Malfunction of the door was tbc overwhelming leader Vehicle Mal f unctions accounted for 84 percent of all incidents in 1998, 80 percent of all incidents in 1999, and 79 percent of all incidents in 2000. The condition of the vehicles rated "fair" overall. Metromover Maintemmce Staff When the system expanded, Mctromover maintenance staffing did not mcrease commensurately with the increase in complexity added by the extensions As noted in the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report the hiring, selection and training processes current ly in place create hardships for the Rail Division, especially in Rail / Mover Maintenance The requirement to select "qualifiable" candidates erodes productivity Candidates withou t an aptitude for vehicle maintenance are recruited some candidates do not have the aptitude or sometimes the interest in the kind of work involved in their new positions Page 6 of 146

PAGE 7

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase 11 Metromover Turnover is exacerbated unnecessary movement results from lack of appropriate minimum qualifications Time for the development of job proficiency is lengthened Efficiency is impeded. The effects of the selection a n d promo t io n processes are particu l arly significant with the Metromover Maintenance Technician due to the broad scope of the technical requirem e nts of t he posi t ion. The promotion of employees based almost entirely on seniority is causing unnatural career movement in the agency contributing to high turnover and vacancy rates in "feeder" classifications while providing little scree n ing of aptitude for what i s in some cases a to t a l career change. Metromover's vacancy ra t e is l ower than the MDT overall vacancy rate. Staffing R e q uirements Metromover Maintenance Metromover is understaffed 19 -21 pos i tions based so l ely on the phys i cal growth of the system. Six additional Metromover Technicians arc required to operate the Metromover Componen t S h op during two shifts on a daily basis. Metromover Maintenance staffing needs include : 20 -22 additional Ma intenance Technicians, 4 5 additional Maintenance Superv i sors, a n d 1 Rail Car Cleane r Supervisor to meet the maintena n ce needs of the existing system a11d operate t he newly established Metr o mover Component Shop Track & Guideway (Metrorail & Metromover) Explore t he transfer of responsibil it y fo r the top of the MetroraiJ guideway i nspection to Tra n sit Engineering and consider contracting-out graffiti remova l and vegetation comrol. If respon s ib ility for t hese activities r emains within the jurisd i ction ofl"rack & Guideway, three additional Rail S t ructural Repairers are required. Comple t e a cos t analysis of contracting-out the I nsert Replacement Program versus comp leti ng it in-house. If it i s cost effective to complete the project inhouse additional staff required for the project inc l udes : two crews of one Rail Structure & Track Sup erv isor and six Track Repaire rs each, for a t otal of t wo sup e rv i sors and twelve repairers Incr ease d workloads within Rail Track and Structures dictate the need for four additional Track Equipment Operators, not only to operate equipment bu t also to maintain and repair equipment that is being used to a greater extent. The addition of one Track Shop Supervisor will provide continuous supervisory coverage for the Track Shop, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Rail Structure staff required to comp l ete Remedial Action Repons based on time i nterva l s estab l ished by the Florida Bridge Inspection Progmm total.s two Rail Structure & Track Supervisors and eight Rail Structural Repairers These t en additional positions Page 7 of/46

PAGE 8

Rail & M
PAGE 9

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover MOT's capital spending in 1994 ; t his percentage bas dropped to less than l% in both FY 1999 and F Y 2000. With a capital program of nearly $40 million, including $15 million for the Phase I vehicle midlife rehabilitation, MDT has made a significant commitment to ensuring the l o ng term via bility of Metromover If th is program comes to frui tion the system will be positioned well. T he current age of the system requires that this reinvestment take place. The projected capital, a s it now exists with the P hase I vehicle midlife addressed. leaves few capital requirements not covered for Metromover. Phase I Recommendations I n the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report, the project team indicated that a successful plan for the rehabilitation of Miami-Dade Transil's heavy rail system seemed contingent upon sev eral organizational and management issues. Although additional financial resources would be required, in the project team's opinion, add i tional resource s would not be maximized without some systemic changes. Following the Phase II review th e project team reaffirms these recommenda tions, which are summarized below along with a brief statement of t h e s tat us of the recommendations. The current process of contracting maintenance work to outside vendors needs to be revisited. STA1VS. MDT has estab lis hed dialogue with the Tra nsit Workers U nion concerning procurement of work through contract. Component and equipment contractS have been awarded to facil itate timely repatrs. MDT established a new Metromover Component Shop based on a cost-benefit analysis of contracted-out versus in-house repair. The Agency sho uld revisit the present method of estab l ishing that a candidate is "qualifiab le" and should take an active ro le in providing an environment tha t reward s the professional development of the workforce. STATUS: MDT established a 13( c) Strategic Task Force and developed a plan to improve recntitment and training processes that included the participat ion of the Transit Workers U nion. The Ag e ncy should establish mechanisms that enco ura ge innovation and investment in the workplace. STATUS: MDT has brought together cross-functional groups t o a s sist in program planning Page 9of146

PAGE 10

and evaluation. Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If -Metromover The Agency should establish structure within the organization that provides consistency and continuity STATUS: MDT is taking advantage of the large amounts of data and information collected and has reformulated data analys is to identify trends MDT has established action plans to establish target goals and track perfonnance MDT should ensure that sufficient funding continues for enhanced vehicle maintenance activities and attempt to provide Met rorail with the capital infusion required to perform the rehabilitation activities mentio ned in this report. STATUS: The Office and Management and Budget has committed to pledging a portion of the loc al option gas tax to issue $140 million in bonds to fund the Metrorail and Metromover Rehabil i tation programs. The 2002 to 2007 capital program includes $119 million for the Metrorail vehicle rehabilitation beginning with planning and engineering funds in this fiscal year. Phase II Recommendations MDT should provide the addi t ional Me tromover Track & Guideway, and Rail Main t enance Contro l staff ident ifi ed in the report as well as the opera ting funds necessary to fund those positions. MDT should ensure that sufficient funding continues and hold the schedule on the Metromover Phase l vehicle midlife rehabilitation MDT should establish a universal location identification system map for the Metromover wayside to track in c i dents repairs, and maintenance. The system should be inte grated with the GIS component of the new computer system and all entities involved in any type of reporting conceming the wayside including Maintenance Central Control, and Contractors, should be requ i red to use the location identification system. Rail Maintenance Control should track this information and provide routine feedback to Metromover Maintenance regarding system trends and perfonnance. MDT should have Transit Engineering evaluate the area referred to in the report as the "hot spot" and investigate potential engineering or design solutions in this area to minimize maintenance costs. Page /Oof/46

PAGE 11

TABLE OF CONTENTS Rail & Mover Rehabilitatioll Report Phase ll Metr onwver LIS T OF FIGURES & TABLES ... .. ........ ... . .. . . .. ... .. .. .. .. .......... ... .. . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. 12 S ECTION II P HASE IIMET RO MOVER .. .... .. .. ....... . .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. ... ..... . .... 16 Introduction ... ... ..... ... .... ... .. ... ............. . ......... ...... .... ..... .................... ....... .................. .. ... ... ... ...... 16 Cha pter I S ystcm Overview .. .. ..... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .... .. . .. . ............... .... ... .. .. . .. .. .. 1 8 Chapter 2 Met romover Maintenance ... . ... ....... ..... .... . ....... . .. . .. .. ... .... . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .... 27 Me t ro mover Main t enance . ..... . ...... .. . .. ...... . ................... ..... ....... ........ .. ..... .. .. .. .. ...... .... 27 Metromover Vehicles .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. ............ .. ....... ......... ........ ..... .... .. ......... .. ........ .... 30 Metromover M ai ntenanc e Shop .... ....... . .. .. .. ..... .... .. ...... .. ...... . ..... . .... .. ... .. ........................ 33 Metromover Vehicle Maintenance ............... .. .. .. .. ............................. ..... .... .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... 34 Metromover Ways ide Mainte n ance ..... . .. ..... .. .. ..... .... .. .... ............... ......... ..... ... .... ..... ...... 38 Metromover Experience and Classifica t ion ............................. ............. ......... ..................... 41 M etromo ver Vehic le A v ail ability ..... ..... .. .. ........... .. ........ ..... ....... ..... .... .. ........ .. .. .. .. ...... 43 Metro mo v e r Vehicle Performance ..... ...... ...... ............. .. ....... .. ..... .... .... ................................ .. 5 1 M etromover Ve h ic l e Allocat ion .... . .. .... ... ............ .. .. .. .. . ..... .. .. .. ........... ..... .. .. ... .. .. ........ 66 Me tro mover Veh i c le Con dition ......... ..... .. ... .......... .... .. .. .. ..... .. .............. ...... ...... ........ ...... 69 Me trom over Wayside Condit ion .... ............ .. .... .................... .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... ........ ......... .. ... 76 Met r omover Waysid e Mainte n ance a nd Repair ......... .. ........... ... ........ .. .. .... .... .. ..... .. .. ........ 7 9 Mctromover Vacancy Rates .. . . .. .. ........... .... . .. ..... ............ ..... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .... .. ... .. .......... 104 Metromover Manpower Requiremen t s .. .. .. ..... .. .. ........ .. .. .... ..... .. ...... ..... .... .. ............ . I 04 Chapter 3 -Financial ............. .... .... ................ ........ . . ... ..... ... ... ........ ...... ..... .... ... .... ... ...... .... . l iS Recent H i story . .. ...... ........ ....... ..... ... ...... ... ... ...... . ..... ...... ... ... ... ... .. ..... ........... . ...... ..... .. 115 Future Outlook ... ...... .. ..... ....... ............... ..... .............................. .......... ......... .. ............ ...... I 1 9 SECTI ON Ill: OPERATIONAL REVIEW ...... .. ....... ............... .. .. ............................ ...... ....... .. 1 26 Chapter I -Track & G u idewa y Staffing .. .. .. .. ......... .. .... .. ...... ... .. ...... ... ... .. ............. .. ........ ..... 1 26 Rail Structu r e .. .. ......... .. .. .. . .......... .. ..... .. .. ..... ........ ....... .. ...... ................. .. .. .. .... .. ......... 126 Rail Track . ...... . .... .................... .... ....... . ............. ......................... ...... ... ...... .................. ..... 128 Rail Shop .. .. .. .. ........ ..... .. ......... . ............ ......... .. ....................... .. ........ .. ........... ... ... ........ 129 Labor Hours by Dcpa (tment ....... ................. ...... .. ... ......... .... .. .. ........... ... .. .. .... .. ................. 1 3 1 Vacancy Rate s . ..... . .. .. . ...... . .. .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. .. .. ..... ...... ... . .. ..... ................ ...................... 132 Sys tem Expansion . .. .. ..... . .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. ..... ..... ... .......... .......... .. ....... .. .. ...... ..... ..... .. ... 135 Curren t S t atus ...... ........... .. ..... .... .. ....... .. ........................ ...... .............................................. 135 Ma n power Requir e ments ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. ..... .......... .. .. ....... .... .. ...................... . 135 Chapter 2 Rail M ainte nanc e Contro l Manpower Needs ............. .. ... .. .... ........ .. ....... ............ 139 Maintenance Control Respons i bilities . .. ................. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ..... ... ....... .. ..... .. .......... .... 1 4 0 Maintenance Contro l Organization .. .. .................................. .. ........ ... ....... .... ................. .. 142 Personnel Needs .............. .... ........ .. . ..... .. . .. .... ........ .. .. ........ .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ..... ........... . .. 146 Page II of 146

PAGE 12

Rail & \1over Reporl Phase II -Me1romover LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES Tab l e I Tabl e 2 Table 3 Tab le 4 Figure I Figur e 2 Table 5 F igur e 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Table 6 Ta ble 7 Table 8 Table 9 T able 10 Ta b le II Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 1 8 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure I 0 Tab l e 19 Table 20 Table 2 1 Figure I I Table 2 2 Table 23 Table 24 Tab le25 Figure 12 Figure 1 3 F igure 14 F igur e 15 Figure 16 Figure 1 7 F igu re 18 Adtranz System C o m p arison .. .... .... .. ... . .... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. . ..... . ..... .. .................... .. .. .... 19 Compari son of Sel ected Peer Charac t eristics, 1998 .... .... ............................. .......... ... 20 Peer Mover Systems .. ..... ....... .... .......... .. .... .... .. .. .... ....... ..... .... ... ................ .. ........ .. ...... 2 1 Annual V ehicle Miles Per VOMSIV AMS .. .. .... . .. .. ......... .. .... .. .... .......... .............. ...... 2 1 Pas senger Miles per Di rectional Mile ...... .. .. ... .............. .. .... .. ...... .. ......... .. ............ .... 22 Total Mover Vehicles per Mile .......... ........ ................ ........ .... ...... .... .... .. .. ................ 22 Mover Percentages of Sys tem Totals .... ............... .. ........... ... ........ .. ....... ......... ... ... . 23 Mover Capital as a Percentage ofTotal Ca p it al .. .. .. .... .. .......... .. .... .. ..... ....... ............ 23 Metromover Operating as a Percentag e of MDT Operating .... .. .. .... ........ ...... .. .. .. ...... 2 4 Average Annua l V ehicle Maintenance C ost per VOMS ................... ................. ..... 24 Average Annu al V e h icle Ma i ntena nce C o st per VAMS .. .. ........ .. ............................ 25 T ota l Service Interruptions, M etromover. .... ................. .. ..... ...... .. ......... .. ........ .. ....... 25 To tal Service Interruptions and Annual Passenge r Miles .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. ........... 26 R ail/Mover Maintenanc e Divi s ion .. .. .. .. .... .. .. ... ........................... ..... ...... .. .. .... ..... .. 2 7 Ori gi nal and Expanded System C ompar iso n ........... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. ...... .. ..... 29 M e tromover Main tenance Staff .... .. .. .......... .. ............. .. . .. .. .. ....... ...... ..... ..... .... .. .. . 30 M etr omover M ilea ge by Ve hi cle Type ........... ........ ...................... .. .......... ......... ........ 33 P rev e ntative Mai ntenance Inspections .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... ..................... .. ..... . .... .. .. . 35 In spection Labor Ho urs ..... .............. .................... ... ................. .. ........ .. .. .. .. . ........ 35 Repa ir Labo r Hours ..... ......... .. .. . ...... .. .. ....... ..... .. .. .... .. .. ..... .. ..................... .... .. 36 Labo r H ours by Job T ype, 199 4-1 999 .. .... .............. .. ........................... ............ ...... .. 37 Wayside P M Labo r Hours ..... ...... . .. ... ... . .... .... .... ... .... .. . .. .. .. .. . ...... .... ...... .... .. ...... 39 Wayside Repai r Labo r Hours .................... .. .. .................... .. ........... .. .. ...... .. ........ .. ..... 40 Metromover Positions ...... .. .. .. .. ............. .. .. .... .. .. ................. ............. .. .. .. . . .... .. 40 I nspe ction & Maintenance Hours per V OMS .. .. .... .. ......... .. .. .. .................... .. ......... 41 Former Classifi c a tion Pe rcentag e of Total.. ........... ....... .. ............... ... ......................... 4 2 Percent ofTecl mic ian s wi th Technician/Electrician Experi e nce ............ .. .. .... .. .. ...... 42 Metromov e r V chicle A vai l a bi I ity .. .. .. ........... .. .............. ........... ......... .. .... ........ ..... 43 Operating Spare Ratios .......... .. .... .. .... .. .. ....... .... ................................. .................. .. .. 44 Total Operating Expens e s per VOMS .............. .. ... .. .... .................... .. .. .... .......... .. ..... 44 Total Operating Exp enses per YAMS .. ........................... .. ...... ........ .. .. ............... .... .. 45 Labor Hours fo r Insp ection & Maintenance ....... ..... ..... ..... ........... ... ............ .. ............ 45 Inspection & M a intenance Hours per VAMS ... .. ........ ........ ........ ...... .. .............. .... .... 46 Days Shopped-S toredAvailable .. .. .. ............................. .. ....... ... .. .... ................ .. 4 6 Phase I Vehicle Availa b ility .......... ....... .... .. ...................................... .. .. .... ........... .. 4 7 Phase 2 Veh i cle Availability .... .. ............................. ......................... ............ ........... 4 7 Mean M i le s Between Failure s by Pha se .. .... ............. .. ........... .... .. .... .. ...... .... ......... .. 4 8 Mean Miles Be t ween fai IU(C$ by Vehicle .... ..... ............. .. ....... .. .... .. ............... ..... .... 49 A v erage Annual Mover Veh ic le Miles ................ .. .... ...... .. .... .. .......... .. ................ .... 50 Annual Mileage vs. Mean Miles Be t we en Failures ................... .. .... ........ .. .. ..... .. ... .. 51 Incide nts by Y e ar .. .. ....... .. .... .... ........ .. .. ..... .. .. .. . .. ........ . .. ................... . .. .. ... 52 Incide n t s by Month ...... .......................... .... ..... .. .. ........... ........ .. ...... ... .. .. ...... ........ .... 53 Inc ide nts by Day of Week as a Pe r centage o f Tota l ................... .. ....... .... ........ .. ....... 53 Page 1 2 of' 146

PAGE 13

Figure 19 Tab le26 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Tab l e 27 Figure 34 Table 28 T able 29 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 F i gure 38 F i gure 39 Table 30 Table 31 Table 32 Table 33 Tab l e 34 Tabl e 3 5 Figure 40 Figu re 41 Figure 42 Table 36 Figure 43 Figure44 Figure 45 Figure 46 Table 3 7 Figure47 Tab le 38 Figure48 F igur e 49 Figure 50 Figure 51 Rail & Mover Reh abilitation Report Phase II Incidents by Day of Week ..... ... .. .. .. .. ..... .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. ............ .. .. .. . . 54 Incidents by Ti me o f Day . . .... .. .. .... .. ...... ... .... .. ... ............ .. . ..... .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. .. 5 5 Inc id ents by Loop Affected . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... . .. .. .. . . .. .. .............................. .. 56 Minutes of Delay . .. .. .. .. ........ .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . ... .. .. .. .. . . . ...... .. .. . . . . . .. .. .. ..... . .. . 5 7 N umber of Vehicles Held at Station .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. . 57 Pe rce ntage o f Total Removals from Service . .. . . .... ........ .. .... .. ..... ............. .. .. .. 58 Vehicles R em oved from and Retained in Servi c e . . .... . .. . .... .. .. ........... ........ .. .. .. 58 Deboardings by Stat ion .. .. . .. .. ... . .. .... .......... .... .. .. . .. ..... . .. .. ............ . ..... ............ .. 59 Natu r e of Malfu n cti on .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . .. ..... .. .. . . . .. .. ... .. ..... . . ..... .. ............ . 60 Cause of Delay .......... .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. .... ... ..... .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. ...... .. ...... . . .. 61 Incid ents by Vehicle .. ............... .... ...... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .... .. .. .. .. . .. .. .... .... .. . .. . .. . 61 Loca t ion of Incident .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. ....... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 62 High Inciden t L ocation s in FY 2000 . .. .. .. . . .. . . .. .. .. .. ... . .. . .. . . ... .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. 63 Recovery Tec hni cian Response Time .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 65 Time Required t o R e s u me Service .. .. .. .. .... .. ...... .. ............. ..... .. .. .. ............ ........ .. . 66 Percentage ofFY 2001 Total Boardings by Station .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 67 FY 200 1 Boardings by Station by Day .... . ... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . ...... .... . .. .. . .. .. .. .... .. 68 Stations Ranked by Num ber of Boardings, FY 200 .. . .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. ....... . . ..... .. .. 69 Defini tions of Mover Vehicle Con d itio n s .... ..... .. .. . . .. .. .. .. . .... .... .. .. ..... . .. . ........ 70 Ratings of Mover Vehicl e System Condi tions ...... ..... . .... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . 7 1 Mover Vehicle Mileage, Projected 2001 -200 5 .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 72 Phase 1 Mover Vehicle Mileage Growth . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .............. .. ... .............. ... 73 Phase 2 Move r Vehicle Mileage Growth . .... .. .. . . ........ .. .. .. . .. .... ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 74 Normalized Phase 1 Mo ver Vehicle Mi lea g e . .. .. .. .. ..... ..... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .... .. . ....... 75 Normalized Phase 2 Mover Veh icl e Mileage . .. .. .. ....... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. 75 Definitions of Mover Power Distribution Conditions ...... .. .. .. .. .... .. .... ........ .. .. .. ..... 77 D efmi tion s of Mover S y stem Wide Cont rol s Cond it ions .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .... .... .. . ...... 77 Definitions oH.,lover S tru ctu re Conditions . ........... . .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .... 77 Rati n gs of Mover Wayside Cond itions . .... .. ... . ........ . ... .. .. .. .. . . ... . .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. 7 8 Switches by Area .. . ..... .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. ..... ..... . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 80 Switch PM Repair, and Overhaul Labor Hours ...... .... .. .. .. . .. . .... . .. . .... .... .. . ..... 81 Switch PM by Area .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. . ....... .. .. . . .. .. . ............ ..... . 82 Switch Repair Labo r Hou rs ..... .. .. .. .... ... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . ... ..... .. .... .... .. ........ .. .. .... 82 Hi-Cycle and Lo-Cy c le Switch es Repair H ours .. .. .. .... ..... .... .. . .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. 83 Average To t al Labor H ours by Area ... .. .... .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .... ....... . .. .. ......... .. . .. .. . . 84 FY 1999 Average Labor Hours per Switc h . ...... ....... . .. .. .. ......... . .. . .. . .. .. .. . . ... 8 5 FY 2000 Average La bor Hours per Switch .. .. ...... . .. .. .. ...................... ........... .. . .... 85 FY 1999 Labor Hours by Area ..... ..... .. ...... .... .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. ........... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 86 FY 200 0 Labor Hours by Area . .. .. .. . .......... .. .. . .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. 86 Wayside Overhaul by F i sca l Year .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. ............ .. . .... .. .. .. . .. .. ..... 87 Total Overhau l Cost by Fiscal Y ea r. .. .. .. .... ... ....... ...... ........ ........ . .. .... .... ..... .. ..... .. 88 Wayside Overhaul by C ategory .. .. .. ..... . .... ..... .. . . .. . ....... . .. .. .... .. ..... .. .. .. .. ....... 88 Pe rcentage o f Overh aul Program by Category .. .... .. .. ... .. .. .... ..... .. . .. .. .. ..... .. .. 89 Overh aul Program-Work Order% of Total .. ... . .. .. . ..... .. .. ... .. .... . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. ..... . 89 Overhaul Program Parts Cost% ofTotal . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 90 Overhaul ProgramLabor Hours% ofTotal... .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. ........... . .. . ......... .. .... 90 Page/3 of 146

PAGE 14

Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54 Figure 55 Figure 56 Figure 57 Figure 58 Figure 59 Figure 60 Figure 61 F i gure 62 Table 39 Figure 63 Table 40 Table 41 Table 42 Table 43 Table 44 Table 45 Table 46 Table 4 7 Table 48 Table 49 Tab l e 50 Table 51 Figure 64 Figure 65 Figure 66 Figure 67 Figure 68 Fig ure 69 F igur e 70 Figure 71 F i gure 72 Figure 7 3 Figure 74 Table 52 Figure 75 Figure 76 Table 53 Table 54 Table 55 Table 56 Table 57 Table 58 Table 59 Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover Overhaul Program -Pans & Labor Costs% ofTotal .. . ........ .. .. . .. .. ..... . .. .. .. .. .. ... 90 Total Over hau l Costs Top Tern Locations .. .. .. . . .. ..... .. .. .... .. . .... .... ...... ... . .. . . 92 T otal Overhaul Work OrdersTop Tem Locations .......... .. .... ........ .............. .. .......... 93 Total Overhaul Parts Costs Top Ten Loc ations ........ .. .................................... .... .... 94 Total Overhaul Labor Hours Top Ten L ocations .......................... .. ........ .. ........... .. 95 Total Rail Costs-Top Ten Locations .... .. .................... .. .... .... ............................ .. ..... 96 Total Rail Work OrdersTop Ten Locations .................................................. .. .... .. 97 Total Rail Parts Cost Top Ten Locations .... .. .......................................................... 98 Total Rail Labor Hours-Top Ten Locations .... .. ................ .. .................................. .. 99 Overhau l vs. Rail Total Costs .... .............. .................................... .. ...... ...... ........ .. .... I 00 Overhaul vs Rail Labor Hours .............................. .. .... .. .... .. .......... .. ... .. ............ ...... I 0 I Rail Overhaul Locations by Fiscal Year ...... ............ .. .. .. .. .. .............. .. .. .... .... ........ .... 102 Station Rail Overhaul Costs by Loop .................................................................. .. .. I 03 Metromover Vacancies and Vacancy Rates .................................. .. .................... ..... I 04 Rat io ofMetromover Technicians to Vehicle-s ........................................................ 105 Annual Labor Requirement, Sep teml>er 1992 .. .. .. ...... .. .... .... .................................... I 06 Revised Service Plan .. .. ..... .. ....... ....... .. .. ..... .. .. ... ..... ............ .. ... .. .. ....... ...... ... .. l 07 Metromover Service Pla n 20 0 1 .................................................. ....................... .... I 08 Metromover Servic.e Plan, 200 l Revised ........................................................ .... .. ... I 08 Metromover Technician Line Up ............................................................................ I 09 Manpower Requirement .. ........ .. ..... .. .... .. ............. ............. .. .. ....... .. .... .. .. .. ...... II 0 Mctromover Manpo wer Needs ................................ .... ........ .. .......... .. ................ .. .. .. Ill Metromover Technical and Supervisory Staff Requirements-System Growth ....... 112 Component Shop Savings ........................................................................................ 113 Metromover Technical/Supervisory Staff R equireme nts with Compone nt Shop .. 114 Metromover Operating Expenditures .............. .. ....................................................... 115 Metromover% Operating and% Rid ers hip .. .......... .... ................ .. .. .. .... .......... ........ 116 Operating Expenditures Growth ........ ................................................ ...... .... .... ........ 116 Metromover Operating Expenses Actual & Constant Dollars .......... .. ..................... 117 Metromover Capital Expenditures .. .... .. .. ... .. . ................... .. .. .... ........... ............. 118 Mctromover% Capital & % Ridership ........ ................ .................................... ........ 118 Metromover Funding% of Agenc y Total... .................................... .. .. .... .. .............. 119 MDT Operating Expenditures .. ................. ........ .... .. ....... . .. ........ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 120 Metromover Operating Expenditures .... .... ..... .. ...... ..... ....... .... ..... ......... ..... ..... .. .. 120 Metromover Operating Forecast .. .. .... ................ ...... .. .... .. .... .. .... ........................ .. .... 121 Capital Program Comparison 'Oito'06 vs. '02to '07 ...... .... .. .. .......................... .. .. 122 Metromover Capital Program Projects FY 2002-2007 .................... .. ...................... 123 Merromover Capital Expenditur e s ....... .... ..... .... ................... ........... .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. 124 Metromover Expenditures % of MDT Total... ................ .............. .......................... 125 Rail S t ructure Maintenance Staff .. .. .... ..... .... .. ... ..... .. .. .... . .. .. . .. ........................... 1 27 Rail Structure Labor Hours by Job Type ................................................................. 127 Rail Structure Labor Hours per Employee ........ .. ..................................................... 128 Rail Track Maintenance Staff ...... .. .. . ........ .............. ........... .. ...... .. ....... .. .. .. .... . 128 Rail Track & Guideway Labor Hours by Function .. .. .. .......... .. .... .. .. .. .... .................. 129 Rail Track Labor Hours p e r Employee ...................... .... .................. .. .... .. .... .. .......... 129 Rail Shop Positions ........ ............ .... .. .............................. .. ........ ........ .... ............ .. ... 130 Page 14 qf /46

