Trainset Final Report Ver 4.0 7-23-11.docx20305%20DocSpec... · Web viewLarry Salci was retained as...

Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee

PRIIA Section 305 Single Level Trainset

Technical Specification Report

Executive Board Review Panel

Author: Larry E. Salci, Principal, SalciConsultDate: July 20, 2011

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

This work has been specifically requested by and performed for the PRIIA NGEC Executive Board Review Panel. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrieval system of any nature, by other parties, without their written permission.

PRIIA Section 305 Trainset/Standalone Car Report-Review Panel

CONTENTS

Section Page

1 INTRODUCTION 32 CONSULTANT PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND 73 SCOPE OF REPORT 84 PRIIA DESIGN OBJECTIVES, REQUIREMENTS, 9

AND EVALUATION4.1 Standardization Initiatives 94.2 Operational Considerations 114.3 Other Observations and Comments 124.4 Specification Summary 13 4.5 Specification Development Approval Process 14

5 SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY TABLES 185.1 Operational/Performance Requirements 195.2 Interoperability Requirements 215.3 Safety Requirements 235.4 Reliability and Maintainability Requirements 255.5 Passenger Amenity Requirements 275.6 Communications and Electrical Controls 305.7 Vehicle Standardization 325.8 Environmental Initiatives 335.9 Regulatory and Industry Standards 34

5.10 Test and Acceptance Requirements 35


1. INTRODUCTION

The Technical Subcommittee of the Section 305 Next Generation Equipment Committee (NGEC) has prepared a technical specification for procurement of Single-level Passenger Trainsets (hereinafter Trainset). This Technical Specification is to be used for the procurement of a fleet of new Trainsets for use in medium to long-distance intercity corridor service in North America. This Report provides a review of the Technical Specification approved by the Technical Subcommittee at a meeting held in Chicago, Illinois on June 22, 2011.

In order to determine whether the Trainset technical specification meets the requirements of the NGEC, the Executive Board decided to create a Review Panel to determine whether the specification, as produced, met the “Requirements” for design/performance objectives derived from the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act, 2008 (PRIIA) Section 305 mandate, and whether the decision process undertaken by the Technical Subcommittee met the inclusive process requirements of PRIIA. A report was to be developed for the Executive Board that summarized the Review Panel’s findings and recommend whether or not the Trainset technical specification should be adopted. The Review Panel consists of leaders from several state DOTs and the Federal Railroad Administration. Mr. Larry Salci was retained as an independent transportation passenger railcar consultant to assist the Review Panel in its responsibilities to review the Technical Subcommittee work that was done, and provide a concise objective and independent review of the technical specification and the process by which it was created for the Executive Board’s consideration and approval. Members of the Review Panel are as follows:

Bill Bronte, Caltrans, ChairmanRon Adams, Wisconsin DOTAllan Paul, North Carolina DOTScott Witt, Washington State DOTJohn Tunna, Federal Railroad Administration

It is Mr. Salci’s professional opinion that the PRIIA Section 305 single-level passenger Trainset technical specification meets the NGEC Executive Board Requirements Document Rev. 2.0, approved November 18, 2010, which includes major design objectives and performance and operations requirements of PRIIA Section 305, and therefore, approval of the single level passenger Trainset technical specification is recommended for consideration and approval by the Executive Board.


In this report, Mr. Salci summarizes his review and rationale for his recommendation. This is detailed in Section 4, PRIIA Design Objectives, Requirements and Approval. In summary, the trainset technical specification meets Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Tier I, 49 CFR Part 238, requirements for up to 125 mph passenger rail equipment. However, this specification is different in one major respect from the previous PRIIA Sec. 305 developed specifications for both bi-level and single level passenger railcars. They both utilized a proven existing design as a baseline for development, the trainset is more of a performance specification for a “to be designed” trainset. The development of this technical specification was to allow for various options or alternatives that would not prevent exclusion of any particular trainset manufacturer. Current trainset manufacturers offer a myriad of options for the design of a trainset. By contrast, the bi-level car utilized the Caltrans C-21 technical specification, a derivative of the bi-level California Car and Surfliner Car previously designed and manufactured. The single level car used the Amfleet I and II cars as a baseline technical specification from which to develop the PRIIA single level specification. Also, the carbody material specified for both the bi-level and single cars was stainless steel and both cars utilized conventional two axle trucks. The Trainset technical specification allows for options for carbody material and for the design/configuration of the truck/suspension systems.