PAGE 15

Table 60 Tab le 61 Table 62 Table 63 Ta ble 6 4 T able 65 T a b l e 66 T able 67 Table 68 Tab le 69 Ta b l e 70 T able 71 Table 72 Ta b le 73 Rail & Mover Reltabiliration Report Phase ll -Metromover Rail Shop Labor Hou r s b y Function, FY 1997 FY 2000 .. . .. . . ..... . ..... ..... ..... .... .. 130 Rail Shop Labor Hours .... .. .... .. .................... .. .... .. .............................. .. .. .. .... .. .. ........ 131 Rail Sh o p Hours per Employee .... .. ........................ .. .. .... ........................ .. ............ .. .. 131 Track & Guideway Labor Hours by Departme n t.. .. ........ .. .. .. .... .. .. ... .. .... ....... .. .... .. 132 Vacancy Rates . .. .. ..... .. .. ........... .. .. .. . .... ................ ......... ....... .. ..... .. ......... . .. ... 133 Overview of Vacancy Rates ............. .................. ...................................... .... .. .. .... 134 Track & Gui deway Manpower Recommendations ..... .. .. .. ..... .... .. ........................... 138 Ma i ntenance Contro l Staff ............ .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... ..... ..... .......... .... ..... .. .... ............. 139 Maintenance Control O r ganization .... . ... .... . ............ .... .... .. . .. .. .. .......... ........ .. .... 1 4 2 Revised Maintenance Control Organ i zation ...... ... ....... ...................... .. .. .. ..... .. .. .... 143 Proposed Maintenance Control O r ganization ...... .. ..... ...... ........... ........................ .. 144 A ll ocation of Tasks by Area ........ ..... .... .. .. ................... .............. .. .... .. .. .. .. ......... 1 45 Allocation of Main t enance Con t ro l Clerk P ositions ......... ........ .. ... .............. .. .. ...... 146 Sta ffi ng Recommendations .. ..... .. .. .... . .. ................ .. .. .. .. .... ... ........... .. .. .. .... .. 146 Page IS of/46

PAGE 16

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If Melromover SECTION II PHASE IIMETROMOVER Introduction Miami-Dade Transi t (MDT) entered into an agreemen t wi th the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University o f South F l orida to assist MDT in docume n ting rail rehab il i t atio n nee ds and develop a five-year approach to dealing with them. The work requested covers an ana l ysis of both Metrorail and Me t romover. The eff ort i n cludes an assessment of the financial and organizational need s required to protect t hese sub s tantia l public investments CUTR presented Phase I-Met rorail fmdings in a Fina l Report on January 9, 2001. This report rep r esents CUTR's findings on the work involved w ith P hase U Metromover. The p r oject for Metromover was conducted in essentially four phases: Assessment of the current state Estimation o f needs Comparison with other systems Recommendations for the n ext fiv e years Section II of this r e port will summarize the project team's findings for Metromovcr. During the course of the project, MDT expanded the scope of work to incl u de a m ore t ho rough opera t ion al review of specific Metromove r activities and other operat io n s within MDT Ite m s directly rela ted to Mctrom o ver include the following and will b e presented in Section II of thi s report: Me t romover staffing Wayside replacemen t schedu le s Allocation of reven ue vehicles Visits to o the r p roperties The following operations will be r eviewed in Section Ill: Trac k & G uideway staffing Rail Maintenance Con trol manpower needs A Mo ve r Rehabilitation Task Force, composed of Agency Rail Div ision personne l, m et formally four times after the projec t began in August 2000 to track the progress of CUTR's work, review draft fin ding s and p r ovide comments and guidance MDT Rail Maintenance Control D i vis ion assemb led much of the data re qui r ed. In addition. there was heavy relianc e on the Federal Trans i t Adm i nist r ation s Section I 5 d a ta to r Page I 6 of 146

PAGE 17

Rail & lvtover Rehabilr'tation Report Phase lf -Me1romover Metromover and the other people mover systems. The National Tran sit Data Base serves as the only source of comparative data available. While direct comparison of the systems using the data is difficult the database does contain e nough parameters that a good sense of th e re la tive scale and performance of the peer people mover systems can be established. The most recent year for which all of the transit properties have reported in a consistent manner is 1998; however, data for Metromover were collected through 1999, and for 2000 in some cases Severa l dozen interviews with MDT eJ(ecutive staff mover maintenance managemen t support function supervisors, and working supervisors were conduct ed over the course of Phase IT. These interviews provid ed a broad perspective and detailed understanding of the challenges and inner workings of the Metromover Maintenance timction. Metromover was completed in its curren t configuration in May 1994, at an original cost of $381.3 million With 8.8 miles of guideway, 29 veh icle s, a subsiantial maintenance facility, a central control faci lity, and associated heavy maintenance equipment, this system r epr esents a significant public investment. The preservation of any public infrastructure investment typically represents a challenge t o those responsible for its stewardship. The public (customers and elected officials) becomes accustomed to the service that it provides and is typically focused on investment decisions regarding new or enhanced services, while the operations personnel are challenged with keeping the system in proper running condition. It is somet i mes easy to lose sight of the constant reinvestment that is required to keep any asset in good condition. The policy and decision makers are faced with a myriad of competing needs, finite resources, and without intimate knowledge of the day-to day problems facing the numerous operations This report a ttempts to provide an objective assessment of the needs facing Metromover, recognizing that other competing needs within MDT and the Cou nty may or may not be as compelling. This sect ion of the report will focus on six major areas: System Overview, Metromover Maintenance, Metromover Vehicles, Metromover Wayside, Metromover Manpower Requirements, and Financial Aspects Page 17 of !46

PAGE 18

Chapter 1 System Overview Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase 1/ -Metromover The Miami-Dade Transit (MDT) Mctromover is an electrically powered fully automated people mover system, connecting with Metrorail at Government Center and Brickell Sta tions and with Metrobus at various locations throughout Downtown Miami. The 8.8-mile system provides service to 21 stations in the central downtown, Omni, and Brickell areas. With 29 mover vehicles, Metromover served over 14,000 passengers on weekdays with operating expenses of $15 million in FY 2000. Metromover provided in exce ss of 4.4 million passenger miles of service last year with an operating staff of 149 The average passenger trip length was slightly over one mile, and I ,035 service interruptions were reported. To provide a context for the overview of the Metromover sys t em, some comparative data from peer systems are presented. There are currently eleven automated guideway transit systems operated worldwide using the C-100 AEG Westinghouse/Adtranz vehicle. Seven of those systems are operated within the United States, and six of the seven provide shuttle service at airports in major US cities. Today, Metromover is the only non-airport people mover in operation in the US using the A E G/ Adtranz vehi cle. Attributes common to all eleven of the Adtraoz ve hic les i nclude the following: 38 inch Wheel Dia meter Propulsion Type 600 VAC 3 Ph Nom i na l System Voltage Trans/Rect Auxiliary Power Supply 250 Amps RMS Curren t/Power Rating Self Motor Ventilation Dynamic Electrical Braking System Air/Drum Friction Braking System Automatic Train Control (AT C) Openttion Attribute s unique to individual systems include: Vehicle Weight Minimum: 32,400 32,600 pounds (Metromover32,600) Maximum : 52,400 58,713 pounds (Mctromover-57 ,200) T ract ion Motor 1460PI 1 460ST 1460SE (Mctromover) Gea r Unit Ratio 13.42: l 16.65: l (Metromover) Page 18 ofl46

PAGE 19

Accele(ation/B(ake Rate 1.3/1.3 2.0 /1.3 2 .0/1. 5 2.0/1.8 (Metromover) 2.2/2.2 2 5/2.0 Rail & Mover Rellabiliralion Reporr Phase II -Metromover Since Adtranz provides maintenance services to all systems currently operating Adtranz vehicles, a request for information and tours of those operations was submitted to Adtranz. Adtranz considered much of the information requested by CUTR to be confidential, and, therefore was unwilling to provide "any information th at details th e methodology Adtranz uses to det ermine staffing sizes required for its operation and maintenance organizations, intervals upon wb.ich maintenance is required for its spe c ific technology, and the costs associated with those operations. Based on the competitive nature of t he transit industry and the fact that operation and maintenance costs play a significant role in d eterm ining a successful bidder Adtran z guards this type of information and considers it p r oprietary."' Adtranz determined that the following systems most c l osely resembJe.d Metromover and provided information outlined in Tab l e I regarding each of these systems: Hartsfield Atlanta International (Atlanta) Denver International (Denver ) Frankfurt Maio International (Frankfu rt ) Stansted ( London) (Sta nsted) Singapore DPM (Singapore) Tabl e 1 -Adtrao.z System Comparison Hours Annual Annual \1over Qf Ridership Service (millions) per veh Vehicles Stalions Miles Location Switches Atlanta 5 : 30 am-1:00am 65. 0 60,000 44 14 4.4 T unnel Denver 5 :30 am-11: 00 pm 23.8 50,000 22 8 2 5 TuMel F ranHurt 4:00 m-1 I : 00 pm 25. 0 40,000 1 8 3 2.4 Guideway StaJlSted 5 : 00 amI :00 am 10.0 Unknown 9 6 2.1 TuMel Singapore Unknown 25. 0 Unknown 19 14 9.8 Guideway 2 1 Marc h 1 9, 200 1 correspondence from Jame s J Spakauskas.. Vice President, ATS Marketing. Adtranz. Reference No.: M IBx0002 Pagel 9 o f 146

PAGE 20

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover Despi t e the fact that the above systems are most similar to Metromover, detailed comparison of those systems to Metromover i s not possib l e in the absence of specific operating information. The only source of detailed operating in formation for automated guideway people mover systems appears to be the Federal Transit Administration (FT A) Section 15 Da ta Base Pee r systems rep<>rted in FTA Section 15 include the Ja cksonville Skyway (Skyway), operated by the Jacksonville Transportation Author it y (JT A ), and the Det r oit Downtown People Mover (DDPM), operated by the Detroit Transportati o n Corp<>rat ion (DTC). While the comparison of Me t romover t o these systems is less than ideal since they operate different vehicles comparable data are available. The Skyway is an electrified, elevated dua l guideway monorail transit system. Bombardier, Inc. of Canada is providing an expansion of the Skyway as well as additiona l vehicles. Ni n e two-car vehicles will t ravel up to 35 mph and carry approx i mately 56 passengers per car. Six of eight stations are open at the present time. Service i s gene r ally available Monday thr ough Saturday a n d fo r special events on S unday. The DDPM opened sh ortl y after the M etromover. The system opera tes seven days a week and consists o f a 2.9-mile con t inuous loop that include s 13 passenger stations Peak-day ridership of 54,648 during the first year of opera t ion reportedly fell to 5,000 per day i n t 997. While the sys tem attributes vary great ly, comparisons can be dra wn Table 2 summarizes some of t h e more relevant characteristics o f the peer systems. Table 2 -Comparison of Selec t e d Peer Characteristi cs, 1998 Wover Mccromovcr Skyway ]oDPM Vehicles RQute Vehicii!:S Vehicles Operating .ft.files Available Ope,.ated f>ersonnel 8 5 29 15 129 1.8 4 2 1 2 2.9 8 8 82 As can be readily seen, of the systems available fo r comparison, Metromover compares most closely wi t h DDPM. It should be noted that V e hicles Available" represents the tota l number of cars reported in th e fleet and "Vehicles Operated" is the num ber of cars that the agency wan ts available for servi c e each day. Vehicles Operated or Vehicles Operated Maximum Service (VOMS), as it will sometimes be referred to in the report is the same as the Peak Vehicle Requ i rement (PVR). Both represent the highest daily vehicle requirement plus any addi t ional rolling stock required to be ready as backup. Tabl e 3 depicts a de tailed comparison of the s yste ms. Poge 20 of J 46

PAGE 21

Vehicles Vehicles Opera red Avai/af>le In For 'Wovcr M ax imum Maximum System Service Se r vice Met romover 15 29 Skyway 2 4 DDPM 8 8 Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II A1etromover T able 3 Peer Mover Systems Transit Servi<:e Supplied Transit Service Annual Annual Acrual Consumed Scheduled Actual Revenue Annual Annual Vehicle Annual Ve/Jicle Miles Annual Vehicle Unlinked Annual Revenue Vehicle Revenue %of Vehicle Revenue Passenger Passenger Miles Miles Miles Armual flours Hours Trios Miles 972,800 924 ,500 896,1 00 96.9% 84,900 82,300 4,052, 900 4,078 ,100 28.800 29,700 28. 600 96 3% 2,700 2 600 117, 600 105,700 495.600 495.600 495. 600 100. 0% 42_.700 42.700 1 989.100 2.826,70C While the systems' scales vary greatly, on a pro rata basis one can begin to see where Metromover ranks in terms of use and level of effo rt to provide and maintain service By taking the annual vehicle miles and dividing those miles by the number of vehicles required to "make service," Metromover ranks ahead of Skyway and i s compm ab l e t o DDPM in this mileage c omparison. If th e en t ire fle et wer e us e d, Metromo ver wou l d rank second wit h 3 1 879 miles These comparisons are presented in Table 4. The difference in the miles is a functio n of the number of cars used as operating spares Tabl e 4 Ann ua l Vehi cl e Miles pe r V O MSIV AMS Velrides Annual Vehicles Annual Annual Operated Miles A vailable Miles Vehicle Maximum per Maximum Per 924.500 1 5 2 8 Metromover's 8.5 dir e ctional route miles are a l most 5 t imes greater t han th e Skyway's and 3 times grea ter than DDPM's. A more relevant measure of sys t em exten t is that of passenger mi. les to directional rou t e miles Figure I depicts the re l ative comparison. Page 2 I of 146

PAGE 22

,,.. ,.g I ,(1(10.01)0 $(1(1.000 (j(J(J,I)()() 400.000 l(I(IJ)I)!) 0 Rail & Mowtr R 0 Figure 2Total Mover Vehicles per Mile In 1998, Metro m over carried approximately one percent of the passenger mile s r eported for the entire MDT During that yea r Mctromovcr con s umed 2 6 percen t of the to tal cap i tal a nd 6. 6 percent of th e o p erati n g expe nses. In term s of to tal expendi tu res attribu ted t o Metromover, the capi tal and operat i ng expend i tures reported equa led j u st over 6 percen t of t h e total rep orted. A comparison of these p erc en tag e s for the p eer s ystems i s >resented in T a b l e 5 Page 11 146

PAGE 23

Rail & Mov 81.0 100. 0 6 .(> 3.3 !()() () 6.1 34.0 100.0 Even th oug h the re l at i onship of tot a l expenditures to passenger miles can be skewed in a particular y e a r because of t h e n ature of capita l expend i tures. the followin g charts are presen t e d for Metromover for th e las t several years. The percentages seem high relative to the percentage of se r vice provid ed i n 1998. F i gure 3 s h ows t hese percentages h ave dec r eased significant l y si n ce 1994, when comple ti on of the Phase 2 extensions was accomp l i s h ed. 60 % 5 0'}1.. E .$0% 1! J O % I! 2 0 % 1 0 % 01}'. .. FY94 ( ; y 9." I Y 96 F igure 3 Move r Capital as a Percen tage of Total Capital Operating expend i tures, as a percentag e of MOT' s total operating expenditures, ha v e remained relatively constant from FY 1994 to FY 1999. The s i x year average is 6.1 percent. Figure 4 indicates the year t o year change. Page 23 (>/'146

PAGE 24

7 .()% (o,()% 5 .()% :j U)% ., J., F Y FY9S F Y ?6 F\'91 Rail & Mover RehabiliJa t ion Repo r t Phase II Metromover f"r'?S FY 9enditu rc p er mover vehicle operated i n maximum service Nex t > th e same compar i son i s made but on t he basis of vehic les i n t he entire fleet. This ana l ysis s h ows Mctromovcr at the high end of the range of peer systems, based on vehicles operated in maximum service, and in the middle of the range based on t h e total fleet. The comparisons arc illustrated in Figures 5 and 6. 400.(' )00.(1 8' 0 0 200. 0 100. 0 0 .0 F i gu r e 5 Average A n n u a l Vehicl e Maintena n ce Cos t per VOMS Ptl"<' l4 of 146

PAGE 25

400. 0 300.() I -lOO.O' 100.01 o.oj Vchidc Cost 1x:r YAM S Uail & R e lwhilifotion Rt. porl Pha w I I -;\tletromoFer Fi g u re 6-Average Annua l Vehicle Mai n tenance Cost per YAMS F i n ally! a compari s o n of syslcm perfor mance i s pr ese nt ed. \:Vh i l c the more common d i s tanc e betwee n ' 'ilurcs" provides a des irable in dicator, th e d ifference i n t h e defin i tion of fhihu c from o n e mover agency to a norhcr varies dramarically T h e Na t io n al Da t a Base prov ides information o n ' se r v ice interruptions" for all of t he agenc i es. Because th e defi nitions of' a major and r n ino r s e rv ice in t e n uption chan ged dur i n g t he study per iod, 1 h c aocal int errup tion s figu r e i s used here figure 7 s h ows the t otal servi ce in terruptions for Mctromovc r fr o m 1 995 t o 1999 to i llus t rate t h e Agency's t re n d 2 .500 ); < 2 .000 0. 1 .500 t !'!. c 1.0 0 0 --,)\ 0 F Y 95 F Y ?6 F Y91 FY ?8 Figure 7-Total Se r vice Interruptio n s, Metromo\'cr

PAGE 26

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Merromover Table 6 provides the service intemption data for Metromover and the pe.er systems and includes annual passenge r miles of service to facilitate comparison of the systems. Table 6-T otal Se r v i ce Inte rrup t i ons and Annual Passenger Miles FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 Passe11ger Passenger Passenger Passenger lsYstems iloadcalls Miles Road calls Miles Miles Raatl c alls .t.files Merromover 1 988 4,456,000 1 ,329 4 ,226, 400 75 I 4,278 ,800 1.029 4 078,1()( Skyway 0 1 63,200 0 172,300 0 32 ,2 00 84 1 05,7()( ioDPM I 2,659,200 0 2 ,911500 2,431,300 0 2,826,7()( If the "Section 15" da t a are accurate and close to being consistently reported Metromover is at the low end of the peer group wi t h Skyway and DDPM reporting very few if any, service i nterrup tions Nonetheless, M et romovcr does show a positive trend in red uced service interruptions since FY 1995, as illustraled in Figure 7. An overview of the respective responsibilities, analysis of manpower, i dentification of c apita l needs, physical assessment of the infras t ructure and other issues acknowledged are presented for Me t romover in Chap te r 2. Page 26 o( 146

PAGE 27

Rail & Mover R ehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover Chapter 2 Metromover Maintenance Metromover Maintenance operates under the guidance and direction of a General Superintendent, who reports to the MDT Transit Services Assistant Director. Within this Division are Vehicle Inspection and Heavy Repair, Train Control & T raction Power, and Metromov e r Maintenance. Vehicle Inspec tion and Heavy Repair as well as Train Control & Tractior1 Power, were discussed in detail in the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report. The Division Office consists of the General Superintendent, an Administrat ive Secre t ary, and two administrative staff. A total staff of225 is assigned to the division, as indica ted in Table 7. T ab l e 7 -Rail/Mover Maintenance Divisi o n !RaUl Mover Mainterwnce Division PosWons [Div i sion Offic-e 4 Vehicle Inspection & Heavy Repait' 92 h-rain Control & Traction Power $Q Metromover Maimenanee 70 'o
PAGE 28

Rail & A1over Rehabilitation Report Phase l! Metromover (CBD) through 9 stations and a 12 -vehicl e fleet. Approximately 36 000 vehicle hour s of service were provided annually to downtown Miami. Loops and vehi cles were both unidirectional. The Metromover Phase 2 system opened in May \994 with two additional loops. Service m iles of guideway increased to more than I 0, and Metromover routes for normal service increased from 2 independent loops t o J independent and 2 dependent loops. Stations increased from 9 to 21; the vehicle fleet increased from 12 to 29. Vehicle service hours to 3 business districts rose to I 00,000 hours. The 3 lo op-operating options in Phase I in creased to 3 1 combinations of loop operating opt ions available to Ce ntr al Cont rol with all loops a nd vehicles bi-directional. MOT's new system is about three time s greater than the original system Table 8 presents a com pari son of elements in th e original and expanded systems. Page 28 of 146

PAGE 29

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll -Metromover Table 8Original and Expanded System Comparison Increase Staff 30 73 24 54 12 29 9 2 1 Miles 3 9 8.8 Ho urs/Yea r 36, 0 00 100.000 9 25 H igh Cycle Switches 0 7 Cycles,'Y c
PAGE 30

Rail&. A-fover Rehabilitation RepOrl Phase II Merromover Metromover operates two maintenance areas. One is located at the intersection of First Avenue and First Street in the CBD and the other at the School Board Station on the Ornni Extension. A total of 70 of the 225 Rail Maintenance staff are assit,>ne
PAGE 31

Rail & Mover Rehabilitatio11 Report Phase l/ -Metromover speakers, scats, stanchions, handrails, and fire ex t inguishers. The number I end compartment h ouses the Automatic Train Operation (A TO) electronics for the vehicle. The number 2 end compartment houses the communication system equipment, propu l sion monitor panel, auxiliary control panel, door relay panel, and gauge panel. Each end compartment has a key-locked cover which keeps passengers from being able to access the equipment. Maintenance personnel can access these compartments by unlocking the covers and sliding them off. Two man u a l control s t ations, o n e on each end of th e vehicle, are in the wall on the right side when looking out th e windshield. This permits conven i ent operation of the c ont roller along with clear visibility of the track. The manual cont ro ller is enc lo sed i n th e veh icl e wall with a key l ocked cover. The electrica l system underframe equipment consistS of four cu rrent collector assemblies, an au x iliary control box, and a battery box. The current collec t o r s obtain power from three power ra i ls t o ope ra te the vehicle. Using collectors at both the fron t and rear of the vehi cle provides for c ont inuous current collection t hro u gh t h e switches. The auxil i ary control box distributes 575 V AC to the propu l sion equipment, air compressor, lighting transfonner, and battery charger. The li ghti n g transformer and the batt ery charger are part of the auxiliary control box. The battery box provides 24 VDC of standby electrica l power for emergencies. Two eight-volt batteries con n ect in series to provide th e 24 VDC for vehicle contro l voltages The pneumatic system underframe equipment consists of a n air compressor, an air control package, an auxiliary release package, two brake control packages, and miscellaneous vehicle and bogie piping. The air compressor provides air for operating the friction brakes, air springs and t h e reverser. The auxiliary release package provides a backup source of air press ur e for releasing the emergency brakes, in case there is a disruption i n the nonnal air supply. There is one brake control pac k age on each bogie which controls the friction brakes of each axle. Primary propu l sion for the vehicles is supplied by a 600 V AC direc t drive system Vehicles are controlled in either automatic mode or manually During "au t o m atic control," train speed, stopp i ng at s t ations, door control, and dwell time are performed without any assis t ance from an operator Should it become necessary to manually control the vehicle, the control pan e l avai la b l e in each vehicle contains all the contro ls necessary for an operator t o operat e the vehic l e manually. None thel ess, at all times while in passenger service, the vehicles opera t e unde r full Automatic Train Cont r ol (ATC) with ATO, A u tomatic Train Protection (ATP), and Automatic Line Supervision (ALS) with a maximum speed of 30 m.p.h. Vehicles n orm ally opera t e as single v eh icles; h owever they can be coupled as two -car tra ins to meet special ridership demands. Each vehic l e is capt ive to th e guiderail by an underframe guidance assemb l y utilizing rub ber guide tires that straddle and e n gage th e g u idebeam The guidebeam is between the roadway surfa ces thro ughou t the system. This guida n c e sys t em is rigidly attached t o the bogie and s t eers the vehicl e a long the guidebeam Allowing the rigid axle and the entire suspension system t o pivot on the pivot bearing, which the bogie to the underframe of the veh i cle, effects steering The guide stru cture i s a welded steel frame attached to the underside of each bogie and supports the four-guidewhcel assemblies, current collecto r s, antenna assemblies and the A TC Page31 Qt'i46