Therefore, it is important to first understand the definition of a trainset for the purposes of evaluation of the technical specification relative to the trainset design capacity and consist options that the specification allows. For the purposes of this specification, a trainset was defined as a collection of passenger cars which are semi-permanently coupled to create a fixed consist to be used for a particular train application. The Technical Subcommittee utilized the following definitions as guidance in development of the specification which allows various options and alternatives and is the subject of this report:

A trainset is a collection of passenger cars which are semi-permanently coupled to create a fixed group of cars to be used for a particular train application. Trainset passenger car configurations are generally specified before being purchased taking into consideration expected number of passengers and matching passenger amenities to expected demands.

Trainset cars can be separated and are configurations of trainsets modified but require specialized tooling and generally performed within a maintenance facility.

Trainsets can include a set of integrated cars including a power car or can be a set of passenger cars that are pulled by various types of locomotives. This specification will be for trainsets that are pulled/pushed by any type of locomotive (diesel or electric). Note: This specification does not address trainset propulsion.


Current trainset manufactures provide a number of options for truck/suspension systems including:

o Tilting vs. non-tilting (optional per requirements document)o Assumes both passive and actuated tilt technologyo Articulated (shared truck) vs. conventional trucks (2 trucks per car)o Continuous axle wheel set vs. separate wheel axle and wheel assemblieso Truck equipped vs. no conventional trucko Articulated with tilt and articulated without tilt

Each potential customer will define the size of their train(s) to meet the expected passenger volume. The number of seats per car is largely dependent on the length of the cars (up to 85’)

Trainsets will be designed for low level platform boarding (8” ATOR)

The specification will permit configurations of the following classes/types of service and seating: Standard coach seating Business Class seating Café/food service/lounge areas Cab control functionality with optional baggage section (s)

These next generation trainsets will be designed for a minimum 40 year useful life, intended for use in medium to long-distance corridor service anywhere in the United States. The design (s) of the trainset carbody will be modular design to extent practical for fleet flexibility, seat spacing for comfort as well as capacity, technology upgrades for all mechanical and electrical components, ADA accessibility features, state of the art passenger information and communications systems, and a storage compartment in Cab Car for checked luggage and bicycle racks at the customer’s request. Cars shall be modular to extent practical to permit any car type, with the possible exception of the cab control cars, to be converted to any other car type defined in this specification without requiring modification to the carbody. Standardization of candidate components will be considered, both as to fit, form, function, and input/output interfaces as well as candidate components.

The ends of the trainset shell are configured to allow interoperability/compatibility with existing Amtrak fleet single-level cars and locomotives and PRIIA single-level cars and locomotives. Trainsets shall provide complete electrical, pneumatic and communication systems functional interoperability (trainline functionality) with all Amtrak diesel-electric and electric locomotives and PRIIA diesel-electric locomotives. These trainsets shall be designed and built for use anywhere in the United States and Canada where their use may be desired and complies with Amtrak clearance envelop diagram for single level cars.

The trainset shall incorporate the safety features of Crash Energy Management (CEM). CEM performance requirements have been defined at a trainset level rather than at the individual car


level. The required CEM performance shall be provided through an appropriate combination of push-back couplers, carbody mounted energy absorbers, and car structure deformation, provided at the end car collision interface and intermediate car collision interfaces as needed.

The technical specification provides for three distinct types of passenger accommodations, coach seating, business class seating, and café lounge areas. Checked baggage accommodations and a push-pull cab shall be provided if requested by the Customer. The seating arrangements will be a function of car length (minimum of 60 revenue coach seats per nominal 85 ft. of coach class car length), and shall provide for several facing pairs of seats with energy absorbing workstation tables, and other reclining seats with tray tables and footrests in accordance with Customer preferences. An adjustable pitch overhead reading light and electrical outlets shall be provided for each seat. All revenue seating areas shall feature wheelchair access and adjacent accessible toilet rooms distributed throughout the trainset. Overhead luggage storage above each row of seats shall be provided.

All cars in the trainset will feature a Public Address (PA) system, intercom and onboard train information communication system. Specifications for passenger Wi-Fi and on-board train information systems shall be consistent with Amtrak nationwide standards for these systems. The On-Board Train Information System (OTIS) shall provide an Ethernet-based (or state of the art technology) data backbone for intra-car and car-to-car communications and data transfer, including emergency situation communications capability.

The vehicles will be designed with reliability objectives that identify the Mean Distance Between Train Delays (MDBTD) and the Mean Distance Between Component Failures (MDBTF) to meet the performance levels based on a single car operation at an average speed of 80 mph (129 km/hr.) and a utilization of 215,000 miles per year (344,000 km/yr.). The reliability of the trainset shall be consistent with the requirements of the technical specification’s maintenance plan.

The trainset shall be designed and manufactured so as to minimize maintenance and repair time and overall costs over the life of the car. The Contractor shall prepare and submit for review by the Customer at the Preliminary Design Review a maintainability program plan utilizing design standards that minimize Mean Time to Repair (MTTR), cleaning and maintenance costs throughout the car’s intended service life.