PAGE 32

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase 1/ -Metromover rail collectors The four guidewheels bolt to the guidance structure so that each wheel is in contact with either side of the web of the gu id ebeam A steel safety disc, slightly smaller than the diameter of the guidewheel, is just above the guidewhee l and engages the upper flange of the guide beam preventing derailment in the event of a collision or excepti onal overturning forces The Metromover guideway consists of a two-track 1 9-mile loop through the core of th e Miami Business District; a two-track 1.1-mile extension south trom the loop through the Brickell Business District; and, a two-track 1.4 mile extension no rth from the loop to the Omni area. The completely elevated guideway includes the steel guidebeam, concrete running surfaces, power distribution system, and support structure. In order to attain correct route sequencing and synchron iza tion on the outer Miami Central Downtown Business (MCDB) loop, which is shared by both Br i ckell and Omni routes, the routing method for Metromover is on a first come-first serve basis. By making adjustments to the dwell times on inbound trains, a reasonable synchronization is attained. The system operates weekdays from 5:15a.m. until 12:30 a.m. on the Inner Loop and untill0: 30 p .m. on the Brickell and Omni Extensions. Metromover service or1 weekends and holidays provides minimum passenger service operations on a specified loop or loops. Service i s coordinated to permit Metromover trains to meet Metrorail "last trains" at Govemment Center and Brickell Stations. U nder normal operating conditions, all trains operating in revenue service stop at each s t ation on the route The normal dwell time is 15 seconds at all stations, eCept Government Center, Omni, School Board Brickell, and Third Street. Dwell time at these stations is 20 seconds. The Metromover system is capable of providing five basic service routes: Inne r Loop, Outer Loop, Brickell Loop, Omni Loop, and the Brickell/Omni Loop. Headways are 2 minu tes on the Inner Loop and 3-5.5 minutes on the Brickell and Omn i legs of the Outer Loop Service and Mobility Planning specifies the number of vehicles required by time of day in addition to tb e make-up of the consist, i.e. single vehicles or vehicles coupled in pairs Rail Operations th en prepares a Metromover Operational Plan that identifies the distribution of all vehicles within the fleet to passenger service, recovery, maintenance-assigned or inactive/stored status All vehicles, stations and guideway system e leme nts are checked daily to insure operational safety and reliability Maintenance personnel assigned to these activit ies report their findings to Central Control. All items that affect opera ti onal satety are corrected before the system e l ement is released by maintenance for passenger service. Each vehicle to be used io passenger service receives a daily inspection within a 24-hour period of use. Inspection s normally occur at the School Board inspection area after th e commencemen t of morning service. The inspection includes critical under car requirements, headlights, taillights, trip wires, doors, voice communications equipment, lighting, graphics, and sim ilar e mergency equipment. The vehicle A TC equipment is tested for normal operation on a weekly basis pursua n t to Metromover operating policies. Pag e 32 of 146

PAGE 33

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Merromover All revenue and non-revenue movements arc the responsibili t y of Central Control, located on the s floor of the Stephen P. Clarke Center Central Control i s staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to p r ovide supervision contro l communicati ons, and coordination of Metromover operations. Nonr evenue operating periods arc used for vehicle maintenance, test i ng, facilities and system maintenance, and other non-revenue activities A complete sweep of the guideway is mad e prior to passenger service each morning to verify the guideway is free of forei!,'ll objects, and interlocking switches are functioning properly, and to ensure proper train detection in all track circuits. Sweep t
PAGE 34

Rail & Mover Rehabilirario11 Report Phase /1 Metromover main t enance to meet peak revenue service requirem ents of 17 vehicles each day. A significant number of labor h ours are spent juggling vehicles i nto and out of th e maintenance area. The School Boa r d maintenance area offers some relief to inadequate repair space at the main m a in tenance shop Thi s area was originally designed for minor repairs and visual i nspections on ly, but has been modified to allow maintenance personnel to perfonn l imite4 vehic le .PM in s pec tio ns and minor repairs. The area houses a maintenance repair area for one ve h icle in addition to the veh icle car wash. Vehicles are washed, minor r epairs are accomplishe d and daily inspect ions are conducted w it hin this maintenance area which also provides outside storage for six vehicles. Metrom o ver V ehicle Maintenance Maintenance of the mover v eh i cles includes scheduled preventive maintenance repair, and major component overhau l. The scheduled preventive maintenance program is designed to mainta in car rel i abili t y by detecting and correc ting potent i al defe cts before component failure It includes servici ng of equipment tha t requires l ubrication, measurement, a nd adjustment. Mover veh i cles are withdrawn from service at regular ca l enda r intervals to perform schedu led preventive mainte nance ac t i ons. Move r staff indicated that all current test equipment is based on the l at est techno l ogy and is i n good cond i t i on Inspections range from a daily inspection that consists of a safe ty test, a visual inspection, and a functional test of safe ty-critical and passenger components t o extens i ve electrical and mechanical insp ections completed at 37-day, 75 -d ay 225-day, 450 d a y intervals and 900-day intervals During fiscal yea rs 1996, 1997, and 1998 the maint enan ce d e mand for vehicles equaled 2 vehicles for .PM and 6 vehicles for repa ir, for a total maintenance requirement of 8 vehicles each day. In FY 1 999, th e total vch.icle main t enance requiremen t cont i nued to be 8 vehicles; h owever, the make -up of tho se 8 vehicle s changed to I veh icle for PM, 6 vehicles f or repair, an d I vehicle for scheduled overha u l. PM i nspections are ca tegorized as shown in Table I I. Page34 of 146

PAGE 35

I nspe ct ion Dail y A ll c D E F G s Inspection 24 Hour.; 37 Days Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase /1 -Metromover T ab l e II -P reven ti ve Main te n ance In s p ect i o n s ATC inspection and of the car. Fu n c tion a l t est tlf safetycri tical and conven i ence cc>mponen ts Base level PM aimed at prcve .nti ng the: most common prob lems 75 Days Type A + rask. s a imed at more indepth checks of the components 225 Days Type A + Type B + more dccailed ch e cks of the friction brakes and electrical systems 450 Days Typ e A + Type B +Type C 900 Days Type A + Type B + Type C 4 5 Y Type A + Type B + Type C T evaluates aU ofrh e major components with replacement as e -ars reqUJrcd 8 -10 YearS Deta iled evaluarion of all components functiona l check of all components and sy!'.tems t o insure vehicle is ready for service after f rom Records indi cate that 100 percen t of all daily, A B, C, D, E a n d f inspe ct ions are routinely completed. G Inspec t ions were not required until FY 1999 Since that t ime, all required G Inspec t ions have been comple t ed Table I 2 provides a summary of labor hours logged for inspections A-S in fiscal years 1998 through 2000 Tab l e 12In s p ecti o n l,abor Hour s .Labor Hortrs Preventi\l e Maintenance 1.998 1999 2000 A Inspect i on I ,909 2.419 2.652 B lnspec. t i on t ,515 2.059 1 .890 C lnspec t i on 753 809 817 D inspection 815 1.242 991 E InSpection 431 114 274 F Inspection 834 1 ,026 944 G Inspection 0 1 37 96 S Inspection 0 21 68 56-day Sra.ke ( nspection t ,018 1 ,00 I 1 ,080 Shop Equipment I nspections 179 182 173 Total Inspection Labor Hou rs 7.45 4 9.010 8.985 Page 35 of/46

PAGE 36

Rail & Mover Rehabiliwlion Report Phase II A.fetromover The F-Jnspect ion represents the 4 5 year component overhaul corresponding to approximately I 30,000 miles, while the 0 -l nspection represents the 8 10 year overhaul interval corresponding to approxima tely 260 000 miles. These overhauls include the braking system, HV AC equipment, guide wheels, doors, motor cont ro ls and air system. Metromover T e chnicians complete these overhauls inhouse with assistance from vendors. Repairs result from planned inspections as well as failures identified duriog service. They include repairs or adjustments performed on a daily basis at the vehic le subsystem and component l evel s. A summary of labor hours for repairs reported in fis c al years 1998 through 2000 is presented in Table 13. Tabl e 13-Repair Labor Hours Labor Hours Reoairs 1998 1999 2QQQ Retrofics 0 466 333 Equipment Failures 9,195 7.990 7 238 No Troubl e Found Revenue 120 1 36 41 No Troubl e Found Non-Revenue 288 208 1 66 Graflili /Vandalism 31J 320 98 Lamps/Bulbs 338 159 71 Oail y Inspection/Miscellaneous Tasks 34, 4 03 35,498 46,75( IT otal Repair Labor Hours 45,257 44,717 54,697 In the past the focus of the shop was c learly on vehicle PM and repai r as i ndi cated in Ta ble 14. In FY 1994, 88 percent of total labor hours were dedica t ed to vehicle PM and repair. Vehicle PM labor hours accounted for 20 percent of total FY 1994 labor hours, while vehicle repair labor hours were 68 percent of the total hours By FY 2000, vehicle PM labor hours dropped from 20 percent t o 10 percent of total labor hours while repair labor hours showed a modest increase over 1999 repair hours. Wayside repair along with the F and G Inspections appear to have driven down the vehicle repair hours. Page 36 of I 46

PAGE 37

Rail & Mover Rehahilitatlon Report Phase/[ Metromoer Table 14-Labor H o urs by Job Type, FY 1994-1999 Vehicle PM o11d ReJ)ai,. Vehi cle Pre-ventive Maintenance PM% of Total L a bo r Hour s Vehicle F & G I nspection F & G% of Total Labor Hours Vehicle R epair Hours Vehicle PM and Repair% of Total Labor Hours Wayside Equ;pmcm PM and Repai, Wa>''Side Equipment Preventive. Maintenance Wayside Equipment Prvt% of Tot a l Labor Hours Wayside Repa i r Wayside Repair% of Total Labor Hours Way::oidt: Equipment PM and Rep air% ofTotal Labor Hours T 01al Labor Hours FY FY FY FY FY FY FY 1994 199S 1996 /997 /998 1999 2000 S .S60 I 1.690 5,834 6.509 6.620 7 847 7 9 4 5 20.3% 17.4% 8.5% 8 .6% 1 0 .3% 11.8% 10.0% 0 0 96 0 834 I 16 3 1 040 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 1% 0 .0% 1.3% 1.7% 1.3% 2 9 ,500 4 7 574 5 2 909 57,999 4 5 ,2 57 44,777 54 697 6 7 .5% 7 0.9% 76 9% 76.2% 70. 1% 67.3% 68. 9 % 87 .8% 88.4% 85.5% 84 8% 81.6% 80 .9% 8 0.2 % 4 ,864 6 901 7 03 1 7,656 8,940 9 236 8.074 11.1% 10.3 % 10 .2% 10 .1% 13.8% 1 3 9% 10.2% 4 62 910 2,958 3 9 1 7 2 9 09 3 ,41!4 7 642 1.1% 1.4% 4.3% 5.1% 4.5% 5.2% 9.6% 1 2.2% 1!.6 % 1 4 5 % 15 .2% 18.4% 1 9. 1 % 1 9.8 % 43,686 67,075 68,828 76,081 64,560 66,507 79,398 Avera}.! e 7 ,901 1 2 4 % 448 0.6 % 47 ,530 71.1% 84.2% 7,529 I L 411t 0 3,183 4 ) % 1 5 .8% 66.591 The Cleaning Program w i thin Me tro m over c onsi sts of two leve l s of interior and exterior c l eani n g perfom1ed duri n g off-peak revenue h our s Level One is accompl i shed daily and includes basic ho u sekeeping of the inte r ior of th e car. Exterior washing i s done thr ee times each week v i a an automat i c car wash as the vehicles receive da ily in spections Level Two i s performed four times eac h year and i ncl u d es d etail cleaning of th e car interior and exterior Until recently, cleaning was accomplished at t wo lo c ati ons, th e Me lromover Maintenance buildin g and the School Board I nspec tion Shop by e igh t Rail Vehicle Cleaners under the d i rection of a Melromover Maintenance Supervisor The vehicle cle aning policy w a s revised 10 i n clude daily v ehic l e cleani ng on the mainline on two s h ifts. T he General Superintendent i ndicate d that one new Rail Car Cleaner posi tion is r equired to meet the expanded vehicle c leaning demands and additional R a il Car Cleaners a re required to s uppo rt riders h ip increases and a PVR inc rease from 15 to 17 veh icles One of th e eight Rail Vehicle Cleaner positions i s vacant In the sh op, ten cars are cleaned daily, starting at 6:00 a .m. T h ree v ehicl e s are washed and deta i led du rin g off-peak revenue service. Followi n g is s ummary of t h e acti v iti es included in the cleaning s c hedule : Vehicle Level O neDaily Vac uuming floors side pane l s and end cap seats C l ea ni ng of interior windo ws, panels a n d seats Vehicles with b'Taftiti or vandalism are removed from service immediately Page 3 7 of 146

PAGE 38

Vehicle Exterior Washing 3 Times/Week Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase !I Metromover Metrornover Technician drives vehicle through the automatic car wash at the School Board Inspection Area as the vehicle is daily inspected Vehicle Level Two-4 Times/Year Interior detail cleaning (hand washing) of vehicle ceilings, light fixtures, seats Polishing interior stainless steel with steel bright Shampooing and vacuuming carpet Guideway Station tracks which are also included in the cleaning program are cleaned on a semi-aruma! schedule. It has been suggested that it would be more appropriate to provide a Rail Vehicle Cleaner Supervisor to oversee the activities of the Rail Vehicle Cleaners. A review of position descriptions for Rail Vehicle Cleaner Supervisors and Metromover Maintenance Supervisors indicates that a Rail Vehicle Cleaner Superviso r would oversee interior and exterior cleaning of rail vehicle equipment, the maintenance of various shop areas and be responsible for ensuring that th e rail vehicle is satisfactorily cleaned and presentable for revenue service. Emphasis would be in supervising a staff of rail vehicle cleaners who routinely clean the entire rail vehicle and maintenance shop A Metromover Maintenance Supervisor i s responsil>le for supervising the inspection, diagnosis, repair, and maintenance of Metromover vehicles and related wayside aod central systems. Emphasis is on supervising a staff of technical subordinates, planning and scheduling repair and maintenance work, diagnosing the causes of equipment failures and developing procedures to prevent recurrence, enforcing safety practices and procedures and coordinating Metromover main t enance activities with rail officials and representatives of equipment and service contractors. It appears that a Rail Vehicle Cleaner Supervisor poston would be a more appropriate classification for supervision of the Metromover Rail Vehicle Cleaners. Efforts of Metromover Supervisors' skilled supervisory work in maintenance and repair could be redirected. Another benefit is the assignment of the responsibility for vehicle cleaning to one specific supervisor whose duties are consistent with the subordinates supervised. i1-1etromover Wayside Maintenance The Metromover guideway consists of three loops: the Brickell Loop, the Central District Loop, and the Omni Extension. The Brickell Loop contains 2 tracks for 1.1 miles with 6 stations. All stations serve northbound and southbound passenger service Riverwalk Station and Fifth Street Station have side platforms while Eighth Street Station, Tenth Street Sta t ion, and Brickell Station have island platforms. The Financial District Station is a stub end station on single track. The Central District Loop has 2 tracks for 1.9 miles. The Omni Loop contains 2 tracks for 1.4 miles with 6 stations. All stations serve northbound and southbound passenger service. Freedom Tower S t ation Park West Station, Eleventh Street S t ation, Bicentennial Park Sta tio n (temporarily closed for budgetary reasons) and Omni Station have island p l atforms that serve both northbound and southbound traffic. School Board Sta!ion is a single !rack stub end station. Page38 of 146

PAGE 39

Rail & Murs 8,940 9,231> 8,075 Page 39 of 146

PAGE 40

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover Tabl e 16-Wayside Repa i r Labor Hours Lttl>or Hours Wayside EQuipment Repair FY 1998 FY 19 99 FY 2000 Data Transmission System 79 55 72 Automati c Trai n Contr ol 37 9 517 64 8 ATC Sw itches 961 704 520 rack a1ld S tructures 854 1,438 4 684 Power Distribution System 630 765 1 ,719 Facilities 6 5 0 ToLal Wayside PM Labm Hours 2,909 3,484 7,643 In tcnns of allocated positions, records show that 26 Technicians were assigned to Metromover in early 1993. A total of 13 Tech n icians were added to raise the total complement to 39 Technicians in anticipation of Phase 2 s tart-up The 1994 T able of Organi z ation shows a budget alloca t ion of 54 Metromover Technicians. Allocated positior\s from 1993 until the present time are identified in Table 17. I n terms of actua l staffing, there has been a 14 percent reduction in mai n tenanc e supervisors and a 7 percent reduction in Metromover t echnicians since 1994, when the system was expanded and vehicles increased from 12 to 29. rable 17 Me t romover Pos i tions 2001 Classification 1993 /994 /998 1999 2000 2001 /994 Melromover Ma intenance Supervisor 7 7 7 6 6 Metromover Technician .39 5 4 5 J 5 J 51 6 -14.3% 50 7.4 % A review of Section 15 data illustrates the relationship between labor hours for vehicle inspection and maintenance and the number of vehicles operated in maximum service (VOMS) as reflected in Table 18. Pag e 40 of 146

PAGE 41

Rail & Mover Rehabilitatioll R e port Phase II Metromo..,er Table 18-Inspect i on & Maintenance Hours per VOMS !nJpection & Maintenance FY FY FY n FY Hour$ per VOMS /994 /995 /996 19. 97 1998 Averafl.e Mctromover 5,164 5.318 6.608 7.143 6,592 6,16 1.931 1,553 1,754 265 644 1.221 ODPM 9,620 12,133 8,415 10,140 9.360 Based on Section 1 5 data Metromover is well below DDPM and five times greater than Skyway in the dedication of inspection and maintenance hours per vehicle operated in maximum service. The wide range in labor hours most likely results from the significant differences in the systems themselves; i t is difficult to draw conclusions from this small sampling of data Metromover Experience and Classification The pres ent day training program for Metromover Techni cian s is driven by MO T's interpretation of a 13(c) Arbitration Award. The 13(c) Arbitration Award indicated that the agenc y must h ire candidates who are qualified or c o uld become qualified via tmining The 13(c) Arbitralion Award clearly stops short of indicating the proce ss by which a candidate can become qualified. In response to the Arbitration Award, MDT determined that it was the responsibility of the age ncy to provide tbc training i n order to make the candidate qualified. Vacant positions are bid based on seniority Successful candidates are introduced to their new posi t ions at training programs that h ave been reduced over time to a total of five mont hs. Unlike MetroraiJ, where the lead supervisor is assigned to provide the training program, for small classes a former Metromover Technician currently ass igned to the trai ning division provides all training, w hich is a combination of classroom and on-the-job training Larger classes do require the participation ofMe tromover Supervisors, as the t raining division is severely overburdened with a multitude of training demands precipitated by 13 (c). The ca ndid ates complete the training program and are then assigned to the maintenance shop, where they remai n on probation for a period of one year. ln order to determine the levels of experience and education vehicle maintenanc e sta ff possess, a revi ew of infonnation concerning the former classification of the Metromovcr Technic ians on duty in April of 1999 was conduct ed. T hat information shows years in classification ranged from 3 to 15 years with an average of 7 years. Education le vel ranged from 9 to 16 years with an average of 12.3 years. O nl y 4 of 46 (8.7%) were in th e ir classification more than 10 years and 10 of 46 (21.7%) less than 5 years. Only 7 of 46 (15.2%) had 13 or more years of education. Well over half(56.5%) of the Metromover Technicians were former Mechanics, and one-third of those Technicians had l ess than 5 years in their current classification wh i le 92 percent of Metromover Tech nici ans with fonner electronic o r elec t rical expe rience had been in their current classification a minimum of 9 years Over half of the current Metromover Technicians average only 4.4 years in their current cla ss ification If cu rrent trends continue, as new employees enter Page 41 q( 146

PAGE 42

Rail & Mover Rehabililation Report Phase 11 t\1etromover the Metromover workforce they will do so with litt l e or no previous technical experience. Fonner clas si fications and years of experience are reflected in Figures 8 and 9. S?% f i gu r e 8 Former Class i ficatio n Per centage of Total 60% Percent wi lh Experien::e F i gu r e 9-Percent of Technicians wi t h Techni cian/E l ectr i cia n Experi ence MDT recently organized a work group to review in detail their 13(c) not only from an historical perspective but a l s o to assess the impact of those ag r eements on the dayt o day operations of both Metrorail and Mctromove r maintenance A detailed report including findings and recommendat i ons was forwarded to t h e Director of MDT for his review and act i on. P<1ge 42 of 146

PAGE 43

Metromover Vehicle Avuifability R11il & 1\Jfo\'<'r R clwhi lilfiJi ou Ract m o thb a lli ng had o n m over ve h icle availability. I(J(J% 90 % S O % 1 0 % , 40* t O % 20% U)% ')No$ Figure 10 -Mctrono,cr Ve hicl e Availability At issue here the number o f mover vehicles necessar y to provide service versus the number of m over ve hicle s the A gen c y actuall y owns. While there continues t o b e debate over the ' right" nl1i() for vehicles. Mctro movcr has both b c n cfllcd by suff ered from havin g 29 movc r Page43<1f'l46

PAGE 44

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover vehicles to care for on a system t hat "requires" 17 vehicles be available for se rvice each morning; the shop's current requirement for ve hicles operated in maximum service is 1 7 mover vehicles. When compared with other systems, Metromover ranks I Sl in terms of vehicles operated in maximum service (VOMS), and 1" in tenns of vehicles available for maximum service (YAMS). Metromover's ratio of operating vehicles to available vehicles is second to Skyway's and exceeds both DDPM's and Metrorai l s as indicated in Table 19. Table 19 -Operating Spare Ratios Metromover Skywa.v DDPM Metrorail Year VOMS VAMS VOMS VAMS VOMS VAMS VOMS VAMS 1994 19 29 2 2 8 8 76 136 1995 20 29 2 2 6 6 80 136 1996 16 29 2 2 8 8 80 136 1997 15 29 I I 8 8 86 136 1998 15 29 2 4 8 8 80 t36 1.9 2 0 t.O 1.7 Metromover ranks 2"d in tenns of total operating expenses per vehicle operated in maximum service for mover systems based on Section 15 Data as reflected in Table 20. Metromover operating expenses per YOMS exceed Skyway's and are about 75 percent of DDPM's. Table 20 -Total Operating Expenses Per VOMS Operating expem e Per VOMS Metromovcr DDPM FY FY FY FY FY /994 1995 /996 1.997 1998 563,984 565,465 812,806 915.333 970,440 765.60( 359,900 356.30() 393,650 660,9()() 462,40 0 446,63( 958,988 I I 94,883 927,438 I 000,838 I ,069 713 I ,030,37 I n tenns of total operating expenses per vehicle available for maximum service, Metromover also ranks 2"" for mover systems. Metromover's operating cost per YAMS is closer to Skyway's than Metromover's cost per VOMS, and it is less than half of DDPM's as indicated in Table 21. Page 44
PAGE 45

/?(Iii & Mover Relwbi/il{l(ion R e port Phose II M elr(mWl'<'r T able 2 1 -Tota l Operating Expenses l'er YAM S .\ 'IN't/S(' ,.-y F)' FY /T f'Y P e r VAMS 1994 !995 1996 !997 !998 A\'(# '(IJ:e 369.50 7 3 8 9.976 448.445 473.448 501,952 436.(# S kyway 359.900 356.300 393.650 660.900 231.200 400.391 DDI'M 95X ,9XX 1 1 9 4 ,88 3 927 438 1 .000.838 1.0<>9. 713 1 ,030 .372 A c cordi n g to Sectio n IS data. in 1 994, 98, 1 2 1 l abo r ho urs were prov i ded for i n s pccli o n t md mai nt enanc e During 1995, 1ha1 number rose to 106.368, an 8.4 percen t i n cre ase Labor hour s d ec l in e d to 1 05.726 i n 1996, a 0 .6 pe r cent d ec r ease. Lab o r hou r s rose 10 1 07,141 i n 1997 a n d h en d ropp ed 1 0 98,8 77 in 1998. Labo r ho ur s r e poned i n 1 999 tota l e d I 0 I 185 h o urs, a n incr e a s e of 3.1 pcr<:. cnt compared to those reported five yea r s ago i n 1994. Labor hours ar c presented i n Fig u r e I I. I(IS, OOO 1 (1 (!,( 101) I (1 4 (1(10 0 1 0 2, 000 1(10,(100 0 :5 'JS, con sistcnll y rcp o r cd l'cwcr l abor hours for each v e h ic l e ava i l able for ser vice t ha n DDPM bulmorc h ou r s tha n Skyway a s presented i n Table 22. Page 45 qf 146

PAGE 46

Rail & Mover Rehabiliwtion Report Phase II M e tromover Table 22-Ins pection & Maintenance Hours per YAMS Jnspecrion & Maintenance Hours oer VAMS 1etromover kyway ioDPM FY FY FY FY FY 1994 1995 1996 /997 !998 Averae 3 383 3 668 3,646 3,695 3 410 3 56( 1,931 1 ,553 1 ,754 265 322 1,16 9 620 12.133 8,415 1 0,140 9,360 Inspec t ion and maintenance hours per V AMS presented in Table 22 mirror tho se presented for VOMS. DDPM's allocation of hours per YAMS is significa ntly greater than Metromover s, and Mctromover averages three times more inspection and ma intenance hours per V AMS than does Skyway. The total number o f mover vehicles needed simultaneously in t he pe a k periods to satisfy passenger demand wh ile keeping per-car passenger loads at o r below a pre-determined level is called !he Peak Vehic l e Requ i reme n t (l'VR} Metromover recently began operating two 2-car pairs, resul t i n g in a PVR of I 7 vehicles. A PVR of 1 7 represents 59 percen t of t he fleet. Should Metromovcr d e c i d e to add a third 2-car pair, the PVR will increase to 18, whic h is 62 percent of the total fleet Review of the vehicle availability data presented in Table 20 indicates Metromover has had some difficulty in meeting the peak vehicle requirement in the past. A tolal of 10,585 days are available aru111ally for the fleet. Table 23 basically shows where the 29 vehicles were l ocated (i.e., in the shop or in storage) during annual intervals. Table 23Days ShoppedStoredAva ilabl e Day$ %of Days %of Days %of total 1 970 18.6% () ().0 % 2 599 24.6% 273 2 .6% 2.889 27.3% 1 ,832 1 7 3% 5,864 2,250 2 1.3% 1 937 1 8 .3% 6,398 2,523 23. 8% 2,09 1 19.8% 5,9 7 1 2,393 22. 6% 1 872 17.7% 6,320 1,420 26.0"/o 494 3,538 A comparison of the availability of the Phase I vehicles to Phase 2 vehicles is presented in Tables 24 and 25 Page 46 of 146

PAGE 47

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover Table 24Ph ase I Vehicle Availability Phase I Vehicles Days %of %of Days %of Year Shopped Total Stored Total Total 194 1,398 31.9% 0 0 0% 2 .9 82 68.1o/. 195 1 ,552 35.4% 273 6 2% 2.5 55 58.3o/. 196 1 ,563 35 .7% 1 026 23.4% 1 ,79 1 40. 9o/ 9 / 97 1 ,0 28 23.5% 1,018 23.2 % 2 ;334 53 3o/ 9 / 98 1,073 24 5% 1,123 25.6% 2 184 49.9% 9199 1, 533 35.0'.4 839 19.2% 2 008 45 .8% 100 843 37.4% 269 11.9% 1.144 50.7% Total 8 ,99 0 3 1.5% 4,548 15.9% 14,9 98 52.6% . In 1994, Phase I vehicles were approximately eight years old, and the new Phase 2 vehicles were put inlo service. Phase I availability dropped to an all-time low in September of 1996. The decline in availability i s most l i kely l he result of the retrofit work that was identified in t he 1994 1996 summary of l abor hours In the three years foll owing the retrofit work, approxima t ely one fourth of the Phase I vehicles w ere stored. As with Metrorail, some of those vehicles moved to the shop after removal from st orage Ea rly 2000 data do show a mode st increase in availability; h owever, a shop rate of37.4 percen t is higher than any rate recorded previously. Table 25P h ase 2 Ve hi cle Availability Phase 2 Vehi<:les Days %of Days % of Days %of 572 9.2% 0 0.0% 5.633 1 047 16 9% () 0 .0/1.1 5.158 83. 1.326 21.4% 806 13.0% 4 ,073 1.222 19.7% 14.8% 4,064 1, 450 23.4% 15.6% 3,787 61 860 13.9% 16.6% Phase 2 vehicles, represented in Tab l e 25, started to ach ieve relatively low availability ra tes during their third year of service. Those rates appear to be directly affected by the 13 to 17 percent storage rates rather than by significant shop rates, as is the case wit h t he Phase I Page 47 of I 46

PAGE 48

Rail & Rchahiliwti o n Plwse II Me lro m ove r v ehicle s. The newer Phase 2 vehicles appear to spend Jess t i m e in the sh op t h a n do the Phas e I vehicles An i ndicaw r tha t p eli1aps hcs t desc r ibe s th e sho p s performance i s tha t o f mea n miles bet ween Hlil u re-s. F igur e 12 r eflects mean miles bet w e e n ave-raged for Phase I vehicles, Phase 2 vehicl es, and the t otal fleet. Phase I vehi cles show ed a sign ificant i n c rease in mil e s between failur es i n 1999 and 2000 i n c ompariso n to m iles hctw cc n f.iil u rcs I'CJ)Ortcd in previous years. On t h e oth e r h and, Phase 2 ve h i cles s ho w a consi s t ent gradual imp roveme n t s ince 1995. It is highly probable that early Phas e 2 rat es were lo w due t o probl ems t ypical of new vehic l es llS they adju st to the system. The P h ase 2 vehielc s c onsistently performed bette r than t h e Phase I vehicles from 1995 through 199 8 1.400 1 200 1 .000 ( oOO -' "' -'00 200 0 FY )S I:Y9(o F Y 97 FY?8 F Y?) ( o.'OO F i gure 12Mean Miles Jlct wcc n Failure s by Phase Mean mile s between f ail ure s flom F Y 1995 through J une 30, 2000 were aver a ged for each mover veh i c l e. Those data are pre sen ted in Figur e 13. f'([ge 48 of/ 46

PAGE 49

1.400 1.200 ] 1 .( 1 00 600 > < 400. 201> o Rail & Mover Re/whi!ital i o n R e po r l Ph(lse IJ -Merr o nuwel' I 2 .l .J ( I 1 S 9 I(} II 1 2 I ) H I S I C 1 7 ll$ 1'> 2C) 2 1 22 2 J 2 4 24 2 6 27 l i J r.1 \ l\'ct J>has..: 1 : 1 1 1, 2 : 1 3 2'' Fi gure 13Mean Mil es Between Failures by Vehicle Th e s e d a t a also substa n tiate a d i fference in Phase I and Phase 2 mo v e r veh i c l e pe rfo r m ance Phase I veh ic les s h ow not o n ly a g r eater range in miles bet wee n f ailures but also a gre a ter inconsist en c y in perfor ma nce between veh i cles While P has e 2 veh icles were u nable to e xcee d the maximum m iles between n l il urcs l ogged by Phase I vehicles, Phas e 2 vehicles consist ently a chi e v e d the Phase I m inimum mi les l ogged. All 17 P ha s e 2 v eh icl e s exceeded 400 m iles b etween failures, wh ile only 9 o f 1 2 Pha se I ve h icles achi eved tha t level. To exami n e furth e r the possible differ ence in perf o rm anc e betwe e n Pha s e I and Pha s e 2 veh i cles average annua l mil e a ge o f th e ve h i cles f ro m FY 1 995 th roug h FY 2000 was e xamin ed. Fig ur e 1 4 represents that da ta Pwc 49 ot 146

PAGE 50

" :< 0 9 > t < 60 000 50.000 4(1JI(I(I 3 0,(1(1(1 20. 00 0 10.00 0 0 Roil & 1 \-f(W< ? r R e habi l itmion R epor t Phase II i ltfelnmwv < w 0 1 ()2 0 3 (M 1)$ 0 6 () 7 1)$ 0 9 1(1 I I 1 2 13 1 4 I S l(o 17 l'l 20 21 22 l.l 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 ) Figure 14-Ave r a ge Annu a l M o vc r Veh i cle M i l es Pha s e 2 ve h i cl es, w ith th e e xc e ption of Ve hi cl e s 111 6 and 112 9 l ogged more mil e s than Pha s e I vehic l e s A c o m pa r ison of those ave r age mil e s and m e an mile s be t ween fii l urc s i s p r esented i n F i gur e 1 5. I n o rde r lo p r ovide a g r ap h i c r e p rese ntntion of the mean mile s be t wee n f ai l ures w ere i n c r e ased b y a factor often. P o g e 1 4 6

PAGE 51

(fJ. (I(I(I SIJ, (I(Ifl :c 41),(101) :;: v $.: J.O.OOQ ;,: < 20.(1(11 ) )1).(101) Rail & Mover R J S r. 7 1$ > 10 11 l2 U l4 1:' Ito 1 7 I S I'> 21. 1 1 22 2 3 24 2() l7 2') F i gure: ISAnnual Milc.age v s Bchw: cn Failurc. s With the e xce ption of on e ve hicl e, Phase 2 veh i cles appear to b<; m ore reliab l e tha n >hasc I vehicles. M etromover Vehicle Perftmlltmce R ail M a i nt cmmcc Co ntr o l in conju n ction with Ce n tral Conlrol re viewe d Met ro movc r Operntions' Summary of Unusual Occurrences reports for four m onth s (March June, September, and December) over a peri od of thre e ycm-,; (1998, 1 9 99 lnd 2000 ). rhc data wer e con solida1cd int o an in c ide n t repo rt f()rmat. that provided i nf()nnn1ion o n the fitc tors. fis ted be low) regarding Mctr omovcr veh icle performa n c e and service intcl'ruptions. Dat e of Each Inci dent Day o f Week the I nciden t Occurred Tim e o f Incid ent L oop A ffect cd b y the Incid e nt Number ofVeh i c l cs H eld a t a S t a t io n a Result of the lncidc111 Len gth of Delay Cau s e d by the Incid ent Paw 5 1 I>(

PAGE 52

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Melromo v e r Number of Veh i cles Removed from S ervices Due to the Incident Time Service Resumed Station a t which Passengers Were Deboarded Cause of the De l ay Staff w h o Reported the Incident Nature of t h e Vehic l e Ma l function Re l ated to the Incident Location of the I ncident Time Metromove r Re c overy Tec h ni c ian was Dispatched t o and Arrived at the Incident Figure I 6 shows the number of incidents that were reported annually. Incident s in 2000 represent a 4 percent increase over 1999 incidents, and a 1 3 percent reduct ion in 1 998 incidents Figu r e 1 6 -Inci d ents b y Year There docs no t appear to be a significant difference in in c idents based on month with the exception of December. Given t h e intense maintenance commit m ent that Metromover makes to s u pply vehicles for the Orange Bowl parade at the end of the year, the fact that December incidents are low is to be expected. Only 30 incidents were reported in December 2000 as indicated in Figure I 7. Page 146

PAGE 53

250 200 lSO 100 s o ,..-----, M:ut:h J u n e 199& 0 1 999 2000 Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Repor t Phas e If -M e tromover F i g u r e 1 7 Inc id e nts b y M o nth I ncidents, w he n vi e we d b y day of th e week as a percen tage of the t o t a l we e k, s how an increas e in the perc e ntage of i ncidents o n Sa tu rday a n d Sun d ay, i n addition to a sizeable reduction in the percentage of incide n ts on Wed n esdays Incidents by day as a percent of the tota l week are pre s ented in Figure 18. 0 .25;/ 0.2 0 1 5 0 0 1 o .os Mon Tue Wed Thu F r i Sat Sun 1998 D 1999 2000 F i g u r e 1 8 -Inci d ents b y Day o f We e k as a% o f Total When daily incidents are viewed in tenns of the number of inciden t s rather t h an as a per c entage of the t ota l Wednesday conti n ues to stand o u t as a day wi t h more in c idents as seen in F igure 19 Page 53 of 146

PAGE 54

Suodoly Saturduy Friday Tuesday l O 40 60 lnd.dent$ Rail & Mover Rehabilitalia11 Report Phase If -M etromover 100 1 2 0 140 160 Figure 19-Incidents by Day of Week Incidents by time of day are displayed in Table 26. AM and PM peak hours are identified, and the highest percentages of hourly incidents for each year are presented in red text. Only in 1999, did the highest hour of i nc ident s occur during peak hours. It is also inte resting to note the reduction in the volume of incidents per hour reported in 2000 with the highest percentage of incidents at 8.7 percent, as compared with 10.5 percent in FY 1999, and 9.1 percent in 1998. Page54 of 146

PAGE 55

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover Table 26Incidents by Time of Day nme Incidents Of %Of %OJ %OJ Incident 1998 Total 1999 Total 2000 Total 05:15. 06:04 23 6.7% 23 8 0% 19 6.4% 06 :05 07:04 20 5.8% 11 3 8% 17 5 .1'!. AM 07:05 08:04 12 3.5% 15 5 .2% 15 5.00A Peak 08:05 09:04 10 2.9"10 1 0 3 5% 16 5.4'!. 09:05. 10: 0 4 II 3 .2% 8 2.8% 12 4 .001< 10:05. 11:04 16 4.7% 14 4 9% 15 5 .001< 11 :05 12:04 20 5.8% 15 5 .2% 1 3 4 .4% 12:05-13:04 15 4.4% 11 3 8% 16 5.4% 13:05. 14:04 18 5.3% 20 .1.0% 21 7 .0'1< 14:05. 15:04 20 5.8% 15 5 .2% 26 8.7% 15:05. 16:04 24 7 0% 30 IO.S% 2 1 7 .0% PM 16:05 17:04 26 7 6% 2 3 8.0% 25 8 .4% Peak 17:05 18:04 28 8 .2% 17 5.9% 24 8 .1% 18:05. 19:04 14 4 .1% 12 4 .2% 14 4 .7% 19: 05 2 0:04 25 7. 3% 21 7.3% 12 4 0% 20:05.21:04 31 9 .1% 16 5.6% 14 4 7% 21 :OS 22:04 16 4.7% 18 6 3% 10 3 .4% 22:05 23:04 7 2.0% 6 2.1% 6 2.0% 23:05.01:04 6 1.8% 1 0 .3% 2 0.7% Total 342 100.0% 286 1 00.0% 298 100. 0% Loops affected by incidents are presente d in F igure 20. It appears tha t problems negative ly impacting the Brickell/Omni Loop i n 1999 have been corrected. Figures from 2000 present a more normal distribution of incidents. Page55 of 146

PAGE 56

Brick1 .'()mni C()u l<:r II No n<: 1998 C Bric. k c ll 0 BrickcllrQm.nii'Outet 1<1inn.:r/()l,llr Rail & A1over Rehabilitation Report Phase /1 -Metromover 2000 Inner II Urick<:IIIOmnillnn<:r F igure 20I nci d e n ts by L oop Affecte d The most frequently occurring minutes of delay were 6 and 7 minu t es Delays of 5 -10 minutes accoun t ed for over 50 percent of all delays. Delays in 2000 equaled 1999 del ays of 6-9 minu t es, and were slightly longer than 1998 delays of 5-8 minutes. The amount of delay is show,n in Figure 21. Page56 of 146

PAGE 57

1 6% 14% 12% 10% 8% Q "' 6% 4 % 2% ()% 0 Rail & Mo ver R e habiliwtion R e p ort P h ase ll Metr omove r 5 1 0 15 2 0 2 5 30 4 0 4 7 90 1 6 0 2 00 M i n u l cs o f IX l a y 1 9 9 8 m -zooo F i gure 21 -Mi nu tes of De lay Th e num ber of ve hides held at an inciden t ch anged significant l y between 1998 and 2000 In 1 998, the r e were 237 i nciden t s where 5 vehic l es were he l d a s opposed to 45 inciden t s in 2000 and there w ere 190 incident s w h en I 0 v ehicles w ere he ld as opposed to 2 6 incidents i n 20 00 In creas e s i n one t o four vehicles h eld were not e d in 2000 Figure 22 i llustrat e s th ese change s 2!0 200 c :!! .s ISO 0 z 7. 1 00 5 0 () --A "\ .A. 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 II 1 2 13 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 9 All Nu mbtro(Vchi<:lcs -1998 t m -zooo Jo' i gure 22 Number o f Ve hicl es H eld at Station P age 57 o f 146

PAGE 58

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II t\lletromover Figure 23 illustrates each vehicle's percentage of t o t a l vehicles remove d from service. In 2000, the number of times each veh i cle was remove d from service never reached three percent and generally fell below the h igh percen t ages recorded in 1998 and 1999. 4% ..----------------4% . . .. .. .. ........................................................ .... -----------------------I 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 I I 1 2 1 3 1 4 I.S 1 6 17 1 8 19 20 21 22 2:i 24 25 26 27 28 29 All Vc.:hicl e Number -,m -1999 -2ooo I<'igure 23 -% o f Total R emova l s from Service Removal of v eh i cles was required about one-th i rd of the time. Figure 24 illustrates the relationship between vehicles r emoved from service and vehicles that continued to operate in service. This relationship appears to be consistent over the three-year period No Vehi c les RcnlO\'Cd Vchi1C$ R emoved 1 ..........,,,_,.- / j ) . -. . . -0 100 200 400 5 00 600 100 tl af lneidel'lts F igure 24 -Ve h icles R e m on'(( from a n d R etained i n Servi ce Page 58 of 146

PAGE 59

Rail & Mover Reltabilitatiou R e port Phase II -Metromover The S ta tions at which pas sengers were deboarded are illustrated in Figure 25. Government Center appears to b e disproportionately hig her because, when possi bl e p assenger s are transported to there for deboarding to faci l itate transfer t o other destinations. Third Street Station and Bayfront Park Station show hig her numbers of incidents while m ost other stations either remained the same or actually had very few deboardings 2 0 1 8 1 6 1 4 'E 1 2 i Q 1 0 u 8 6 4 2 0 f.\ '\. l'\v '\. "" .......... .. / v'\ --v ....... 7'-' -1! 2 -!i g < l "l! g i i! g t! s 0 g v c -l! $ ,. ($ VI , 0 0 VI C VI "' :; < Q r -1! ] 0 f "' ;; .. -5 I > E 2 "' Jl e 5 i:2 3 e ;! e & u: '!!' I "' ... ,, g 0 c "' ... E ., u - c "' 2 0 "' "' to..-atio n 1998 -1999 zooo Figure 25 D e boardings by Station The nature of the malfunction is presented in F igure 26. Since 1998 the six most frequent malfun ct ion s have r emai ned the same with simil ar rates of freque ncy and include: door Automa ti c Train Operation, overspeed no depar t, power, and n o arrive. PageS9 Q{ 146

PAGE 60

100 90 80 I 7 0 6 0 .2 5 0 ., 40 ;1: 3 0 20 10 0 --C'r-...,.., .A N a t ure o f Malf u n ctio n -Rail & Mover Rehabi/it(l.(ion Report Phase II M efromover Figure 26Nature of Malfunction Cause of delay i s illustrated in Figure 27. Vehicle malfunctions accounted for 84 percent of all incidents in 1998, 80 percent of all iucidents in 1999, and 79 percent of all incidents in 2000 There were 50 fewer incidents due to vehicle malfunc t ion in 2000, as compared to 1998 Page 60 of 146

PAGE 61

Vehk l c Malf\lll<;tion TrJi n Conlrol Other I'()Wtl' Computer -F.mcr&c.cy Gat e 0 0 i5 Gu ideway C onununiC3tions Traction Power A lann 0 s o 100 I S O 200 Number of 1ft: I<\)' $ Figure 27 -Cause of De l a y R a il & Mov er R ehabilitation Report Phase II Metromove r 2SO 300 Incidents per vehicle a re ill u strate d in Figure 28 All P hase I vehicles except v ehi c le 12 reported fewer in c idents in 20 0 0. Phase 2 vehic les 13, 15, 19, and 2 4 reporte d h i gh numbers of i ncidents c ompared with 1998 a n d 1999. In c i d e nts i n v o lv ing all vehicl e s in c r e ased from 0 in 1998 to 2 in 1 999, and to 6 in 2000 . -------------------I 2 3 4 S 6 7 $ 9 J() II 1 2 l:t 14 15 1 6 l 7 1 $ 1 9 2() 2 1 22 2:l 24 2 $ 26 2 7 2$ 29 A ll Vehi c l e Number 1 ??8 -1999 2000 Fi g u r e 28Incidents b y V e hicl e Page 6 1 of 14 6

PAGE 62

Rail & Mov e r R e habilitation R e port Phase II -Metromover Location of incidents charted in Figure 29 indicates t he stations with the highe s t numbers of in cidents are Govenunen t Center, College North, Kn i ght C e nter, T hird Str e et, and Omoi. Co ll ege Bays ide and Bayfi ont Park, which ar e not incl uded i n th i s list r e corded h i g h inc ide n t s during 1998 and 1999 z o -------------------------------......... --..-----------I O" --! I s L __ o-------------------Flgure 29-L ocat ion oflncidcnt Page 6 2 of I 46

PAGE 63

Rail & Mover Rehabilitatio11 R eport Phase II -Metromover The following system map i d entifie s the highest incident locations for 2000. No apparent trends, in terms of loop or high incident corri dor are seen regarding the location of incidents 04 J TUl.LOOP I OOWNTOWN ()Off,ll, 1,001' Locerioo (;enl(r N01th K.ni$hl Ccn1<1 Third Sm:ct Qmn; Ruyfro n t St & Eishl h S1 Baysido.! Hr.n screct $c:hoollklant I Figure 30High Incident Locations i n 200 0 26 24 23 22 20 IS 1 3 1 2 II Page 63 of 146

PAGE 64

Rail & Maver Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromol'er During weekday revenue service on the first sb ift four recov ery technicians are on duty and are assigned as follows: Omni Loop l Brickell loop 1 Inner/Outer loops2 The recovery technician assigned to the Omni Loop is also responsible for completing daily vehicle inspec tions at the Sch ool Board Maintenance Shop. Concern was raised that the response time of t he Omni recovery t echnician was longer than the other recovery technicians' respo nse tim es as a result of the additional inspection responsibilities. Two factors included in the incident log were the "time technician was dispatched to., the in cid ent and the "time the technician arrived at., the in cident. Unfortu nately these factors were not availab le from the Unusual Occurrence Reports until March 2000; therefore, the database contains only !57 entries. Additionally, th ere were several en tries tbat showed disparit i es in the reported times (i.e., arrival time occurred prior to dispatc h time). As a result, rather than simply computing an average time for the responses, the mode, th e most commonly occurring time, was used as a benchmark for co mparison The most frequently occurring response time for all incidents was 5 minutes with 26 occurrences. Figure 3 1 represents response times for the 157 incide nts in t erms of those responses that required less than 5 minutes 5 minutes, or more than 5 minutes Slightly over half of the respo nses were accomplished in Je. ss than five minutes. Response t ime was longest for the Brickell Loop followed by the Omni Loop. There is no indication that Omni recovery tedmician response time is longer; in fact the Omni recovery t echnician exceed ed a 5-minute r esponse time on I I of 22 occasions, while th e Brickell recovery technician exceeded a 5-minute response time on 19 of 33 incidents. The General Superintendent expressed concern regarding the Recovery Technician perfo rming vehicle inspe ct ions, and then respon ding to the general public for recovery in a disheveled state due to the nature of the inspection work. He recommended that an additional Metromover Tedmician position be funded to assist the Metromover Techn ician currently assigned to perform daily vehicle insp ections; the Recovery Technic ian would no lon ger assist with daily inspections. Page 64 of / 46

PAGE 65

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover 2S .,------------------" j 3 );; 'li 0 ., ... < c < 5 Minutes 5 Minutes > S Min utd Figure 31 -Recovery Tech nician Res p onse T ime There was also some discussion regarding stationing a Recovery Supervisor at Central Control to assist in restoring a failed vehicl e to service In terviews were conducted with maintenance and Central Control personneL Both groups generally agreed that in those instances when Central Control is unable to return a vehicle to service recovery assistance is needed at the site of the failure ra t her than at Central ControL There are clearly defined trou ble-shooting procedures i n p lace at Central Control, and Central Contro l pet'sotme l appeared to be familiar with the procedures and knowledgeable in all aspects of vehicle failures and failure management of the system. When those procedures are unsuccessful, hands-on assistance at the scene of the failure is required. The final factor considered in the incident log was the amount of time reguil_'ed fo,! resu".)ption of service after arrival of the recovery technician. Over hal f of the time serYice was reswned in one minute or less, and 90 percent of the time, service was restored within ten minutes or less. Restoration of service is illustrated in Figure 32. Page 65 of 146

PAGE 66

2 5 0 200 / \ ISO !i \ o .s 0 100 "" \ 50. 0 0 2 3 ""--. 4 s 6 1 Rail & Move r R e habilitation R e port Phase lJ -Metromover I 8 9 1 0 II+ M inllles R.:quiK>d t o Resume Service Figure 32 Time Required to Resu m e Service Metromover Vehicle AllocatiQfl Metromover has historica ll y operated five vehicles on each loop during weekdays and three vehicles per loop on weekends. While those vehicles have routinely operated as sin gle car trains, two car train s are used during special events, and, only recently, two of the vehicles were reconfigured as two-car trains i ncreasing the weekday revenue vehicle requirement to 17 vehicles Headways remained unchanged since five "trains" continue to operate on each l oop ; however ridership capacity was increased by virtue of the fact t ha t those five trains now consist of 17 rather than 15 vehicles. In t h e abse n ce of agency data regarding hoardings by hour for each individual sta t ion, hoardings by station were viewed from two different perspectives to examine the allocation of five vehicles to each loop The first consis t ed of an examination of each s t ation's percent of th<; -total during FY 2001 Over 40 percen t of t otal hoardings occurred at Government Center, a key station on the Downtown Inner/Outer Loop. Govenm1ent Center was followed by Bayfront Park Station, also on the Downtown Inner / Outer Loop, with 11 percen t of b ? ard ings. Brickell, a s ignificant statio n on the Brickell exten sion ranked t h ird wi tlf l 0 percent of the total hoardings followed by Omni Station the mo s t significant s t ation on the Omni with 6 percent of total hoardings. A graphic presentation of the percent of to t al hoardings by s t ation is presented in Figu re 33 Pa ge 66 of 146

PAGE 67

4S .O% 40 0 % 35.0o/. 0 r l().oo/. 1? 0 0 l S Oo/. -;; 2().0% -0 15. 0 % 1 0.0% S.O% 0.0% /'\. 1? E g ,. 0 "' 8 1 E 0 0 0 Me ll'()nl(t\er l..ink$ wilh M1f'()r:lil -.... ......... " i! :li = 1!. v. = v. 1'. 0 8 z < 1? g !! ., e :a ff u: ... = .. a: :;: 0 v Sta1ion % Uoordi ngs Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll -Metromover 1\ I 1 l: .. " > 2 -5 "' .. ji = .. "' ,!: w c < "' Figure 33Percent of FY 2001 Total Boardings by Station The significance of boardings at s tations other than Government Center is very difficult to detennine simply because of the scope of the service provided at Government Center To that end, station boardings by weekday, Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays were evaluated. Tab le 27 presents an overview of those data by station, sorted i n a descending maimer by number of total boardings. Each s tation was awarded between I and 20 points based on where boardings a,t that station fell in relationship to all other stations. Government Center received 20 points in e ach of the types of days, since it recorded the highest station boardings on weekdays, Saturday, Sundays, and Holidays On the other hand, Fifth Street Station received a score of I for Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays, because it recorded the lowest number of'Station boari:lings on those days. Since there are 20 stations on the Metromover Loops, a sctire of 20 was chosen as the maximum score that could be earned. Page 67 of 146

PAGE 68

Rail & Mover Rehabililalion Report Phase II -Metmmover Tabl e 27F\:' 2001 Bondings by Statio n by Day Boardings Stations Weekdav Satudav Sunda}' Holidav Total Go\'emment Center 1 ,706 608 174,954 136,768 57.479 2,075.810 Bayfront Park 486,135 26.89 3 20,981 8,38 L 542,390 Brickell 405,795 31,510 27,3&0 1 6,385 481 ,07( College/Bayside 221,768 25,638 23.094 6,545 277,046 Omni 219 ,900 26.073 24,380 6.633 276 9 86 Miami Avenue 1 42,224 9.854 4 903 2,632 159,613 Knight Center 133,55 4 9.309 6.519 2 ,430 1 51,8 1 1 First Street 116.564 13,911 11.981 2 ,783 145,239 ColJege Nonh 130,121 6 ,728 4 ,420 1,544 1 42,813 Eighth Street 107.945 4 ,989 4,344 I ,315 118,593 f i nancia l District 102,204 7,095 5 ,103 1,745 116,148 Schoo l Boar d 59,015 9,328 7,653 1 ,750 77, 7 4 6 If enth Street 55,292 2 429 1.743 671 60,135 Arena/State Plaza 4 8.707 5.300 3 ,488 1.113 58,609 rrhird Street 32,315 3 ,140 2,087 584 41,126 Fitl h Str
PAGE 69