The trainset will be in compliance with all applicable federal regulations and industry standards and industry practices and specifically compliant with all Americans with Disabilities Act and related regulations and standards.


2. CONSULTANT PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND

Mr. Salci has 40 years’ experience in the transportation industry, 32 as the CEO of both passenger railcar manufacturers and passenger rails system operators. He has 20 years’ experience as the CEO of four passenger railcar manufacturers, The Budd Company Transit Group, Bombardier Corporation, Morrison Knudsen/Amerail, and Colorado Railcar Manufacturing. Mr. Salci has 12 years Transit System CEO Experience, with six years each in Detroit and St. Louis, responsible for commuter rail and light rail operations and maintenance experience. He has the unique experience and perspective of being both a private sector CEO responsible for the development of bids, design, manufacture and warranty of over 3,000 passenger railcars of all types and technology and the experience of procuring, operating and maintaining commuter rail coaches and locomotives and light rail passenger railcar systems (www.salciconsult.com).

Mr. Salci recently served as the independent consultant for the Executive Board’s Review Panel for the PRIIA technical specifications for the NGEC’s Bi-level stainless steel passenger railcar, the Single level stainless steel passenger railcar, and the Diesel-Electric locomotive. Within his experience portfolio, Mr. Salci has extensive CEO experience and responsibility for the design and manufacture of earlier generation bi-level cars such as the Amtrak Superliner II, and the Caltrans California Car. Mr. Salci has similar industry experience with single level cars of both stainless steel and aluminum design and technology. During his tenure as CEO of Budd Transit, Mr. Salci was responsible for the design and manufacture of 150 Amfleet II coaches (stainless steel) and the design and development of the Viewliner car shell (stainless steel) for Amtrak. During his tenure as President of Bombardier Corporation, Bombardier won an order for 104 Horizon single level cars (aluminum) with Amtrak. During his tenure as CEO of Morrison Knudsen/Amerail he was responsible for the design and manufacture of 50 Viewliner sleeper cars for Amtrak. For the past three years Mr. Salci has been an independent consultant in the transportation industry serving clients responsible for the design and manufacture of passenger railcars, operation and maintenance of passenger railcars, and large financial institutions involved in the capital financing of passenger railcars and locomotives. He has also served as an Expert Witness for financial institutions in litigation of leveraged lease transactions for railcars and locomotives.

3. SCOPE OF REPORT

PRIIA Section 305 requires the establishment of the Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee (“Committee”). The purpose of the Committee is to “…design, develop specifications for, and procure standardized next-generation corridor equipment. “ Further, the Committee


http://www.salciconsult.com/

may “determine the number of different types of equipment required, taking into account variation in operational needs and corridor infrastructure.”

The Executive Board of the NGEC established a Technical Review Subcommittee to:

1. Develop a Technical Specification that addresses specific design objectives and requirements and confirms compliance with all PRIIA Section 305 mandates;

2. Document the methodology, process and inclusive development of the Trainset/Standalone Car Technical Specification by industry stakeholders and industry suppliers and consultants represented on the Technical Subcommittee.

The Executive Board established a Review Panel to review and summarize the Trainset Technical Specification a manner that provides the Executive Board the information necessary to determine whether the Technical Specification complies with the Requirements Document approved on November 18, 2010.

This report will address the Executive Board’s items noted above. The compliance with the design/performance objectives and methodology, process and inclusiveness to develop the technical specification will be summarized in narrative format (Section 4) and the summary of the technical specification, will be presented in table format (Section 5) of this Report. The table format was used to summarize the Requirements Document’s major technical design and performance criteria and provide a comparative analysis to ensure they are contained in the Technical Specification. This Report will assist the Review Panel to make a recommendation to the Executive Board for consideration and approval of the adequacy of the Technical Specification in addressing the operational and performance criteria needed to procure, design and manufacture a fleet of trainsets.

Mr. Salci’s review of the Technical Specification and its development and approval process included attending the Technical Subcommittee meeting to approve the specification and examination of the following documents and PRIIA Sec. 305 Committee (s) meeting minutes:

L Salci attendance at the Technical Subcommittee and Executive Board meeting in Chicago, Illinois on June 22-23, 2011

Review of all Next Generation Corridor Equipment Committee By-laws and meeting minutes, minutes of all Executive Board, Technical Subcommittee and Team Subgroup meetings (Interiors, Mechanical, Electrical, Structural, and Vehicle/Truck/Track integration-interface)

Review of inputs from Technical Subcommittee participants that included representation from Amtrak, FRA, States, industry consultants, prime car builders, and major suppliers and component manufacturers