25 --Rail & Mover Rehabiliwtion Report Phase If -Metromover 20 ----------------' I I : j_:--...---v----11 t 0 "' ,. d c I< If .;;; a f 0 i! < 11 v if "' g i E ,g If. g " E ,_ a-"' 0 ,g "' -" E = '" g :;: "' 6 "' <3 < 1 ';; .. !r J 1l "' c g ., "' '" ii: :; w ii: Om:ti lco.lp J111uOucr Figure 34 Stations Ranked by Number of Boardiogs, FY 2001 Metromo1er Vehicle Condition The Metromover Chief Superv isors were asked to evaluate the current condition of the mover vehicles, using a consistent set of definitions for establishing the condition of each subsystem The ratings throughout this report wete adapted from UMTA's Rail Modemization Report 1987 and provide one rating scheme for eva l uating a rail system. The definitions used for assigning condition codes to t he mover vehicles are presented in Table 28. Page 69 r>f 146

PAGE 70

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -M e tromover Table 28 Definitions of Mover Vehicle Condit ions Code I Bad Major deterioration Stroctural corrosion .Extensive surface corrosion, c racks. rot Any failurebrakes, suspension, train control Frequent failuresdoors) HV AC Obs olete-parts interchangeabl e 2 Poor Deterioration Surface corrosion Scr atched, opaque Worn floor coverins Frequent failures-doors. HVAC motors Obsolete ele<::tronic. equipme-nt 3 Fair Deterioration Scratched, opaque windows Worn floor covering, shock absorbers Occasional failures Obsolete eloc,roni c equipment 4 Good Minor deterioration Worn scats., floors Some wheel flats Very fe. w service failures Phase I and Phase 2 vehicle conditions were rated independently using a scale of I -5 for condition (at i ngs of bad, poor fair good and excellent. The lower the numerical rating, the worse the vehicle condition The project team rates the o verall condition of bot h Phase I and Phase 2 mover vehicles as fair five systems rat ed "poor," and most systems rated "fair." The highest rating of "fair" was achieved in electrical, propulsion & dynamic braking, lighting, HV AC, guidance, suspension, carbody, communications and spring brake. Table 29 provides a summary of the evaluations. Page 70 qf 146

PAGE 71

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Melromover Table 29 Ratings of Mover Vehicle System Conditions Rating Item Phase I Phase2 E lectrical 3 3 Prop & Dyn Bmking 3 3 Differential 2 2 Doors 2 2 Lig.hting 3 3 IWAC 3 3 l 'ncumatic 2 2 ATC 2 2 G uidanee 3 3 Fric.t io n Brakes 2 2 Suspension 3 3 Caroooy 3 3 Communications 3 3 Spring Brake 3 3 Average 3 3 The areas that rated "poor" included differential, doors pneumatic, ATC and friction brakes The sensitive edge assembly and passenger interface l owe r ed door ratings. Pneumat i c ratings were negatively effected by air l eaks, air control package and air compr e ssor The main ATC equipment and A TO systems drove down ATC ratings. Chambers and brake adjusters lowered friction brake ra t ings Bombardier Transportation, fonner l y Adtranz, recently completed a Health Check of the Metromovcr vehic les, ATC and wayside. Bombardier Transportation's findings2 are consist e nt with Metromover Maintenance ratings Bombardier reviewed the pin ion seal modification proposed by Metromover and recommended some follow-up a c tion prior to implementation. While vehicle doors were found to be in good condit ion, weak springs were discovered, which along w ith wom cable were not retracting resulting in intennittent door closing problems. Bombardier indicated that the Phase I vehicles are equipped with the old sty l e air dryers that allow moisture into the air system Metromover is currently replacing these air dryers through scheduled maintenance Bombard ier recommended that level valves, air bags and brake chambers be inspect ed, and replacement of valves and air bags where necessary There was no s ignificant difference in ratings between Phase I and Phase 2 vehicles. As a result of the Health Check, Metromover Maintenance revised the vehicle PM schedu l e to include the following PM activities: Transportation. Draft M iami-Dade Metro Mover DPM Vehicle Status Healt h Check, August 13, 200 I Page 71 of/46

PAGE 72

Vehicle Drive Shafts +600 hours Balancing Drive Shafts Re-chroming Yokes Replace Pi1uon Seals Replace High Speed Ramps + 500 hours Vehicle Hardware Replacement+ 200 hours Paint and Repair Motor Control Boxes Replace all Hardware with Stainless Steel Fasteners Total additional Vehicle PM hours= 800 hours R
PAGE 73

Rail & Mover Rehabilirarion Report Phase ll Merromove r mileage within Metrorail was a significant issue in that regard. Within Metromover from FY 1995 through FY 2000, Phase I annual growth per vehicle averaged 22,000 32,000 miles, while Phase 2 annual growth per vehicle averaged 34, 000 44,000 miles. The Phase 2 vehicles, on average, logged more miles than Phase I vehicles logged. Based on the cunent rate of mileage growth, each Phase 1 vehicle will average nearly 388,000 miles at the end of FY 2005, and Phase 2 average miles per vehicle will approach 392,000 miles. As Phase 1 vehicles are removed from service for their midlife overhaul Phase 2 vehicles will be used with greater frequency to fill the void. If current trends continue, the projected 392,000 average miles per Phase 2 vehicle could grow even higher. Given that Phase 2 vehicles will not experience their chronological midlife until 2014, fourteen years from now, efforts should be undertaken to minimize mileage within the Phase 2 fleet to ensure a fleet of sufficient size in the future and to maximize use of the Phase I vehicles until their midlife overhaul. 700.000 500,000 +-----..., 400.000 :; ) 00,000 200.000 1 00.000 0 2000 ____ .,., ..,..,_a 2003 2004 2005 Figure 36 P h ase 1 Mover V chicle Mileage Growth Page 73 of 146

PAGE 74

500.000 450.000 400,000 }50 000 JOO.OOO 250, 000 :< 200. 000 150. 000 100.000 5 0.000 0 2000 Rt1il & Mover Rehabi/it(l(ion Report Phase II Me/remover -Mu.ximum c:::::::::JMinimum -Range -Average l''igun 37-Phase 2 Mover Vehicle Mileage Gro"1h. Figures 38 and 39 reflect the impact on Phase I and Phase 2 mover vehicle mileage of a routine cycle of storing the four highest mileage Phase 2 vehicles for a period of 90 days followed by the storage of the four second highest mileage vehicles, and so on. The storage program proposed is quite different than the mothballing program used by the agency previously. Under this proposed storage program, a vehicle could spend a maximum of 90 days in storage. The vehicle would receive its regularly scheduled inspection prior to storage and should be capable of being returned to service immediately at the end of the 90-day period, after receiving a storage inspection By normalizing mileage, the agency should be able to achieve delay of a Phase 2 midlife overhaul until 2014. A short-term storage program also reduces manhours required for PM by eliminating the daily, 37 day, and 75-day inspections that active service vehicles would nonnally require. Savings would vary depending upon the number of vehicles stored and duration of the storage period. In this scenario, Phase I average vehicle miles increase from 388,000 to 407,000 miles, while Phase 2 average vehicle miles decrease from 392 000 to 377,000 miles. Varying the length of the rotation, the number of vehicles rotated, and the phase of vehicles participating in the rotation w ill yield a variety of results. At the present time, Metromover maintenance is implementing the storage program described above, and four high mileage Phase 2 vehicles are in stora .ge. A review of 200 I cumulative mileage figures shows that actual 2001 mileage increased at a rate of 13.8 percent rather than the 9.8 percent reflected in mileage projections The split of Phase / Phase 2 mileage continued to show a slight increase in Phase 2 mileage as a percent of the total mileage Actual Phase 2 mileage in 2000 equaled 46.2 percent of total mileage; actual Phase 2 mileage in 2001 equaled 47.8 percent of total mileage; nonetheless, it appears tbat the use of Phase I vehicles increased significantly. Average Phase I vehicle mileage increased to 40 622 miles, and 11 of 12 Phase I vehicles fell in the top 12 high-mileage vehicles, compared with 10 of 12 Phase I vehicles in that category during 2000. Page 74 of 146

PAGE 75

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Plwse II A-letromover 700,(100 600,000 500,000 400,000 ::;: 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2 000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 M: ..ximum l=::lMinirnum Figure 38 Normalized Phase 1 Mover Veh.lcle Mlleage 4$0 000 400 000 !-------------------------------------------------------------------350,000 t----------.. 300. 000 250.000 ::; 200 000 150. 000 50, 000 0 2 000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 C=:::JMinhnun' -R:ws -Aver.).!C Figure 39 NormaUzed Phase 2 Mover Vehicle Mileage 2005 2005 The Office of Management and Budget has committed to pledging a portion of the local option gas tax to issue $140 mi llion in bonds to fund Metrorail and Metromover vehicle rehabilitation programs. The FY 2001-2008 MDT Capital Program identifies $15.4 million for the overhaul of Mctromover Phase t vehicles beginning in FY 2003 According to Adtranz, following a comparison study of rehabilitation versus rep l acement, the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority in 1992 began to replace all the original equipment that was supp li ed by Adtranz in 1971 with new eq uipm ent. The original equ ipm ent rep l aced under the program included Central Co ntrol, wayside automatic train control equipment, station doors, and four vehicles serving Airside C and Airside D. Page 75 of 146

PAGE 76

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll -Metromover The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority in 1996, after a comparison study of rehab ili tation versus replacement, began to rehabilitate the twelve original veh i c l es supplied by Adtranz i n 1981. The original vehicles had achieved their design life of I ,000,000 miles and were in need of major rehabilitation or replacement foll ow ing a comparison study of rehabili tat ion vetsus replacement, the City of Atlanta in 2000 began to replace the 24 original vehicles supplied by Adtranz in 1980. The original vehicles achieved their design life of 20 years and were in need of major rehab ilit ation or replacement. MD T can take advantage of the rehabilitation versus replacement studies conducted by these three agencies prior to making their decision for Phase I vehicle overhaul. In response to a March 2000 reques t to Adtranz for information regarding typical work scope performed during remanufacture of Adtranz CX 100 vehicle, Adtranz provided a budgetary esti m ate of $1.3 million per vehicle. All upgrades of the existing Phase 1 fleet must occur within the confines of the 8.8 miles of guideway that also serves the Phase 2 fleet. MD T invested substantial resources to insure Phase I and Phase 2 compatibility when the sys t em was expanded in 1 994, and despite that investment, Phase I vehicles have continually performed at a level lower than Phase 2 on the expanded system. Efforts must be taken to ensure MDT receives maximum benefits from new technology without denigrating the performance of the Phase 2 vehicles which should remain in service until 2014. Metromover Wayside Conditiofl The Metromover Chief Supervisors were asked to evalua t e the current condit i on of the mover wayside power d i stribution system and system-wide ccntrols using a ccns is tent set of de. finitions for establishing the condition. The ratings throughout this report were adapted from U MTA' s Rail Moderniza t ion Report 1987 and provide one rating scheme for eva l uat i ng a rail system. The definitions used for assigning cond i tion codes to the mover power distribution system and system-wide controls are presented i n Table 30 a n d T able 31. Page 76 of 146

PAGE 77

Condition Code 2 3 4 5 Ctmd;tion Code 2 3 4 5 Rail & Mover Rehabilitatio11 Report Phase II A.fetromover Table 30-D efin ition s of M ove r Power Distributi on Conditions Category Definition Bad Major equipment older than des i gn l ife Spare parts unavailab le Subs.tation capacity inadequa te for peak load Poor Single major substation component is s tate of the art remainder nc-uln g end of design Some spare pans unavailab l e Fair Equipment age midlifc 50 75% of maj or components. remainder ar end of desig n l ife Spare parts becoming unavailable Good t-.tajo r equipment state of the art and i n s er vice 1 0 + years tvtino r component sub$ t itution required to restore equipmen t to orig i n al reliability Exc-ellent Major equipment ins talled within past 10 years No problems exis.t Table 31 -Definitions of Mover System wide Controls Co ndition s Category lld Poor Fair Good Excellen t Definition Inoperative. womout or broken items i ncapab le of proper operat ion Poor physica l appearance. dirt )'. wom materia l s Loose mountings. temporary repairs evidence of r epa i rs Acceptable appearance, mino r dus t repairs n e eded Repairs failc.d to retutn equipment to as built condition GO()d appearanc e, clean No significa nt repairS. n o devices no d e ter i oration Brand no evidence-of problem s or r epa irs The Chief Supervisor, Rail Structure Maintenance, was asked to evaluate the current co nditi o n of the mover structures using a consistent set of definitions for establishing the condition of each component. The definitions used for as signing condition codes t o the mover structures are presented in Table 32. Condition Code I 2 3 4 5 Table 32Definitions of Mover Structu r e Conditions Cutegmy Oi!flniriOJI Sad Stn.tccun: has faile d andlc,n deterio r ate d to t h e point that cr eates a serio u s hazard Poor Structure requires frequent major repairs to function as i ntended Fair Str u cture requi r es frequen t minor repairs to function as intended Good Structu r e requires infrequent minor repairs Excellent Stru c ture i s brand n ew. no major prob lems ex i st Page 77 of 146

PAGE 78

A summary of tho s e ev a luations is presented in Ta ble 33. Rail & Mover Rehabili t ation Report Phase ll Merromover Table 33 Ratings of Move r Wayside Conditions Rat ing .Raling Systems Item Phase I Pha .
PAGE 79

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase Jl -kfetromover Bombardier Transportation, formerly Adtranz, recently completed a Health Check of the Metromover vehicles, ATC, and wayside. Bombardier Transportation's find ings3 are consistent with Metromover Maintenance ratings. Bombardier noted that problems were encountered with power rail conditions and recommended replacement of all high-speed ramps and implementation of a high-speed ramp rebuild program. In terms of power rail configuration, Bombardier suggested that the power rail layout for both inner and outer loop be mat ched to improved reliability and availability and recommended that all power feed cable and PDS breaker buss bars be high pot tested and meggered every 48 months to identify potential cable and breaker problems. Bombardier also recommended a complete track mapping on both loops using Phase I and Phase II vehicles. Bombardier indi cated that once the track map is completed, problems can be located from the system track plan, and the ways ide junct ion box es can be checked before v eh icle signal levels are modified. As a result of the Health Check, Metromover Maintenance revised the wayside PM schedule to i nclude the following PM activities: Switch Hi-Cycle Yearly Inspection Replace Lock Pin Cylinders + 800 mmual hours Replace Beam Cylinders and tolerances of Cam Controller+ 400 hours Replace Sphe rical Bearing +2,500 hours Replace High Speed Ramps+ 500 hours Power Feed and Power Rail Re-route and reinforce cable insulation between the "!" Beam and Support Brackets + I ,300 hours Total additiona l Ways i d e PM hours= 5,500 hours Phase l steel girders ofMetromover were rated "fa.ir stn1cture requires frequent minor repairs to fimction as intended." The last insp e ction cycle produced 3,700 conditions that require repair to ensure long-term durability, and 3 467 of the conditions were identi tied as "severe mst.'' The Track & Guideway General Superintendent indicated that although these conditions are minor at this time, based on overall impact on the ex i s ting i ntegrity of the structure they will continue to worsen if oot repaired and estimated it will take approximately three years to address these conditions with existing staff Pha se 2 structures ach i eved an "excellent" rating. Track & Guideway committed in ex cess of I ,000 labor hours annually to the maintenance and repair of Metromover. Metromover Wayside Maintenance and Repair Metromover is evaluating the current allocation of manpower to ma in tenance and repair of the Wayside which is accomplished today on the 3"' shift using a complem ent of twe lve Metromover Technicians and two Metromover Mai ntenance Supervi s ors. Two of those twelve technicians arc assigned to a special crew referred to as the switch crew. The appropriate size of l Bombardier Transportation, Metro Mover DPtv1 ATC & Wayside Health Check, August 1 3 200 1 Pag e 79 of/46

PAGE 80

Rail & Mover Rehahilitation Report Phase II Metromover that switch crew, the possible need for a specific t rack crew, and a methodology for determining a schedule of rail replacement are issues that have been identified. Switch A n a lys i s Swi tch PM a n d Repair logs were provided by Metromover Maintena n ce and were re v iewed for F i sca l Years 1999 and 2000. Rail Maintenance Contro l in con junc t ion with engineering staff assigned to Met r omover provided a summary of Me tromover's Ways i d e Over h aul Progra m that contained complete fiscal year data for FY 1995 through FY 2000 Overhau l data were com pi led from existing sour ces and were, therefore subject to a variety of report i ng d i fferences. Data used from the overhaul for the switch analys i s were limited to data that referenced a switch as the l ocation of the work and were identified by Mctromover Maintenance as the t ype of work t ha t would specifically i nvolve a switch PM labor hours for swi t ches are reported by area. T h ose areas include : Hi Cycle, Zone I, Zone 2, and Zone 3. Specific swi t ches within each of those areas are illustrated in Tab le 34. T ab le 34-Swi t c h es by Area HiCycle Zone I Zone 2 Zone3 Switch 01 Switch II Sw i tch 03 Switch 06 Sw i tch 02 Switch 12 Sw i tch ()4 Swi tch 07 Sw i tch 09 Switch 1 3 Switch 05 S\virch 52 Switch 10 Switc h 1 4 Swi tch 08 Switc h 53 Switch 1 5 Switth 17 Switch 2 1 Switch 54 Swi t ch 16 Switch 2 2 Switch;; Switch 23 Switch 56 The switch PM!Repair and overhaul records as summarized in T able 35, indicate a n increase in FY 2000 P M labor h ours from 58 percent to 73 percent and a decrease in overhau l labor hours from 21 percent to 6 percent. Total labor houl".. allocated for swi tch PM, repair, and overhaul declined from 3,602 hours in FY 1999 to 3,413 hours i n FY 2000 appr oxima t e l y 5 percent. Page 80 of I 46

PAGE 81

Rttil & Mover Rehabiliwtion Report Phase II -Metromover T able 35Switc h PM, R epai r and Overhaul Labor Hour s FY 1999 FY2000 737 23 30 49 99 41 56 97 39 6 2 423 36 459 562 89 35 12 47 2 1 2 66 66 22 2 3 520 39 559 545 45 15 1 5 35 101 184 285 51 5 1 51 106 55 55 23 2 1-Zone 1 421 65 180 666 5 2 1 2 2 3 3 6 6 3 12 12 6 4 2 60 62 1 5 69 5 -Hi-Cycl e 17 64 81 34 6 -Hi-Cy
PAGE 82

1.000 900 8 00 700 :: -600 z soo .. "' 4 00 :> 300 2 00 100 0 HiCycle Zon e 1 Z o ne2 S w i lt:h f y(l () Rail & Mover Rehab ili tfifion R epor t Phas e If M e tromover Zone J Fi gure 4 0 S witch PM b y A r ea A com pariso n of labor h ours for r e pair is p r esen ted in F i gure 41. Lo-cycl e swi tch 8 in FY 1 999 and hi-cycle switch 9 i n FY 2000 req u ired the &'Teat esl number of repair labor hours Swi t che s that required no repair i n cluded s w i tch 52 in FY 1999 a n d switc hes 13, 21, and 55 in FY 2000 R epair hours per switch ranged from 0 to 1 0 I in FY 1999 an d f rom 0 to I 06 i n FY 2000 A total of 7 40 s wi tch r e pair hou rs were l ogged in F Y 1 999 as compared to 724 hours i n FY 2000 12 0 1 00 .2 w ;-. 0 .:l "' "' "' "' "' -N N N "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' Switch -rv 1999 F v 2 ooo F igure 4 1 -Sw i t c h Repa i r Labor H o u rs Page 8 2 of /46

PAGE 83

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll Metromover A graphic comparison of the hi-cycle and t o-cyc l e switches i s presented in Fig u re 42 Repair hou r s required for hi cycle sw i tches appear to be co n sistent l y h i ghe r than hours required for t o cycle switches While individual to-cycle switches showed a s i gnificant level of repairs in either FY 1999 or in FY 2000, hi cycle switches tend routinely to show a higher repair labor hour requirement. 120r------------------------------------------------100 ;-----A,--------------"' I ::I :b ... IJJ.J .. l S witch F i g ure 42 Hi -Cycle a nd Lo-Cy cl e Swi tches R ep a i r H o u rs Given that swi tc h PM is reported for the zone in which the switch is located rather t han for the individual switch, it is difficult to compute the actual total labor hours including PM, repair and over h aul for each switch; however, it is possible to examine the average h ours per switch within each zone Eac h zone is outlined in Tab l e 36 FY 1999 average total l abor hours ranged from a h igh of 182 tbr h i cycle switches to a low of 98 for lo -c yc le swit ch es in Zone 3; tl )e range for FY 2000 was from a high of 189 for hicycle switches to a low of 99 for lo-c 9 cle switches in Zone 3. Page 83 of 146

PAGE 84

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metrornover Table 36-Average Total Labor Hours by A r ea F Y I 999 T owl l.alx>r Hour.-.. Hi-C>cle Zone I Zone 2 Zone 3 Switch 01 850 Swit ch II 666 Swit ch 03 459 Switch 06 559 Switch02 97 Switch 12 3 Switch 04 47 Switc h 07 15 Switch 09 51 Switch 13 12Switch 05 66 Switch 52 0 Switch 10 55 Switc h 14 62 Switch 08 285 Switch 53 69 Switch IS 8 1 Switc h 17 13 Switch 2 1 79 Swit ch 54 25 Switch 16 116 Sw itch 22 16 Switch 55 8 Swit ch 23 21 Switch 56 7 Iota! 1,271 7 56 952 683 Averae.e 182 151 159 98 FY 2000 Tmollabor Ho11rs Hi-Ctde Zone I Zone2 ZoneJ Switch 01 1 ,036 Switch II 523 Switch 03 651 Switch 06 590 Switch 02 45 Swit ch 1 2 12 Switch 0 4 23 Switch 07 35 Switch 09 106Swi t ch 1 3 6Switch OS 24 Switch 52 12 Switch 10 25 Swit ch 1 4 84 Swit ch 08 57 Switch 53 22 Switch I S 34 Switch 17 34 Sw i tch 21 3 Switch 54 3 Switch 16 21 Switch 22 tO Switc h 55 0 Switch 23 56 Sw itch 56 32 Total 1,323 659 768 694 189 132 128 99 The average total labor hours for FY 1999 and FY 2000 per switch within each zone are graphically presented in Figures 43 and 44 The averages are relatively consistent between fiseal years, with the hi-cycle switches requiring the most labor and Zone 3 lo-cycle switches requiring the leas t labor. Page 84 of 146

PAGE 85

2 6 % R ail & Mov er Relza/Ji/itafion R epo rt Phase II Metromover F igure 4 3 FY I 999 Average Labor Hours per S wit c h 24% Figure 44 F Y 2000 Av erage Labor Hours per S witch The re l a tion sh ip between PM, repair and o v erhau l labo r hours b y zone i s ex am i ned i n Figures 4 5 an d 4 6 D u ring F Y 19 9 9 h i -cycle swi t ches req u i r ed the l argest number o f PM ho urs bu t ranked seco n d i n t h e need for re p a i r hours and th i rd i n t he a rea of o verhau l. Pag e 85 of 146

PAGE 86

Rail & Move
PAGE 87

Rail & Mover Reltabiliralion Reporr Phase II -Metromover Maintenance are somewhat low in comparison to projected hours. The reports tend to indicate t hat labor requirements for daily hi-cycle switch inspections are being underreported. lf that is the case, then labor hours dedicated to switch PM, repair, and overhaul could be expec ted to be somewha t higher than t hose hours reported today. Based on manpower analyses conducted t o date, a switch crew of two technic i ans is in c apable of performing switch PM, repair and overhaul at today'slevel. Based solely on current labor hour requ i rements without regard for the window of availability for wayside access, the switch crew re. quires a minimum of three technicians. R ail A n a l ys is Rail Maintenance Con trol provided a summary of Metromover's Overhaul Program in conjunction with engineering staff assigned to Metromover. While the summary provided data from Fisca l Years 1994 th ro ugh 2001 complete fiscal year data were available only from FY t 995 through F Y 2000. F urthermore, overhaul data were compiled from existing sources and were, therefore subject to a variety of reporting differences, spec i fically regarding t h e location of the work. Metromover Maintenance reviewed the overhaul data and identified the various types of work that were involved in the overhaul. All of the detailed analyses presented in t h is report are made using t h ose data from F Y 1995 t h rough FY 2000 t hat n ot only referenced a switch or s tation as the location of t h e work but also were based on the type of work identified by maintenance. In the course of the a n alysis it became apparent that the location listed as "main tenance" might have been used to capture costs and/or hours that did no t fall int o one of the other categories. Overhaul data by fiscal years 1 995 t hrough 2000 are presented in Table 37 and Figure 47. The significan t increas e in overh aul cos t s identified in FY 2000 appears to be directly related to t h e increase in the cost of parts. Table 37-W a yside Overhau l by F iscal Yea r Wa,side FY95 FY96 FY97 r-Y91J FY99 FYOO FY95-00 Orders 7 4 213 182 141 101 133 !Pons Cost $81,273 $102,43 4 $100,339 $71, 890 $205.389 $642,40 Labor Hours 389 2.791 2 ,558 2,028 1 96 4 3,0 4 6 12,77. L;ibor Cost $13.53 I $97.211 $89,()78 $70 635 $68 406 $106 075 $444 93( otal Cost $94,804 $199.645 $170.158 $ 1 70,974 $140,296 $31),4 64 $1.087.341 Page 87 of 146

PAGE 88

0 0 "' S J50 SlOO $25 0 $200 Rail & Mover Rehabililalion Reporl Phm:e II lvletroxnover $ 150 S IOO $50 FY95 F\'96 f Y97 I'Y98 FY9'J FYOO flsea l Year -Tota1Cosl -unc.ar(T ollllCosl) Figure 4 7 Tota l Overha ul Cost by F i sca l Year The overhaul program involves five categories of wayside work: ATO hardware, jntcrlockings rail and switches. Table 38 provides an overview of the data contained in t he overhaul p lan as it relates to those ca t egories from FY 1995 through FY 2000. T able 38-Waysi d e Overhaul by Category Work Parts Labor Labor Total T voe Orders Cost tloutrs Cos t Cos: ATO 2 $9 41 $1,428 $ 1 437 Hardware 137 $44,621 1 783 $62,084 $106,705 lnlcrlockings 194 $218,729 921 $32,061 $250,790 Rail 474 $221,690 9,693 $337,607 $559,297 Swilch 3 7 $157,358 338 $11, 755 $169, 113 Total 844 $642,407 12, 175 $444 ,935 $1,087,342 . According to th i s informa t ion rail led every ca t egory and represented the largest commitment of manpower and financial resources When t he categories are viewed in terms of each category's relat i onship to the overhaul program in total, several trends emerge. F igure 48 presents each category's percentage of the total overhaul program. Paf{e 88 0!'1 46

PAGE 89

so% r 10 % . ---................. 60 % ..... ............. .... . .. . . . ....... .... .... ... g 50% -40%. 'o .. ) 0 % t 20o/. : 10%: . ... ATO Hardware lnt e -rfockings Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover -Rail t a hmHours&Cost -TollllCoSI Figure 48 -Perce n tage o f Overhaul P rogram by Category While over 70 percent of the total labor within the overhaul program has been dedicated to rail replacement slightly over 30 percent of parts costs were allocated to rail. ln t erlockings on the other hand, which consumed slightly O\'er 20 percent of the labor, accounted for parts costs similar to those of rail slightly over 30 percent of the total. Rail requires a greater investment of labor with less expansive parts. That relationship is further illustrated in the fo ll owing F igures. 4 % ()",4 16% F ig ure 49-Overhaul Program-Work Order% of Tota l Page 89 of 146

PAGE 90

Rail & Move r R eltabili r arioll Report Phas e II M etromover 0% 1% 34% 35% .AT O fl.llf<.!""l\: OrntCI'IOCkin$$ aR;)il swi t c h Figure SOOverhaul Program-Parts Cost% of Total 76% Figur e 51Overhaul ProgramLabor Hours% of Total $ 1 % Figure 52Overhaul ProgramParts + Labor Costs % of Total Page 90 of /46

PAGE 91

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase Jl -Metromover The following series of co lor coded system maps presents data to identify those wayside areas that have incurred the highest expenses and/or most significant labor requirements. ln each case totals represent data that referenced a switch or sta t ion as the location of th e work and in the case of rail, is limited to those areas identified as rail overhaul by Metromover Maintenance Approximately 83 percent of total overhaul costs and in excess of 85 pe rcen t of reported rail costs, are referenced in the follow ing data. Of the 844 entries i n the overhaul program, 474 related to rail work. Switch and/or station l ocations were identified for 651 of the 844 overhaul entries (77 percent) and 366 of the 474 rail entries (77 percent), and th e y form the basis of the following analyses. Page 91 of 146

PAGE 92

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase 1/ -Metr omover The t e n areas with the highest total parts and labor costs are identified in F igure 53. Third Street Station, Maintenance, S w itch I, and Brickell form the top t i er of costs that ranged from $89 ,000 to $78,000. The highest cost in the next t i er was $40 000 reported at Switch 2. Fo u r of the locati o n s T hird S tree t and Switche s I 2 and 3 fall w i thin close p roximit y to one anoth er and are identified by a l arge red c i rcle on the system map. OM'NI OIJTat 1.00 8RI CKEl.l OI)T U 1.()()1' T h i r d S"tt Mllimanncc S-...itdll s .... i leb 1 C<:n tet Sy,i f c h 3 s .... ;":b S-...ltcb 10 Ctnttr Fi gure 53-T otal Overhaul Costs-Top Ten Locations ( $ ) S?.o<6 88. 4?6 88.12 8 7 8 4:.5 3(,..010 34. 1 5(1 :,\2.234 Pag e 9 2 of 146

PAGE 93

Rail & Mover Reha bililation Report Phase II M e tromover F i gure 54 illustrates the ten areas with the largest number of work orders. Brickell recorded the highest number for a total of75 work orders Switch l logged 58 and there were 49 work orders r eport e d at Maintenance Third S t reet Station Switch 23, follows these areas and Government Center with wo r k orders totaling 32 to 36 Locations in close proximity to one another i nclude Third Street and Switches I, 2, and 3 as identified by the red circle. @ B l tiCKEtL OUY k. t.<)(IP I M s l n l tntnee Th irdS itM Swi.teh23 Ctf n e r Sw it c h 2 Swilch 3 O n 'llti S wildM: 5 & 1 6 F i gure 54 -Total o,erhaul Work Orders-T op T eo Locations ss 4 9 3<\ 34 19 24 2 1 20 Page 93 o f 146

PAGE 94

Rail & Mover Reltabilitatio11 Report Phase II A1etromover The ten areas with the highest parts costs are shown in F igure 55. Maintenance led with $56,000, followed by Third Street at $52,000 and Switch I at $47 000. As with total costs and work orders the area, including T hird Street and Switches I, 2, and 3 is identified along with Knight Center (lfOCK UI.. 0.1)7 4 29.496 24.894 :.N.60 2 1 43 Pt1ge 94 of/ 46

PAGE 95

Rail & Mov er Rehabilitatio n Report Pha.se Tl Metromover Highest labor hours outline in Figure 56 were recorded for Switch I Third Str eet, and Brick e ll. In addition to t he Third Street a n d Switches I and 2 corridor hi-lighted in the t h ree prev i ous sys t em maps a new corrido r that inc l udes Government Center, State Plaza Station and Colleg e North is i dentified. Swil cb I 'fll i td $1r\'CI B rid:('lt Mai nlenllnQe C
PAGE 96

ten over hau l categories. Rail & Mover R e habilitati o n Report P hase II -Metr omover Figur e 57 illustr ates to ta l rail costs for the top ten l ocations S witch I accounted for 13 pe rc en t of the tota l rail cos ts and the three h ighest locat i ons combined to equal 35 per cent of t hose costs. A corridor including Third Street Switch I, 3, and 8 is evident. Ve rs ion s of this same conidor appeared in all of the total overhau l system maps. Sta t e P l aza Station College North, Omni, and Switches 3 and 8 did no t rank in the top ten total overhaul costs b u t are i ncluded in the top ten r ail cost locations. \..;:::/ laliotl /-. 1 Orid:ell '"
PAGE 97

Rail & Mov e r R e hab i litali o n Repor/ Ph a s e If -M elromo v e r In tetms of the larg e st number of work orders Figu re 58 shows Brickell and Switch I le ading the gro up a s was t he case with total ra i l cos ts follow e d by Thi r d Street and Mainten a nce Wh il e Go v ernm e nt Center, Stat e Park Plaza College North and Swi t ch 5 constitu t e a corridor only Go v ernmen t Ce n t e r q ualified i n the top t en tot a l ov e rhau l work orders and the tota l of work orders in t hose four loc a tions exceeds Brickell by only three work orders eR.tCKt:tt OVlE* LOOf' Latioo N Of'id: d l S1 Swi tCh I r hl r d 2S Omni IS O r iStiltc' Pl:ltit St:ui on 1 6 Sv. it M S I S SWit ctiS 1 4 C oUCi.t N orthiSwi t c h 13 Figure 58Total Rail Work OrdersTop Ten Locations Page 97 of 146

PAGE 98

Rail & Mmer Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Me11omover Sw itch. I and Brickell also rated the h i ghest i n total rail parts cost as seen in Figure 59. A corridor i ncluding Third S treet and Switches 1, 3, and 8 is evident. Locations tha t were absen t from th.e total overh.aul top-ten include Omni, S ta te Plaza Station College North, and Switc h 5 Unlike the situation observed in Figure 55, the combined costs of these loca ti ons e asily exceeds the $28,000 reported at Switch I the highest rail parts cost location l.oc-ation S'o1oi t cb I Br id:cill Thi rd Slrcet s .... i c m 8 S-Aitch S Omoi l'br.a St., illn Figure 59 Total Rail Parts Cost To p Ten Locations I s 28,1-'76 21,1))1 1$,977 15.19 3 9.121 S,IOS S,olO 6,3:\ 4 6.248 Page 98 of 146

PAGE 99

Rail & Mov er Rehabilitation Report Phase II -M e t ro mov e r Tota l rail labor hours for the ten highest l ocations are identified i n F igure 60. Switch I again re main ed at the top; however Third Street replaced Brickell in the second spot. Tw o corridors are a p parent, and only one location (i.e. Switch 5) failed to rate in the top-teo total overhaul. Labor hours for Switch I, Third Street, and Br i cke ll account for 34 pe r cent of the labor hours repre s ented here and 21 percent of t he 12,775 labor h ours incl u ded i n the entire overhaul program. 8RJO:i:I. L OllfDI.OOP Sw itcfl I Th ird StfC\.-.: O riekcll Mai n:enan Cwl
PAGE 100

Rail & Mover Rehabilitati 011 R eport Phase ll Metromover The following figures present graphic comparisons of total costs and labor hours for the overhaul program and the rail component of the overhaul program. They illustrate wayside maintenance efforts within the last six years, and identify locations that have required extens ive work, as well as those locations t hat have required little or no wor k With the exception of Switch I areas in close proximity to stations se em t o be the most cost and l abor inte n s ive, and rail overhaul appears to consume most of the overhaul dollars and hours. Those l ocations where no overhaul costs occurred i n clude: Park West, Freedom Tower, Switch 53 an d Swi t ch 55. The lowest total overhaul costs were re p o rt ed a t E i ghth S t reet Station, S w itc h 7 S w i t c h 1 3, an d Switch 52. 190.000 $80.000 SIO.OOO 1 ----1--$SO.OOO L $40,000 530.000 $20.000 -1-11-t--so.ooo -Overhau l Rail Figure 61 -Overhaul vs. Rail Total Co sts Locations that reported no rail overhaul include the two stations and two switches identified Page I Q() II/ /46

PAGE 101

Rail & Mover Rehabilitat ion Report Phase II Merromover previously in addition to Switch 12 Switch 13, Sw i tch 17, and Switch 52 1,400 ,--------------------. .., ___ ,_ 1,20 0 1,000 800 .8 ... 400 LOC:'Ition o,'ethaut -Rail Figure 62 Overhaul vs. Ra i l Labor Hours In order to detennine the frequency with which rail overhaul occurred at spec ifi c locat i ons, the fo ll owing chart, Tab l e 39, was assembled to identify rail replacement that occurred during each fiscal year in the six year window of overhaul data Because the locat ion points c9n t ained in the overhaul database are rather broad it is not possible to detenn ine hQ(v frequently the same secti .on of rail was replaced. It is possible however, t o identify those locations in c lose proximity t o raU replacement. Perhaps most significant are those stations and switches that show no rail overhaul in close proximity during the pas t six years Page/Of of 146

PAGE 102

'' I Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase 11 Metromover Table 39-Rail Overhaul Locations by Fiscal Year FY FY 1999 Page 102 of 146

PAGE 103

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II lvletromover Rail overhau l cos t s in proxim i ty to stations from the persp e ctiv e of e ach station's locat ion on the extensions versus the i nner /ou ter loop are shown i n Figure 63. 60.0 00 -. -so,oo o 40.000 -,. 6 ;; "' JO,OOO .. 0 "' 20,000 10,000 0 ,_ -----.. I --\ \/'1 \. ./ r ., 11 i! !! z "' -!! 6 jj c. l c !!. 0 0 "' ,2 8 > i z ;;; c i5 8 -!! "' 11 g ;; f > 2 .., "' !!. I " "' .., E , u: iJ' u: w g s E Oi 8 i1i "' -" E ;; 8 ii "' e 8 < "' Ornof tMp ltmeri'Oulcr l..oon R rif". hll I rolal Rail Cost Fig ure 63 S t a tion Rail O verha ul C o s t s by L o o p Annual l abor ho urs equivalent to 2 3 technicians were used to accom p l ish th e total over h a u l reported w ith I -2 of tho se tech nic ians necessary for t h e rail overhaul. I f a track cre w is established, it ap p ears that at l ea s t 2-3 t e chni cia ns will be needed on a full -t ime basis Mapp i ng the wayside with spec i fic l ocation markers and coordinating the use of tho se l ocation mark ers wit h i n main t enance and Centra l Control co u ld certainly facilitate not only s cheduling but also tracking all t ypes of wayside overhaul. Page 103 of 146

PAGE 104

Metromover Vacancy Rates Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phas e II -Metromover Vacancy rates were reviewed for the time period from F Y 1 998 through FY 2001 and are reflected in Table 40. The most notable vacancy rates occur with the Me t romover Technicians and range from a low of 6.0 percen t in FY 2001 to a high of 17.6 percent in FY 2000, which is the only year during th e time period rev i ewed when Metromover's vacancy rate exceeded MDT'S vacancy ra t e. Table 40-Metromover Vacancies and Vacancy Rates Supervisor, Metromovcr Maintcna.nce Supetvisor, Repai r 0 0 ().() M ainte.nanc.e Clerk 0 0 0.0 0 of I 0.() 0 of I 0 of I 0.0 Oof I 0 0 0 of I 0 0 0 of I Maintenance Supervisor I of 7 1 4.3 Oof6 0.0 Oof6 0 0 Oof6 S ofSI 9 8 8 of 51 I 5.7 9 ofSl !7.6 3 of SO Vehicle C leaner Oof8 0 0 I of8 0.0 I of8 Oof8 6 of 7 0 8.6 9of69 8. 6 10 of?O 69of Significant improv e ment in vacancy rates occurred in FY 2001. T he vacancy rate becomes even more critical for day-to-day operations when combined with absenteeism According to the Chief Supervisors absen t eeism runs around 15 percent and current disciplinary procedures fail to offer measures to assist employees in improving attendance Current sick leave policies aUow .12 occurrences prior to any action. Th e Chief Supervisors indicated they cou l d benefit from revised attendance control procedures. Metromover Manpower Requireme11ts The Metromover Technician (MT) performs skilled electronic electrical, mechanical and electro-mechanical tasks in the inspection diagnosis repair and maintenance of Metromover vehicles waysid e systems, and central systems. Responsibilities include the following: Troubleshooting Determining causes of failure and completing complex repairs Performing modifications and retrofits Performing corrective and preventive maintenance Page 104 of 146

PAGE 105

Rail & Mover RrhabilitaliOII Report Phase /1 t'detromover Inspecting and adjusting system components of electronic, electrical, mechanical, electro mechanica l hydraulic and pneumatic equipment utili2ing procedures, manuals, drawing, and schematics E>< maintenance prol>lems Providing advise and direction tc other teclmicians in the performance of wcrk assignments The MT receives supervision from a technical supervisor who periodically reviews and inspect s work in progress and assis t s with difficult or unusual pr
PAGE 106

Rail & Mover Rehabiliuuion Report Phase Jl -Metromover Table 42-Annual Labor Requirement, September 1992 Service Plan /99/ Original MDT Service EIS Plan Item Plan Plan Sep 1992 DETERMINANTS Vehicle Hours Per Year (OOOs) 36.2 69.0 72.2 Number of Vehicles 12 27 29 Physical Guideway Miles 3 8 8 8 8 8 Vehicle Hours/Gujdeway Mile/Year 9,526 7 ,841 8 773 Switch Cycles/Year 9.260 705.255 690 ,000 Low Use Switches 9 20 20 High Usc Switches 0 6 6 LABOR REQUIREMENTS Vehicle PM ProgramLabor Hours 6,226 11,868 13.278 Vehicle Corrective Maintenance 5.321 10,143 1 1 ,348 Vehi cle Related Field Activity 5 756 10, 97 1 12,275 Vehicle Daily Cleanllnsp 8 780 9,135 9 ,135 Wayside PM (No Switches) 3,511 8.131 8 ,131 Wayside Corrective (No Switches) 857 706 790 Wayside Daily Mai ntenance 3.078 7,t28 7,128 Shop Suppon 420 1,01 5 1,01 5 Switch PM 542 3,840 3,840 Switch Cor-rective142 I 0,862 1 0 ,626 Total Annual Work Hours 34,633 73,799 77,566 Equivalent Personnel 21 5 1 54 Recovery Crew (fixed) + 4 22 22 Total Personnel 25 73 76 Difference from Current (25) 0 4 8 51 Based on the analysis, Rail Maintenance Control es t imated 51 additional lechnicians were required 10 meet labor needs for the Phase I and Phase 2 systems. The total complement of t echnicians. including 22 technicians for recovery, equaled 76. Since the allocation of technicians for the Recovery Crew was "fixed" at 22, labor hour requirements for those recovery technicians were not included in the total work hours. To tal work hours represented only technicians and cleaners It was anticipated that a Recovery Crew would be added to minimize delay time of service interruptions A Recovery Crew composed of 22.4 technicians would pro vide a fixed standby crew of 8 t echn ic ians per weekday shift and 4 technicians per weekend shift. A total of 29.4 technicians would be required for programmed, schedule d PM based on existing program a nd Page 106 of 146

PAGE 107

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If -Metromover labor standards. UnplaMed, unscheduled corrective maintenance that varied with system usage would ne ed 24.2 technicians Total technicians required for the expanded system would equa l 76. With a complement of25 technicians alr ea dy on board, a total of 51 additional technic ians would be required. Rail Maintenance Control also prepared a revised analysis of staffmg needs. Using labor hour data from Rail Maintenance Control records for the most recent 12 months as re ported by Me t romov e r Maintenance via completed PMs, Daily Inspection and cleaning reports, Wayside Malfunction Reports, Vehicle Malfunction Reports. and other routine documentation of maintenance activ ity, they determined that the original EIS estimate of 54 technicians and cleaners was "off the mark" fo r two reasons. The assumed service pla n did not appear to be practical, and the assum ed demand for labor by the system seemed to be more optimistic than realistic for the cu rren t service level demand. The Rail Maintenanc e Contro l revised analysis of staffing need s is presented in Table 43. Table 4 3 Revised Service P lan )On1 c -v
PAGE 108

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II Metromover Table 44Metromover Service Plan, 2001 &rviceP/an 200/ IHc.adv.ays (Minutes) IVehiclc Hours/Yea r (Laoor Hours/Technician Current T able 45-Metromovcr Senicc Plan 2001 Revised Service Plan 200/ Current Factors Scenario Loops 3 One-way Miles 8 8 Vehicles 29 PVR 17 Headways (Minutes) 2.12 5.24 Vehicle Hours/Year 106, 000 Labor Hourslfechnician 1 442 Technician & Cleaner Labor Requirement 74 Mctromovcr has a current complement of 50 t echnicians who perfonn all vehicle and wayside PM/repair in addition to recovery. A review of the Metromover Technician Line up effective July 9, 2000 provided job assignments for the 42 technic ia ns on duty; 8 positions were vacant. Table 46 provides an overview of th ose 42 technicians' assignments for a week. Recovery assignments are hi-lighted in red since their duties are fixed, and the recovery crew is not sub ject to the ass ignment of other duties. Routine holidays, annual leave, and modest sick leave averaging a total of25 days annually per technician would effect iv e ly eliminate 20 of these shifts per week. Page J(}8 of 146

PAGE 109

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation R eport Phase If Metromover T a bl e 46-Mel r o mo ver Technicia n I.l n e-Up ;t m. 2 p.m. RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV AfC Rttl\l AlCRctro A/CRctro AIC Reu o A!C Rc1ro NC Retro NCRetro NC Rt tro A/C Retro AfC Rctro (bily Jnsp Daily lnsp Daily lnsp Dail y ln'Sp U aily Jnsp VEii V8U VEH VEH VEH VEH vmt VEJ-1 veu Vlil-l rSJRer T$1RE P TS l RI;P TSIREP TS lREP TSJREP TS/ R C P T SIRF...P TSIREP TSJREP 1'SIR8P TSJREP TS/ R E P TS.'REP rSIIH:J TSIREP TSIREP TSIREP TS l REP T S/REP T S lREP TS/REI' TSIREP TSIRiiP TS/RJ.;P T$JRI 31' T$/ JU:;P TSJREP TSIRBP TS.'REP TSIREP TSIR13P 1'SIRf!P fSIJU:t J 'SFREP p.m.-10 p.m. RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCV RCVfl'S RCVffS RCVffS RCVffS RCVffS TSIRF-P TSJREP TSIRE.P TSIRE P 'I'SIRI!P TSJ R E r TSJREP I'SIR r s;Ju ; p l 'SJRBP TS.' RF.P TSJREP TS/REI' TS!REP TSIREP 'f'SfRlW T$ / R.I_':P 'l'SIR E P TSJREP TSJREI' TSIRF.P TS!RF...P TS!RE P TSIREP TSJREP T$/R!;. J f S l REP 'l'SIREP 1'SlREP TSIREI' TSIRUP TSIREP TSIREP IS/R' TS/ R EP TSIREP TSJREP TSIREP TSJREP TS! R EP lS/REI' TS/WS rs1ws TSIWS TS/WS TS/WS TSJWS l'S!W S TS/WS TS/WS TSIWS TS/W$ TS/WS TSIWS TSIWS 1'$ /WS 'I'S!WS TSIWS TS/WS TS/WS TSJWS 1'S/WS TS/WS 'I'SJWS TSIWS TS/WS TSIWS 'I'S/WS 1'SIWS TSJWS 1'$ /WS 'I'S/WS TS/W S TS/WS l'SIWS l:S/\"' S SWCR!Rft $WCRJREP SWCR!REP SWCRJREP SWCRIREP SWCRIREP SWCR/RSP SWCRJR.6P No te s : RCVRecovery AJC RctroAJC Rcholit Dail y los p -Dail y Inspection RCVJTSRecoverytrroubleshoot TS/WS -T roubleshoot/Waysi de SWCR/REP-Swi tch Crcw/Rcp:ti r VEH-Vehide PMIIns.pectionfRcyail:' RECIREP-Rccovcryi Repa i r TSIREP -Troublcshoou'R cpai r *'Exempt from ''Ot h er D u t ies as Assigned' Page 109 of 146

PAGE 110

Rail & J\1over Rehabilita tion Report Phase If -Metromover System characteristics and FY 2000 actual labor hours were incorporated into the original EIS to determin e manpower needs based on that methodology. Those manpower requiremen t s are presented in Table 47. Tab le 47 Manpower Requirements Service Pla11 MDT MDT Actual Health Hours Per Year(OOOs) 72.2 106.0 of Veh i cles 29 29 Guideway Miles 8.8 8.8 Hours/Guideway Mile/Year 8,773 12, 058 Cycles/Year 690,0 00 1.000,000 20 1 8 6 7 REQUIREMENTS PM ProgramLabor Hours 13,278 8 985 Corrective Maintenance 11,3 4 8 7 947 Rela!ed Field Activity 12,275 Dily Clean!ln;;p 9,135 46,750 PM (No Switches) 8, 131 7 005 Corrective (No Switches} 790 7,122 Daily Maintenance: 7, 1 28 Support 1,015 PMU 3 ,840 2 951 Cotreetive 10,626 520 Annual Work 1-iours 77,566 8 1 ,280 Personnel (Techs &. Cleaners) 54 56 Cr<:W 22 II Personnel 76 67 25 58 With today's weekday PVR of 17 and 2 -4 minute headways v ehic les hours aod miles logged far exceed original projections. In FY 2001, mover vehic les logged 1,219 ,931 miles The highest previous n umber of annual miles reported during any year between FY 1995 and FY 2000 was 975,553 mi l es in FY 1995. FY 2001 represents a 25 percent increase in annual vehicle mi leage compared to the FY 1995 annua l mileage, and a 43 percent increase compared t o FY 2000 Page I/O of 146

PAGE 111

Rail & Mover Reltabi/iration Report Phase lf Metromover ann ual mileage. The expanded use of the vehicles and the wayside is a lso compounded by the age of the system The wayside is undergoing an overhaul by the Metromover in-house staff, and planning has begun for overhaul of the Phase I vehicles, which are approach ing the i r midlife. Intensified maintenance activity is required now sim ply to maintain the system It does appear that addi t ional Metromovcr Technicians are required based on the above ana l yses Allo c ation of recovery c rews must be established as the first s tep in the process of determining manpower needs. The original plan called for 22 on a fixed basis, and recovery crews' hours were not included in any of the previous analyses. Today's allocation of recovery crews from the MT complement totals I I Recovery crews can be assigned as needed, and intensifying vehic l e and ways ide PM/repair should reduce the need for recovery Tabl e 48 summarizes the analyses. T able 48 -M e t romovcr Manpower Needs Vehicle Hours Per Year (OOOs) Metromovc r Technicians & Car C leaners Recovery T cchnicians !Total Staff Required Total Current Staff Total Additlor\al Staff Required Service Plan Analysis Scenario Analysis Current Current RMC Service Plan Scenario 3 Scenario 4 ScemJJ'io EIS Sp 1992 ZOO! Apr 1993 Apr 1993 2001 69. 0 72. 2 106.0 87.0 93. 6 106.0 51 54 61 68 7 1 74 22 22 I I 73 76 72 68 7 1 74 58 58 58 58 58 58 15 18 1 4 10 13 16 Based on a recovery crew total of II, and an average of 1,442 labor hours per technician, additional Metromover Technician positions required total 14 under the Service Plan Analysis and 16 under the Scenario Analysis Supervisor to subo rdi nate ratios for the Metroraii/Met romo er were examined by departmen t and di v i sion for FY 1994 and FY 1998 through FY 200 I Supervisory ratios remained consistent and stable throughout those time periods and equaled a ratio of app r oxima tely I to 7 Metromover's ratio of supervisory to subordinate personnel averaged slight l y higher. Metromover's rat i o increased from I to 9 in FY 1 994 to I to 10 in FY 2001, including Rail Car Cleaning staff. Given the nature of the additional posi t ions identified, a specific supervisor to subordina te ratio for tec hnical positions wit hin Metromover should be reduced to a ratio equal to I to 7, similar to the ratio establ ishe d within Metrorail for technica l positions The supervisor to subordinate ratio Pag e I I I 4 6

PAGE 112

Rail & tWover Reha bilitation Report Phase II Merromover of I t o 10 for th e Rail Car C l eaners, who p erfonn l ess t echnical duties than ihe Mctromover Techn ic ians, sho u ld provide an adequa t e l e ve l of sup erv ision. Using th o se ratios, ad d it i ona l t echn ical and supervisory st aff requirements are as follows: Table 49 Metromover Techn ical and Superv isory Staff RequirementsSystem Growth Additional Posllion s R eQuired Svstem Growth Technica l Positi
PAGE 113

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If Met,-omover and improved tum-around time on component s reb uilt in-house. The General Superintendent indicated that six additional Metromover Technic ian pos i tions would provide Metromover with sufficien t s taff for two sh ifts of operation and res t ore the rwo t echnician pos itions that were re assigned from maintenance An overview of the savings achieved to date by the C omponent Shop is presented in Table 50 Table SOComponent Shop Sav in gs Descriptio, Tor Total Avg Unl t Cost Cost Cost Price Savings $6, 833 $12,260 Sl9,()94 $11 1 ,338 $92,2 44 35.8% 64.2% (7. 1% $139 $250 S390 $2.272 $1,883 $ 10 20 $76.74 . t Tech @ 4 mont h s l T
PAGE 114

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Pltase II -Metromover Table 51Tec hnic a l and S up ervisory Staff Requirements with Comp onent S hop Additional Positions ReauiredComoonent Shoo Technical Positions Bx.ist i n g rv1etrornover Techni cians Existing Rec .overy Tec hnici an s T ota l ExiMing Technical Posit i ons Additional Technical Positions Required-System Growth Addit ional Technical Posit ions RequiredCompo nent Shop Total Technical Positions Requircd Teclrnic:al Supervb or Posit ions Total Technical Positio n s Me.tromover Maintenance Supervis ors Required (I to 7 Ratio) Existing Metromover Maintenance Supervisors Additional Metromover Maintenance SupcrvisoNi Required Non Technical Supervisory Positions Rail Car C leaners Supervisors Required ( I to 10 Ratio) Tot al Posiliom Required Met romover Maintenance Te-chnicians Metromove r Main tenance Superv i sors Rai l Car Cleane. r Supervisor Total Addi tional Positions Service Plan A naly sis 2001 39 I I so 14 6 20 7 0 1 0 6 4 8 20 4 I 25 Scetrario Analysis 2001 39 II so 16 6 n 72 II 6 5 8 22 5 I 28 Page I 14 af 146

PAGE 115

C hapt e r 3 -Financial R ecent H istory Rail & Mover Rehabilirarloll R e porr Phase II M erromo v e r The Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report discussed the historical and pro jec t ed e xp enditure patterns for MDT. That analysis relied on budget numbers for FY 2000 and proj ect ion s based on the Capi tal Program as it was then. For the purposes of this examination of the M ctromovcr finances, actual FY 2000 a n d FY 2001 d a ta w e re used. The fu ture capi t al ex pend it ur e projections are based on th e p rogram dat e d Jun e 25, 200 1 and i nclud e s i gnificant funding increases for bo t h Me tr orail and Metromovcr i n the upc oming years The period analyzed is from FY 1994 to FY 2007 th e year in which the current capita l program ends. The capital needs for Met romover will, in fact be esse ntially met by the inclusion of th e P hase I vehicle re hab ilita ti on for $15.4 million starting in FY 2003. A historical look a t the expenditure patterns for Metromover and th e entire agency is presented first followed by a rev ie w of projected expenditures for both capital and operating. From FY 1994 to FY 2000 Me t romover enjoyed an average annual operating expenditure increase of 6.3 percent. T he growth in operating expenditures for the agenc y as a who le for that period was 2.3 percent. Operat i ng expenditures for Metromover grew from $10.7 million in FY 1994 t o over $15 million in FY 2000 This growth is illustra t ed in Fig ure 64. 16, 000 I 14,000 y;. ll,OOO 58,0(1(1-----= 6,000 8 4 ,000 '-----2,000 ;__ ___ o-96 97 99 Ftsca l Ynr M O't'Cf ()pculillg Fi gure 64-M etro m over Operatin g 00 A s s l a t ed above, the Mctromovcr operatin g ex p e nditure growth over the l ast seven years outpaced th e growth in operating expenditur es for the MD T While these expense s represen t only a frac t ion of the overall agency spending the Mctmmover operating funding has ou t paced inOation during the FY 1994 to FY 2000 period Figure 65 provides a compari s on of Metrornovers agency -wide percentage of ridership (based on annual passenger mile s served) with it s share of operating funding. Page 115 of U 6

PAGE 116

opcr.lt i ns E:\pen:ses a s a % of Agency Total -Annual Mllc sas%of Astn e y T
PAGE 117

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II M erromover expenditures that occurred from FY 1995 to FY 1996 is due to the additional costs associated with "new" Metromover extensions to Omni and Brickell that opened for service in May of 1994. When the operating expenses are viewed from a "constant dollars" perspective which is adjusted for inflation, real growth has occurred F igure 67 illustrates the growth in operating expendiMes for Metrom over in both actual and inflation-ad justed dol.lars. IMOO 1 14.000 12,000 1 g 10,000 0 8,000 -s 8 6.000 4 ,000 MOO o ?4 95 96 9 1 98 99 00 -MO\'Cr0pc:rating -opcrnting Expenditures Co.!'lsUmt Ooll:lt:i Figure 67 Metromover Operating Actual & Constant Dollars The $15 miUion of operating expenses in FY 2000 is the approximate equivalent of$12 2 million in 1994 Act u al expenditures grew from $10.7 million in FY 1994 to over $16 million in FY 2001. As expected, capital expenditures for Metromover fluctuated much more than operating costs Aside from the norma l variances in year to-year capital expenditures expected based on a changing project mix, the final cash flow associated with construction of the Metromover extensions falls into the stud y period. Figure 68 depicts capital expenditures for Mctromover for FY 1994 to FY 2000. By FY I 999 capital expendiMes for the Metromover system were less than $200 t housand and rose to a modest $490 thousand in FY 2000 ', Page 117 of 146

PAGE 118

H I .OOO 1 6.000 j -;:;-H.OOO l 1 2 000 -10, 000 j 3 8.000 6.000 4,000 2.000 0 9S 97 Rail & Rehabilitati o n R eport Phas e II M e tr o m o v e r 99 00 Figure 68Metro mover Capital Ex p end itures The next chart Figure 69, compares th e percentage of the MDT total capital and ridership to th ose of Metromover. Again, whil e th ese comparisons are useful to put funding l eve l s into some perspective, the nuances of both the function of M etromo ver and the heavy capita l infusion requ i red to originally construct the system mu st be co n si dered. A;erw..""Y T oul (,0 20 1 0 94 ? S ?6 97 93 99 Figure 69-Metro mover % Cap it al & % Ridership The Metromover constr u ction was consuming over 50 percent of all of the agency' s capital s pendi n g in 1994 Thi s percentage has d r opped t o l ess than one percent in both FY 1 999 and FY P age 118 of U6

PAGE 119

Rail & Mover Reltabilitation Report Phase If Metromover 2000. Based on the conditi o n assessment included in this report, the system is in good shape and will not have required a significant capital investment for over four years As the Phase I vehicles approach their mid-life, the need for capital increases. T he levels required however, do not approach anything near those that were requi r ed for initial construction. In summary, for the period since 1 994, Metromovcr operating expenditures have more t han kept pace with inflation and have averaged 6.3 percent of the agency's total. The capital required has steadily declined as start-up of the system was completed Figure 70 puts both the operating and capital requirements for Metromover into an agency-wide context. 60% -SO%-E " lt. 40 % 3(}%.; 2()0,4Future Outlook FY 9 5 FY% FY97 F iscal Yc:u.r Mover ()p:r.uing DMovc r CapiLal FY9S I 'Y 99 Figure 70-Metromover F unding% of Agency Tohll The next section of this report looks out through fY 2007 to estimate the funding scenario for Metromover. The operating assumptions are built on the g r owth rates de rived from using a five year moving average beginning i n FY I 997 and applied the fY 200 I expenditure figure in order to project FY 2002 through FY 2007. To project the constant dollar equivalent, a four percent inflation factor has been assumed. To pi'Oject future operating funding for Metromover, the historic percentage of MDT funding was used to create a five-year moving average to project FY 2002 through FY 2007. For the capital expenditure forecast, the capital program dated June 2001 was used. When t hese assumptions are applied the forecast for MDT operating expendi t ures is for an increase to more than $278 million by FY 2007. The average growth rate Page II 9

PAGE 120

Rail & Mover Relwbililation Report Pltase II -tWetromover for the forecast period for operating is 2.5 percent. With an assumed inflation fuctor of four percent, there is the expected continued erosion o f the operating program at the agency level as can be seen in Figure 71. JOO.OOO r----100,000 ------------50.00: 1 Fi9:.al Y<:ar Figure 71 -MDT Operating Expenditures For Mctromover's future operating outlook, if the historic trends continue the picture is somewhat more promising. The forecast predicts an average annual growth rat e over the six years of 6.6 percent. This rate of growth is well ahead of the projected inflation rate. The projection is illustrated in Figure 72 along with the inflation-adjusted 25.0001 20,000 0 15, 000 3 10,000 .. 8 5.000 () 4 <)4 95 96 9 7 98 99 00 OJ 02 03 04 OS 06 07 Year -Opc:ruling -Oper:ning F .... Constanl Dollars. Figure 72Mctromover Operating Page 120 of 146

PAGE 121

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II -Metromover By FY 2007 the annual operating budget for Metromover would be $20.5 million and comprise 6.6 per cent of the agency's projected operating fund. On a constant dollar basis the FY 2007 figure represents a $3 million increase over the FY 1994 level. It should be noted that if the additional staff that has been recommended for Metromover Maintenance is approved, the incremental cost most likely cou ld not be ab sorbed without increased operating funding. Using a total salary cost of $60,000 per position, the annual additional cost would represent $1.2 million if all 20 positions were added. This would represent a 7.5 percent increase over the FY 2001 operating expenditure level. The on-going impact of funding the positions is depicted in Figure 73. 3 0 000 -y: 25.000 g 20.000 5 15, 000 8 10.<)1)() 5,01)() 0 -" I --t ---"-------( N % M 00 0 1 ro M M F i!lCal Y ear Figure 73 l\'letromovcr Operating Forecast There has been a dramatic change in the capital forecast since the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report was prepared for Metrorail. MOT's and the County's decisions to commit to a rehabilitation program for both the Mctrorail and Metromover Phase I vehicles substan!ially improves the out look for both systems. The previously major, un-funded n eed for Metrornover was the vehicle mid-life program for the oldest of them. With this need addressed the capital program, as it now exists, leaves few capital requirements not covered for Metrornover. Figure 74 compares the FY 2001 to FY 2006 and FY 2002 to FY 2007 capital Page 121 of 146

PAGE 122

2so.ooo I g 200.000 r--------e 1so.ooo '----------I ::! 100. 000 8 50.000 l 0 . , Roil & Mover R e h a bili talio n Report Phase If -Metromover c -a.pi la l '02'07 "01-'06 F i gure 74 -Capital Program Comparison '01 to '06 vs '02 to '07 For the years FY 200 I to FY 2006, th.e new capital represents an infusion of nearly $450 million in additiona l funding for MDT. Thi s additio nal fun d ing in cludes ove r $ 1 5 million for Metromover Phase I ve h icl e mid-life ove rhau l begirming in FY 2003. Other significant projects included in th.e program include continuation oftbe wayside overhau l program, security enhancements, power di stributio n enhancemen ts, esca l ator replacements, and guideway s t eel painting. Page I 22 of I 46

PAGE 123

Rail & Mover Rehabililalion Reporr Phase 11 Metromover T a b l e 52-Metromover Cap i t al Program P r ojects FY 2002 to 2007 Mf!tromovc>r Project Power Supply Replacement Digitrip 910 Retrofit for l\letromovcr Traction Power Metromover Phase One-Vehicle Overhaul V ital Relay Replacement Repl ace Mctromover Unintcrropted Power Supply Sy>tem Fencing for Rail and Mover Locations (112) Replace NC System Metromover Outdoor Canopies Metromover W-ayside Overhaul Metmraii/Metromover lhlinterrupted Power Supply Guidcwhccl Bearing f nstallation Room Replace E le11ators Inner Loop (2()0/o) Repla ce Escalators (50'A.) R eplace Vehi cle Wash System (25%) Metrorai i /MetromovcrSteel Girder Painting (75%) Metromover Vehicle Lifts Metromover Fork Lift Metromover Roll-up Door ion CciJinF-J..in'C Map Replac.emcot Station Ceiling Sign Cab. Replacemem Vehicle Destination Signs Mctromover CCTV Inner loop f\letromover CCTV .. Upgrade Total Funded as of 6-25-01 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 200 7 Total 777,497 777, 497 665, 138 665 ,138 665,137 1.995,413 1.600.000 3 ,800,000 5,000,000 5,000.000 15.400.000 500.000 5 00,000 450.000 600.000 2,050 ,000 825,634 825, 634 5 .743 5 ,743 5 ,743 60,760 I 5.000 92,989 100.000 100,000 100.000 75,000 50,000 21,352 446 ,352 388,700 379,182 519 ,550 1,287,432 2 76,120 276.720 553,440 180,000 180. 000 1 80,00 0 1 21,650 661.650 50,000 50,000 80 000 168.')17 168,917 168,917 168 .917 226.809 982,476 1,61 6,7501,616,750 1 ,616,750 1.616,7501.616.750 8,083,750 62.500 I 87,500 250.000 175,000 120.375 88.352 883.727 4,125, 000 4.125,000 50.000 50.000 50, 000 50,000 3a, soo 38,500 40.000 40,000 50, 000 50.000 1 36,000 136.000 251,882 251,882 250.000 250,000 403,001 903.001 3.472.317 5.9. 29,950 8, 783,594 I 2.346.078 7.009,54 2 2,193.163 39.734 7 4 3 Wit h a capital reinvest ment program of nea rly $40 million, MDT has made a s ignificant commitment to ensur ing t he long-term viability of MetrOmover. If this program come s to fruition, the sys t em will be positioned welL The age of the system requires that reinvestment t ake place Figure 75 illustrates the capital investment over a 14-year period. Page 123 of 146

PAGE 124

18,000----16.000 1 14, 000 .. 10.000 ] 8.000 ---'Rail & Mover Rehabilitatio11 Report P hase II Metromover 12,0001-ll 6.ooo I .oooF-2.000 0 94 9) 96 !I? 9 8 99 0<1 0 1 0 2 0 ) 04 O S 0 6 07 Fiscal Y ear Mover Capilal Ex.pendiltm:s -cons.1 a n t Dollars Fig ure 75M elromover C a p it al E x p enditures By F Y 2007 th e Pha s e II V ehic l e s will be 13 to 14 year s o l d. By t hen th e p lann in g for a m i d l i f e r e habilitat i o n of th e newer veh i c les shou ld have b egu n E v e n wit h this signif ica nt capital commitmen t th e Metro mover capital and o pera t i ng req ui re ment will rep rese nt a small perce n tage o f th e MOT overall funding plan Eve n i n th e pea k capital year for Metro m o ver, FY 2005 th e $ 12 m illion will only represen t slightly over eigh t percent of th e MDT capital p lan. Figure 76 demonstrates the portio n o f MOT's capital and operating fun di ng M e t romover wou ld r epresent u n der the fun di n g sce nario outlined here Page /Uof/46

PAGE 125

j Ei 8 J :F. -0 : l .l: 0 95 96 97 capi l al -opcrecing \---------98 99 00 0 1 02 Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If Melromover 03 OS 07 Figure 76-Metro mover Expenditures % of MDT Total .. Page 125 of 146

PAGE 126

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II A1'erromover S E CTION III: OPERATIONAL REVIEW Chapter 1 -Track & Guideway Staffing Track & Guideway, managed by a General Superintende nt is responsible for t rack inspection and maintenance, stru c tura l inspection a nd maintenance and track and structure equipment mainte naoce. T he Divisio n Office consis t s of the Gen e ral Superintendent, an Admin istra tive Secretary, and a Rail Maintenance Clerk. A to t al of 87 staff is assigned to the divis ion. The Track & Guideway Division plans, directs, and co ord ina tes all track and guideway m a intenance requ iremen ts, p ro v ides support to Rail Tra n sportation and Vehicle Mainte na nce Divisions, and works in close c oo r d ination with Train ControVTraction P o wer The division c o nsis t s of three departments : Rail Structure, Rail Track, and Rail Shop Work is assigned to t hr ee shifts: 7 a m .-3 p.m., 3 p.m.-II p .m ., and I I p.m.-7 a.o>. Rail Structure The Chief Supervisor of Rail Structur e Maintena nce directs the maintenance and repair of Metrorail and Metromover structures and related track The d ivis ion was establ ished in 1 983 prior to implemen t ation of a Bridge lnspe ctio n Program, and the original budget included a t otal of three Rail Structural Repairer positions. In 1984, Metrorail structures were i nspected for the first time by an MDT co n s u ltant contracted to develo p tile Bridge Inspecti o n Program. The firs t inspec tion was desit,,'ned to establish a baseline for the future Bridge Inspection Program and i d e nt i fied 221 girder conditions for repair. Remedial Act ion Reports (RARs) were completed for those items and we re forwarded to Track & Guide way for repair. Prior t o the next bridge inspection, whic h y i e l ded a total of almost 9,000 conditions for repair, the complement of Rail Struct ural Repairers was increased from three to six Responsibility for the Bridge I n spection Program became a joint effort of the Track & Gu id eway structural maintenance staff an d Tr ansit Engi n eering. The comp l ement of Rai.l Structural Repairers increased f r o m six to ni ne in 1989 with two of t he nine repairers assigned to the Br id ge Inspect ion Program on a full-time basis. A service adjustment occurred in 1990 that reduced the number of repairers from nine to eight. A budget increase of f ou r repairers, approved i n 1994 to raise the compl ement to twelve, was nullified by a 1995 service adjustment th a t returned the com p le ment of r epairers to eight Pu rsuan t to th e service adjustment, Track & Guideway indicated, bas ed on the approved l ev! of manpower, t hey would no longer be ab le to accom p lish graffi t i remo va l respond t o vegetation p r obl em s, or inspec t the t op o f th e Metrorail guideway; no nethel ess, based on a review of recent labor hours, T rack & Guideway continues t o per f onn these activities, whi ch require from one to th ree full time staff annually. T rack & Guideway also indicated that twelve rather than six months would b e required to r epair "priority 3" bridg e i nspection items Page 12 6 of 1 4 6

PAGE 127

Rail & Mover Rehabililation Report Phase II -1 \fe1romover A 1995 for additiona l staffing to maintain th e Metromover extensions was unsuccessful. Current Staff assigned t o Rail Str u c t ure Maintenance tot al II, includi n g the Chief Supervisor. Rail S t ruct u re Main t enance Staff are s h own in Table 53. Two of the eleven pos i tions are currently vacant Tabl e 53 -R a il Str u cture Ma int enance Staff Rail Stnfcture Mai ntenance Chief Rail Stmcturc Mainte nance Rai l Stnctural Repairer Rai l Structure & Track Supervisor I 8 2 Structure maintenance works !rom 7 a m t o 3 p m five days a week. Structural maintenance is based upon conditio n s identified thr o ugh the Bridge I nspect ion Program. The preventive ma. intenance (PM) program is based on the State of F lorida Inspection P r ogram To date, ratings o f the structure from the Flor i da Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administmtion have been excellent. Rail Struc t ure labor hours by job type from October 1996 through June 2000 are reflected in T able 5 4. T ab le 5 4 Rail S tru cture Lab o r Hou rs b y Job Typ e Job Tvoe F Y 1997 FY !998 FY 1999 Avero>?e f Y 2000 Remedial Acti on Reports (RAR) 649 ),661 5 668 3 326 4,473 RAR% ofT oral Labor Hour s 20.1 28. 1 34. 1 30 4 20 3 Repairs 2,586 9,359 1 0,937 7 627 1 7,520 Repair % of Total labor Hours 79.9 79.1 65.9 69 6 79 7 RAR + Repairs 3,235 13, 0 2 0 16,605 10,953 21,993 FY 2000O ct-Jun Based on available manpower during FY 1998 through June 2000 labor hours per employee are indicated in Table 55. P ag e I 2 7

PAGE 128

Rail Track Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase /J t\1etYomow.tr Table 55Rail Structure Labor Hours per Employee Rai l S1ructural Repairer Rail Structur e & Track Supervis o r # o{Posirions /998 /99 9 2 000 7<>f8 8of 8 8of 8 2of2 2of2 2of2 Ho urs per Position /998 1999 2 000 1 447 1 ,660 2,199 The Chief Supervisor of Rail Trac k Mai nt enance directs th e activities of the track mainte n a nc e section. Track main t enance operates two shifts. Four crews prov ide coverage seven days per week on the third s h ift from 9 p.m to 5 a.m On. e crew works five days e ac h week on the first shift !rom 7 a.m. t o 3 p.m. Mainte n ance and r epai r of the track a re based on inf ormation pro vided through a comprehensive inspection program. Guideway Inspect ion Specialists visually inspec t the track two times eac h week and issue daily conditional reports that are prioritized by the Chief T rack Inspecti on Superviso r and forwarde d to the Chief Supervisor of Tra c k Maintenance for repair. U pon completion o f r epairs repair orders are retu rned t o the Chie f Trac k Inspection Supervisor for processing. Geometry inspection is performed four time s each year thro ugh a contract serv ic e Ultras on ic testing of the rail is perfor m e d twice a year. A total of 42 staff is assigned to rail tr ack maintenance inclu d ing the Chief Supervisor of Rail T rack Maintenance and th e C hief Supervisor of G uideway Inspection. Six of t h e 4 2 positions are current ly vacant. Trac k maint e n a n ce in the yard is accomplished on the first sh ift while all ma inline work is done on the third shift when tra ck is available during non-r evenue servi c e times. Rail Track Maintenance positions are identified in T able 56. Tabl e 56Rail Track Maintenance Staff Rail Track j\.faintenance Chief Superv isor, Rai l Track Maintenance R ail Tr1lck Repairer R ail Struct u re & T r ack Supervisor Ch ief Super v i so r Gui d eway Inspection Guideway Inspec t io n SpecialiSl Positions I 29 s 4 Rail Track & Guideway la bor h ou rs by function from October 1 9 9 6 t h rough June 2000 are presented in T able 57. Page I 28 of 14 6

PAGE 129

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Repon Phase /J -Metromover Tabl e 57-R ai l Track & Guideway Labor Hours b y Fun ction FY 999 Maintenance 64 6 4 11/o ofTota1 Labor Hours 0 1 0.1 0.1 47,2<)2 55, 642 36,227 4 6,387 % Labor Hours 85.0 86.9 81.2 84.7 Jnspect ion 8 268 8,311 8,324 8,30 1 %of Tota l L abor Hoors 1 4 9 13.0 1 8 7 Labor Hours 55 624 Based on available manpower from FY 1998 until June 2000 labor hours per employee are reflected in Table 58 R a il Shop T a bl e 58-Rail T rack Labor Hours p e r Empl oyee #Pi/led versus Budgeted Hours per Filled Positions Position Repairer 22 of30 28 of29 24 of29 lGuidevay Inspect i on Specia liSt 4 of 4 3 of 4 3 of 4 2, 2 08 I 206 I 50 4 6 of6 Strucrure & The Chief Supervisor of Rail Shop directs the activities of the Rail Shop The Ra i l Shop op e rat e s 24 hours a day, seven days a week over t h ree s h ift s and is responsible for track vehicles and e quipment maintenance, repair, f abrication, stori n g, a n d d e liv e ry of all track and structure materials. The Rail Sho p conducts PM on eq u ipment based o n manufacturers recommenda t ions and t i me intervals, track system repairs, guideway structure repair, and all div i sions o f Rail Opera t ions. Equipment maintenance and contro l records are computer c ontro ll ed through a database allowing for equipmen t PM schedules and repair tracking from the shop office The shop s correctiv e program is divided into two categories: minor repairs perf onned in-house and major repairs contracted to authorized factory representati ves. The inventory includes 45 pi e ces of mob il e heavy equipment, 130 pieces of mobile and ligh t equipment, and an assortment of other s m all t oo l s and equipment. Rail Shop staff to t a l s 32 i ncluding the Chief Supervisor Three of the 32 pos i tions are current l y vacant. Rail S h op positions are sh own in T able 59. Page 129 of 146

PAGE 130

Rail & Mover fl.ehabilirarion Reporl Phase II Melromover Table 59-Rail S hop Po $ ilion s R(1il $ hov Pv.tirions Chief Supervi,o r R i l Shop I Rail MajJltentmcc Wor k e r 7 Tra c k Equipm ent Operator 19 Track ShOP Supe r v isor 5 Accor di ng t o the S ta te of the R ai l Report cxtstmg eq u ip ment m ainte n a nce efforts are at approximate l y 50 p ercent of the required level as a result of: reassignme n t o f shop maintenance staff t o track main t enance; increased us e of equipment; a lengthy process required to use outsid e v e ndors for equipment repairs ; extensions of grant funded equipmen t rep l acem ent cycles ; and the lack of a ret ra inin g program for equipmen t operators. Rail S hop l abo r hours by job function are pres ented i n Table 60 Table 60Rail S h op Labor Hour s b y Functio n, I'Y 1997FY 2000 Func t ion FY 1997 FY /998 FY /999 FY 1 0 0 0 P r'ii\'
PAGE 131

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ({ Metromover Table 61 -Rail Shop Labor Hours Puncrion Preve-ntiv e Maint<:nancc (A-BC-M) PM % ofTora l Labor Hours PM Equipment R.epair PM Repair% of Total Labor Hours Dai ly Workload Dai ly Worlcload o/o To1al Labor Hour s Shop Daily Wor k l oad Shop Workl oad % Tota l Labor Hours T ra c k Daily Workload Track Workload.% Total labor Hours PM+ Repairs+ Dail y Shop & Track Workload FY2001 1 2 05 5.5% 305 1.4% 18,709 85.7% 248 1.1% 1 354 6.2'!. 21.821 Revised labo r hour s per position based on fY 2001 acmal l abor are presented in Table 62. Tabl e 62-Rail Shop Hou .rs per Empl oyee #of Po.tltio n s Equipment Operator 5 of? of? Labor Hours by Department Hours P er Position Table 63 ill ustrat e s FY 1997 through Ju ne of FY 2000 labor hours for eac h department with in the Track & Guideway Division. Pflge 131 of/46

PAGE 132

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase I I kfetromover Table 63 T rack & G ui deway Labor Hours by De partm ent Vacancy Rates Deoartment FY 1997 FY 19WJ FY /999 FY 2 000 Track 47.356 55.722 36.291 46, 456 Guideway Inspection 8 2 68 8 ,311 8,324 8 ,301 S truc.ture 3 235 13,020 16,605 10, 953 Sht)pu 6 ,090 8 ,506 10,784 8,460 Total 64. 949 85,559 72.004 74,17 1 *FY 2000 Oct -Jun **Shop numbers are for FY 199 7 through FY I 999: FY 2000 figure l'epresents 9 months of actual FY 2 00 1 labor hours 42,831 6 ,799 21,993 16,366 87,989 Vacancy rates fro m FY 1994 through FY 200 I are illustrated in Table 64. Page 132 (if 146

PAGE 133

ClassiJk u ri(tfl Adm i nistrn ti on k )cner. d Superin tendent R ail M:ti n t tnanc( A dmini $ 1 r.d ) v t $.;.<;r.l)' I Sc:<:r ct3.f)' M.Ol A Fidd T-e:;.! Erts n.eer Kat e Tot:tl Rail Trnd: Ch ie f Supcrvi$or ft.9il T rack Ch iefSupctVisor Oo i dewuy lnsption Rai l S m tcturt & Track Superv i so r !Guideway lnspt ion Spcc ialiSJ T t1ek ReJ).'li(et Vacancy Rate Total Rail S t ruc.:ture Rail S m:tore SIJU<:ture & Track Supt:rvl$0r ft:til R.-ep.,ir'e! VacMcy Rate ()(:II R3il Shop Chi cf$tlp!wiSOr, R:1il Shop Track Shop Supcr.isor Trac k f. qulpm<:nl Operator Ra.il Maint e -nance WOork<:r Vacancy Rat e 1\ual Tmck & Vacancy R.stc ota l MDT V:::11ncy ft,.'tte !Tot a l Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Reporl Phase II -Metromover Tabl e 64-Vaca n cy Rates 94 fl Rate 91l Y R.uu: 99 V Rotl! 00 Y JJJ V Rate 0 0.()% 0 0 0% 0 0 .00.4 100. (}% 0 ().0% 0 (). O'Yt 0 ().0% 0 0.0% 0 0 .0% 0 0 .(1% 0 0.0% 0 I) (). 1)% 0 I 4 .l (} 0.0% 3 0 O .Oo/. 3 0 0.0% 3 0 0 .{)% 3 > 3 3 0 0.0% I 0 O.C)'% I 2 33.3 % 3 l 25.<)'JA 4 7 tO S8.SO.<. 22 14 12 46.2% J I 2(o I 2 9 1 2 14 4 0 0 0 .00.-f )J.j% 2 1 0 .0% 7 2 14.3% 10 1 3 Q o .cw. 500.0%3 S 6 42 .9% II 17 5 .6% 5 0 0 0 .0% 1 0 0 0% 0 0 0 % 0 I 2 !i.O% 4 0 6 0 0 .0 % 3 I 25.0".4 4 S 26.7% 2 $ 3.4% lS 9 37 2 5 .1% 3 9 )9 41 0 0 0% 0 0 0 % 2 50 0% 4 () 0 .0% 2 I l l 5 % 8 0 OJ)% 8 3 2).1% I) 0 0 .0% II tJ {) Q.l)% 0 0 0% 0 0.0% I 1()().0 % 0 O .OOA. 0 ().0% 5 0 0 0% I 1 6 .7% 0 0.0% s 16. 7'< 6 I4.:W. 0 0.0% 4 3.4% 2S 2 4.9% 3 6 0 0 0 % 0 0 0,. 0 0 0 % Q () ,Q% 0 O J)% 42 0 O .t)% I 50 .0% 1 I 1 2.5% 9 1 18.2% It 0 2 40.0% J 8 42 1% l(J 2 28 .6% 5 2 40.0"'.4 5 0 O .Oo/,; S 0 () .1)% 4 20 0% 1$ 5.3% 1 9 0 OJ)'A l lS.6o/ S 2 2 8 .6% 3 3 SO.O% 3 1 1 t8A% 20 12 3 1 S % 25 s 24 2% 2 9 l 9.4% 28 l 9 .7% 60 2-Z 26 .&% 64 82 88 3 S 8 81 18.5% 364 439 m }) 24 27.3% 7$ 88 69 390 430 ) 2 1 0 11.4 % 82 s 81 40 9 .3% .183 42 430 !I S.7% 76 87 9 .&% 390 428 I I 12 .6% 38 8 .9%. Vacancy rates have significant l y improved within the Track & Guideway Division; nonetheless they continue to exceed the rates reported by the agency as a whole In FY 1994, almost I in 4 positions allocated was vacant In FY 2000 that number improved to I in 17 and then fell to I in 8 in FY 2001. Page 133 of 146

PAGE 134

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase If -Metromover In the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report, Track & Guideway vacancy ra tes were discussed in detail. A study of filled positions completed by the C hief Supervisor of Rai. l Structure Ma i ntenance found t hat over 74 percent of the Track & Guideway staff members were relatively new emp lo yees. It was determined th a t entry salary rates for Track & Guideway classifications were lower than those of Vehicle Inspect ion & Heavy Repair and Train Control & Traction Power. This l ower salary rate at entry translates into larger differences in pay as an employee moves up to higher levels within the personnel system A comparison of the number of employees who moved and the size of the department from whic h they came indicated a disproportionately higher number moved from Rail Vehicle Maintenance and from Track & Guideway. The movement within Rail Vehicle Maintenance was fro m less skilled jobs to those requiring more skill, and there was no movement from anywhere in the system into Track & Guideway. It was suggested that these positions were viewed as entry positions where employees remained only until they met criteria to move to other higher paying positions. In the past the two classifications within Track & Guideway with the high es t vacancy rates were the T rack Repairer and the Track Equipment Operator. A review of current vacancy rates yields sligh tly different results. In FY 199 4, the vacancy rate for Trdck Repairers was almost 60 perce nt. In F Y 200 I, that rate was 17 percent. From FY 1994 until FY 200 I, the v acancy rate for Track Equipment Operators decreased from 43 percent to zero, while th e vacancy rate for Rail Maintenance Workers rose from 6 percent to 50 percent. The following tabl e traces vacan t positions in relationship to positions allocated for four classifications. Table 65 Overview of Vacancy Rates FY 1994 %of FY 2001 %of Reten tio n of Track Repairers and Track Equipment Operators no longer appears to be a problem, despi t e a significant increase in the number of the positions allocated w ith in each of those classification s The problem area today, in te rms of vacancies, appears to be th e Rail Maintenance Worker classification where a significant reduction in the allocation of these positions has taken place. P(lge I 34 of146

PAGE 135

System Expansion Rail & Mover Rehabi/irarion Report Phase II -Metromover In late 2002, the Metrorail system will expand 1.4 miles to include the Palmetto Station and rail extension, which w ill increase manpower requirements within Track & Guideway. Approximately 2.6 miles of mainline track will be added that will require: T rack walk inspection-2 times/week Curve lubrica t ion -weekly Rail wear inspe ction annually In terlocking inspectionmonthly Ult rasonic rail testing 2 times/year Track geometry testing 3 times/year Direct fixation rail fastener anchor bolt inspectionevery 41h bolt annually Station pit cleaning monthly Track inspection repair order for major failures projected at 6/year due to heavy volume of traffic over the turnout side of switches Girder inspection additional RARs Top of girder inspection Current Status While it appears that an infusion of additional staff must occur now, it is difficult to determine the scope of the need, not only because staffing levels have been inadequate for an extended period of time but also because staff turnover has been excessiv e Toward that end, the following recommendations are offered as a first step in the process of mee t ing Track & Guideway manpower requirement s. Manpower Requirements Mctrorail Top of Guideway, Graffiti Rem oval and Vegetation Control Based on an overview of labor hours, Track & Guideway has continued to perform these activities despite requested re-assignment of these activities to Transit Engineering. RECOMM END A TION: E xplore the transfer of responsib ility for the top of t he Metrorail guideway inspection to Transi t Engineering and consider contracting-out graffiti removal and vegetation control. If responsibility for these activities remains within the jurisdiction of Track & Guideway, based on labor hours required in th e past, thr ee additional Rail Structural Repairers should be allocated to facilitate completion of these tasks Page 135 146

PAGE 136

Rail T ra c k Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase II :\.letromover Staff required for the Insert Replacement Program includes two crews of one Rail Structure & Track Supervisor and six Track Repairers each, for a to t al of two supervisors and twelve repairers The program will require a minimum of two years to complete RECOMMENDATION: Complete a cost analysis of con t racting-out this project versus comp l eting it in house. Given t he l eve l of staff r e quired, the work might be accomplished in a shorter time frame by a contractor using a larger complement of employees. This type of work constitutes a project rather t han a program; however, all employees hired will be retained after the p r oject is completed. If it is cost effect i ve to complete the project in-house fut ure projects should be i dent ified for this work group prior to an employment commitment. The Track & Guideway General Superintendent indicated that the cost analysis of contract i ng-out would have to be with the cons t rain t s of available work time access to comple t e this work. He noted that a contractor wou l d be faced with the same restrictions of trac k access as would be in-house forces, and a limited daily work time would basically prohibit using a larger work force due to these constraints. A con t racto r would hav e to be supported by a si ze able s taff of in-house forces t o provide flagging services, designate the locati o n of t h e work needed and assure correct repairs are accomplished. He indicated this work encompasses the entire system, and as such, wou l d be more effective ly approached as a program since t he t ime required to comp l ete the system wou l d be l engthy, and areas would need to be addressed in order of need He also s t ated that if it is cost effective to complete the project in-house, futu r e projects exist and can be identified prior to an employment commitment. R a i l S h o p Staff requested for the Track S ho p includes four Track Equipment Operators, two Track Shop Supervisors, and four Track Equip ment Mechanics. RECOMMENDAT I ON: There are currently 19 Track Equipment Operators and 6 Rail Mainte nanc e Workers assigned to the Rail Shop. Seven of those Track Equipment Operators and three of the Rail Maintenance Workers are assigned to operate equipment while twelve Track Equipme n t Operators and three Rail Maintenance Workers are assigned to the shop I n 1 994, the Rail Shop had a tota l of32 staff in these 2 positions. Today, that number is 25. Equipment is becoming more Page 136 of 146

PAGE 137

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase Jl Metromover sophisticated, and the aging Metrorail system is expanding. Some procedures have been revised to provide system access during additional hours, thereby expanding the workday. Increased workloads within Rail Track and Rail Structures dictate the need for additional equipment operators not only to operate equipment but also to maintain and repair equipment that is being used to a greater extent A.n increase from 19 to 23 Track Equipment Operators appears to be appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Look for ways to enhance track equipment operator availability within Track & Guideway while ensuring timely in house PM and repair of equipment. RECOMMENDATION: The Track Shop operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week The current allocation of 5 Track Shop Supervisors is insufficient to provide con tinuou s coverage by a Track Shop Supervisor. The addition of one Track Shop Superv i sor will provide continuous supervisory coverage. RECOMMENDATION: The Track Equipment Mechanic position is a new classification designed to improve and enhance the maintenance capabilities of the shop. Given the current structure that includes equipment operation as well as maintenance by two different classifications, adding a third classification into the mix has the potential of creating organization al conflict especially if the new position is considered to be either higher in rank or compensation Track & Guideway shou ld ask Classification and Compensation to study t h e proposed new position in relationship to the ex i sting positions to identify potential benefits and/or conflicts RECOMMENDATION: Consider introduction of an incentive program for contracted-out specialized equipment repair and PM, based not only o n timely turn-around of equipment by the contractor but also based on quality of performance of that equipment after repair. Rail Structure Rail Structure staff required to complete Remedial Action Reports based on t ime intervals es t ablished by the Florida Bridge Inspection Program totals two Rail Structure & Track Supervisors in addition to eight Rail Structural Repairers. Funding for the positions will be provided through Florida's Bridge Inspection Program. RECOMMENDATION: Approve positions based on ' erification of funding from the Florida Bridge Inspection Program. Page 137 of 146

PAGE 138

Palmelto Station and Rail Extension Rail & Mover Rehabilirarion R e port Phase 11 : \1etromov e r Track & G uid ewa y identified a need for two Rail Structural Repairers two Guideway I nspection Specialists, four Track Repairers, and one Track Equipment Operator to mee t quantified ma i ntenance and repair needs fo r the new Palmetto Station and rail extension. REC O MMENDATION: Approve positions after development of a Track & Gui deway main t enance and rep air schedu le for the ad d itional 2.6 m iles of track hack & Guidew ay manpowe r r ecommen da t i ons are summarized in T a ble 66. Table 66 -Track & Guidewa y Man po wer Recommendations Additional Action Required 3 MRGui deway Altempt t O Inspection, transfer MR Strocturd.l Repair er Vegetation Guideway Control, Graffiti ln .. to Removal Tra n sit Engineering: Contrnct.out Vegetation Control and Graffiti Removal lnsen 1 2 Replacement anal y sis of Projec.t contracting-out versus in-ho use Su)Wrvisor Coverage Rail Structur e & Track Super v isor 2 Fl Bridge Confln n FOOT Rail S tn.u;:tura J Repairer 8 f unding Program Rai l Structural Repairer 2 P almetto Stalio n Deve l op Guidcw'"Y Inspection Specialis t 2 and rail maintenance and Tra c k Repair er 4 e .xtension repair plan for Track Equipment Operator I Palmetto S tation and rail e xtension Page /38 /46

PAGE 139

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report PJUJse 11 /vletromover Chapter 2 Rail Maintenance Control Manpower Needs The Chi ef, MDT Rail Maintenance Contro l who reports to the MDT Transit Services Assistant Director, manages Rail Maintenance Control. The Division was established in 1982 with a staff of three T ransit Maintenance Production Coordinators and five Rail Maintenance Control Clerks to provide support to V eh icle Maintenance by issuing wo rkload schedules and performing data entry of Vehicle Maintenance Reports (VMR). In the early 1990s, Maintenance Control assu med responsibility for support of System Maintenance, which included Communications as well as Train Control and Traction Power. Maintenance Control staff increased t o four Transit Maintenance Production Coordinators and six Rail Maintenance Control Clerks. System Maintenance was reorganized with Communications report i ng to Mctromovcr and Train Control and Traction Power reporting to Vehicle Maintenance. In 1991, Communications moved to T ransit Engineering, and in conjunction w ith the move, one Transit Maintenance Production Co ordinator position and one Rail Maintenance Control Clerk p o sit ion were re-assigned to Engineering. Nonetheless Train Control and Traction Power reporting remained within Rail Maintenance Control. At some point prior to 199 4 the complement of Rail Maint enan c e Control Clerks was increas ed to six positions and just recently three additional Transit Maintenance Production Coordinators were approved as an efficiency measure for the division. The Division Office consists of the Chief and an Administrative Secretary. Table 67 i de ntifies the 14 staff assigned to the division Table 67-Maintenance Control Staff MOTA Rail Maintenance ControJ IAclmi l nistrat ivc Secretary I 1,-,,,;, Maintenance Production Coordinator 6 Rail Maintenance Control ensures that th e infonnation required to conduct the varied aspects of rail system maintenance is available, verifies by in spe ction of records and activities that operating maintenance actions and products conform to MDT specified requirements and standards and routinely monitors and reports on performance of the various rail operations functions in the areas of quality, quantity, and timeliness of activities. Maintenance Control serves as a primary source for maintenance related data and documentation. The Division currentl y provides support for Vehicle M ain t enance, Communications, Train Control Traction Power, Metromover, Track & Guideway, Rail Transportation, Facilities, Engineering, and the Change Review Board. P(lgeJ 3 9 of 146

PAGE 140

Maintenance Control o bjectives include: Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Phase ll Metromover Scheduling all preventive maintenance requirements for each function of rail operations Collecting and processing data describing all work accomplished by the various operational functions Publishing all performance reports and i nformat ion comparing required/planned actions to actual Maintaining the Rail Operations PM Program plan, and records Maintaining e quipment records and repair histories for all equipment Administering the agency s Change Control Program CUTR noted in the Phase I Rail Rehabilitation Report that with an i ncreased emphas is on workload the role of Maintenanc e Control in tracking and analyzing data has become mor e cri tical. While Maintenance Control today provides a valuable role t o MDT it cou l d enhance its effectiveness by taking better advantage of the data it collects. A wider distribution of the data and analysis to the operational entities could assist the opera t ing divisions with their planning, scheduling, and, mos t importantly their decision making M a intenance Control Responsibilities A discussion of Main t enance Con trol responsibilities was h eld with Transi t Maintenance Production Coordinators, Rail Mai nt enance Control Cle rks, and th e Chief of Maintenance Control to as s ist in understanding the expanded ro l e of Maintenance Con.trol. Following i s a summary of curren t re sp onsibilities and fimctions: Absentee report ing initially done for Rail Transportation has now expanded to all sections Fe deral 1490 reporting invol ves recording da i ly hours for each Train Operator on a mon t hly basis ; each Train Operator Report takes hours Expanded data collection and analysis for Track & Guideway now includes preparation of a Monthly Repo rt Chairing the month l y Change Review Board in addition to maintaining the minutes and writing all procedures and obtaining Temporary Change Notice (TCN) approvals ; associated activiti es are time consuming Coordination of all audits for the agency i e ., APTA FOOT, quali t y, and s afety ; seasonal in nature ; major challenge i s maintaining consistent data from one presentation to another Monito ri ng the growing Capital Grant Funding Program requires a major investment of time from December until April PM s chedul e s fur Rail Vehicle Maintenance Metromover Page 140 of 146

PAGE 141

Rail & Mover Rehabilirarion Reporr Phase II -.Metromow?r Maintenance Train Control and Traction Power, Track & Guideway totaling 3,000 packages per month Preparing an annual average of 500 PM schedules and tracking service disruptions for Facilities Maintenance; complete tool calibrations Document control for Engineering changes; TCNs require a !,'Teat deal of work; received a 40 page TCN from Transit Engineering for Metromover wayside; Metrorail and Metromover mid-life overhauls wil.l requ ire extensive work Preparation of Standard Operating Procedures; complete for all sec t ions; updating is not difficult; creating where procedures do not exist is difficult and time consuming Scheduling and tracking all equipment calibrations in addition to all equipment that has been contracted-out for repair within Rail Maintenance, Facilities and Train Control & Traction Power Reporting r equireme n ts for FTA have dramatically increased, and mandated corrective action and tracking are now required with reporting on a monthly and quarterly basis; specific programs and projects identified include : implementation of SWAN, reconvening G Inspection Committee, tracking deferred maintenance, implementing GP-02 PM process, and tracking serialized equipment Metrorail's PVR bas in creased to 90 and Metromover's PVR has increased t o 17; higher PVRs increase VMRs; Metrorail has seen an increase from 10 VMRs and work orders per day to 45 VMRs and shop work orders since the PVR increase; Metrorail system will expand in F all 2002 when Palmetto Station and rail extension opens Facilities Maintenance has requested tbat Maintenance Contro l resume scheduling, tracking, and proce ssing of PM inspections and eleva to r/escalator maintenance that totaled 549 i n the past and add 1,975 pieces o f bus spe cific equipment to PM process FT A demands timely credible reports; new reporting includes: inventory control, failure management reporting, rolling stock reporting, and management reporting Page 141 Q( 146

PAGE 142

Maintenance Control Organization Rail & Mover Rehabilitation R eport Phase If -Metromover Follo wing is an ov erv iew of the structure Maintenance Control prior to approval of three additional Transit Maintenance Production Coordinator positions: Table 68-Maintenance Control Organization Position TM Production Coordinator T1v1 Production Coordinator T M Production Coordinator Track & Guideway Ra:il Vehicle Maintenance Train Control Metromover Traction Power Subordinates 1 RM Control C l er k 3 RM Control Clerks 2 RM Control Clerks The organizat i onal structure as proposed by the Chief of Maintenance Control, incl udi ng the three additional Transit Maintenance Production Coo((linators is presented in Table 69. Page 142 of 146

PAGE 143

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Re po r t Phase ll Metromover Table 69 R evise d Maintenance Control O rgan ization Positio, TM Producti o n Coordinator TM Producfion Coor d inator TM Production Coordinator Tfo.,1 Produccion Coordinator TM Production Coordin-at o r TM Production Coordinator Computer Analyst!Progrnmm.cr AssiK,mcnt Rail Vehicle Maintenan ce SWAN Heavy Repairs rvtetromover Track&. Guideway Capita l Project!) Rail Trai n Control Traction Power Vital Relays Special Projects Audit FT A Reporting Monthly Re)'Klrt Quality Assurance Fad l itics Maintenance Calibration Change Review Failure Management Rail Rehabilitation Subord;nates 2 RM Control Clerks 2 RM C ontrol C lerks I RM Contr ol C lerk I RM Control C ieri< Extens iv e work was completed pursuant to FTA's request for an Action P lan to track items identified for follow-up in CUTR's I Rail Rehabilitation Report. As a r e sult of those efforts Main te nance Contro l identified a total of 16.5 additiona l staff needed t o as sist with the follow-up work Included in that total were 5 .5 new Transit Maintenance Product ion Coordinators and II new Rail Maintenance Control Clerks T h e scop e of responsibilities for the add itional staff contained several project, rather tha n program items In the absence of adequate staff, several reporting functions co n tained errors or were incomplete. Additional staff would facilitate clean-up" of t hose items so the movement forward could be on a solid base. While there appears to be a need for this work to be accomplished, once it is completed, the need for those s t aff required to complete the work subsides Those project it ems included such things as recalculat ing service d i srup t ion methodology, establishing a base of serialized equipment, correc tion of the Mean Miles Between Fail ures methodo l ogy and update of the Met rora il and Metromover vehicle logs. Table 70 presents an overview of a proposed organizational structure that in t egra tes additional Page 143 of 146

PAGE 144

Rail & Mover Rehabilitation Report Ph"se II -Metromover staffing needs, hi-lighted in red text, into the revised Maintenance Control organization. It identifies a need for 8, rather than II, additional Rail Maintenance Control Clerks. A total of four of the new Control Clerks are assigned to assist recently approved Transit Maintenance Production Coordinators. While it does not show a need for additional Transit Maintenance Pwduction Coordinators in excess of the three new Transit Maintenance Production Coordinators, it does show a need for a "Pwgram Designer & Analyst" position. Coordination of effort is critical for efficient functioning of Maintenance Control. A significant effort is required now to establish correct, viable databases that can be shared across divisions and minimizes duplication of data handling efforts. That role would be best filled by a Program Designer & Analyst position as a direct report to the Chief of Maintenance Control. Based on current responsibilities and Action Plan requirements, additional staff needs total nine. Table 68 Proposed Maintenance Control Organization Position TM Pro
PAGE 145

Rail & Mover Rehabilitarion Report Phase II Merromover I n an attempt to confirm t he allocation of additional staff, a detailed analysis of a document prepared by a previous Chief of Maintenance Control, regarding Control tasks and ass i gnments, was conducted Unfortuna t ely the documen t was not dated; nonetheless, it did contain references to all departments listed above as well as Facilities Maintenance lt consisted of a listing of tasks with associated hours requi red to complete those tasks by area on a monthly, biweekly, weekly, and daily basis. There were ind i vidual task listings for seven Rail Main t enance Control Clerks and two Transit Maintenance Production Coordinators. Annual hours were calculated based on t he actual hours the t ask required and t he frequency with which the task occurred during the year. The data were sorted and summarized to provide an overview of annual area r equirements. The area referred to as "Rail/Mover Maintenance" was prorated and divided between ''Rail Main t enance" and "Mover Maintenance" on the basis of a total of 165 vehicles in the combined fleets (i e. Metromover's 29 vehicles we r e equivalent to 18 percent of the total vehicles, and Metrorail's 136 vehicles were equivalent to 82 percen t of the to t a l vehicles). Those hours were then added to either Rail Maintenance or Mover Maintenance and are reflected under the column entitled Annual Adjusted in Table 71. Like wise t h e areas identified as "Faci lities" and "All" were com bined to form one category. Hours representing that combined category are presented under the A11nrtal Adjusted column i n Tab le 71, which presen t s an overview of the genera l distribution of each area's pe r centage of projected arutual task requirements Tabl e 71 -Allocat i on of Tas k s by Area Adjusted %qf %of Annual %of t11'PA A cJUa/ A(:tual Annual ttnnual Adjusted Annual T rack & Guideway 146 7 8% 2.984 9.3% 2,984 9.3'1< Train Control 191 10.2% 3 .80<1 11.9% 3,80<1 11.9% Rai11Mover Maintenan ce 210 11.2% 2.936 9.2% Rail M 'aintenance 301 16.1 % (>,l l66 19. 0% 8.486 26.5% Mover Maintena .nce. 407 21.8% 6,84() 21.4% 7.356 23 0% Facilities: 37 2 .0% 1 2 84 4.0"/o 9,348 29. 2% All 576 30 .8% 8,064 25.2 % Tota l 1,868 31,978 Proposed Rail Maintenance Control Clerk assigrunents as a percentage of the total are i llustrated in T able 72. Page 145 of 146

PAGE 146

Rail & Mover Rehabiliration Report Phase II -Merromove r Tabl e 72A ll oca ti o n of Rail Maintenance Contr o l C l e r k P os i tions Acljll!itrtd Area %of Anrtua/ %of RMCC %of &Guideway 2 ,984 9.3% 2 984 9 3% Co ntrol 3,804 11.9% 3 ,804 1 1 .9% 2 Maintenance 2,936 9 .2% 6,066 19.0% 8.486 26.5% 4 r-.1aintenancc 6.840 21.4% 7.356 23.0'/o 3 1 ,284 4 .0'/o 8 ,064 25.2% 9,348 29.2% 4 P ersonnel Nee d s The allocation of Rail Ma i ntenance Control Clerks appears to be appropriate. Additional staffing recommenda t ions are summa r ized in Table 73. Table 73 Rail Main tena n ce Contro l Staffing Recommendations Additional C la s sification Positions Rail Main(enance Conrrol Clerk 8 Pro cam Designer & Anal vst I Tota l 9 Page 146 of 146