Review of PRIIA Single-level Passenger Railcar Trainset and Standalone Car Requirements Document, Rev. 2.0, approved by Executive Board on November 18, 2010

Detailed review of the Trainset Technical Specification Recommendations for Procurement approved June 22, 2011

Review of the States trainset equipment survey needs Review of Special Report, “Cant Deficiency, Curving Speeds and Tilt”, Brian Marquis,

M.E., Volpe National Transportation Systems Center Review of the Special Report, “Summary of Carbody-Truck Interface Standardization

Efforts”, prepared by the Structural and VTI Subgroups for Single level specification Review of Special Report, “Considerations of Alternate Materials for Passenger Rail

Carbody Construction”, Jeff Gordon, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center Technical Subcommittee Power Point Presentations on Trainset equipment

specifications, June 22, 2011 Review of 49 CFR Transportation Part 238 applicable sections to Specification references, and relevant APTA Standards and Recommended Practices, and AAR industry standards and references

Review of 49 CFR Parts 27, 37, & 38, Americans with Disabilities Act requirements

4. PRIIA DESIGN OBJECTIVES, REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

The Technical Subcommittee recognized in early 2010 that to serve the entire North American intercity corridor market(s), a bi-level car, a single-level car, and a single level trainset designs would be required. These multiple design requirements are due to existing operating limitations and requirements due to physical infrastructure dimensional issues of tunnel and bridge clearance issues, combined with the existence of high level passenger loading platforms on many intercity corridor routes shared by both local commuter rail agencies and Amtrak’s intercity and state corridor services. These issues are most prominent in the Eastern United States, particularly the Northeast Corridor (NEC). Also, some states, specifically Oregon, Washington State, and Wisconsin were already in advanced stages of planning and procurement for single-level trainsets to meet their respective corridor requirements.

As historical reference, the Executive Board approved the PRIIA bi-level car technical specification at its August 31, 2010 meeting in Washington DC. The Executive Board approved the single level technical specification at its February 15, 2011 meeting in Washington DC. The Executive Board approved the Diesel-Electric locomotive technical specification at its March 16, 2011 meeting in Washington DC.

4.1 Standardization

Section 305 of PRIIA created the NGEC and tasked it with the development of standardized intercity rail equipment specifications, and to initiate a procurement of


standardized intercity rail rolling stock. The NGEC Executive Board created a Standardization Working Group to develop a report on the proposed approach to standardization. The Executive Board approved the Working Group’s Report and recommendations at its February 15, 2011 meeting. The Report identified several potential benefits including reduction in life cycle costs, reduction in parts inventories, reduction in worker training, reduction in tools and tooling requirements, improved reliability, and consistency in design, manufacture, and operation. There were four main standardization elements to the Working Group’s recommendations as follows:

1. Standardization of Technical Specification Characteristics - Specification (s) shall incorporate standardized topics for chapters, layout of documents, and incorporate standardized vocabulary and nomenclature to the maximum extent possible

2. Standardization of the Process for Evaluating Nominees for Standardization -Identification of the potential interfaces for the component. Technical assessment of the benefits, downsides of standardizing a component/system. Evaluate life cycle costs and any intangible merits or demerits of standardizing a component.

3. Standardize Process for Developing a Standard - develop standard in consultation with suppliers, operators, and regulatory agencies; undertake competitive procurement process for selecting the standard component; seek designs for adoption as standard during railcar procurement.

4. Identify Potential Nominees for Standardization Consideration -Receive input from Technical Subcommittee Technical Working Groups as part of specification development process.

Section 2.2.1 of the Requirements Document states that, “All car types shall be based on a standardized design that facilitates tailoring of interior equipment arrangements and functionality to meet the needs of Amtrak, different state agencies and classes of service. Car designs shall be modular to the extent possible in order to minimize the amount of additional design required to adapt to the needs of different state agencies and classes of service.

In response to the direction of the Executive Board, the Trainset Technical Specification identifies candidate component/systems for consideration noted below:

o Vehicle structure for common platform for all vehicle types within the fleet;

o Component attachments (e.g. truck, seats, tables, HVAC)


o Components at a fit/form/function/input/output level (e.g. truck, wheels, axles, couplers, cab controls/displays, seats, cab seats, inter-car jumpers, inter-car gangways, HVAC units, static inverters, batteries, lighting, tables, door systems, etc.)

o Seek commonality in components between PRIIA vehicle types where appropriate (bi-level, single-level, diesel-electric locomotive and trainsets)

It is important that as the technical specification (s), once approved, move into the procurement phase that the Technical Subcommittee apply the rigorous process outlined above, and develop the promising component/systems into the technical specification standards through the appropriate systems engineering processes. This needs to be closely coordinated with the current Configuration Management/Engineering Systems documentation process that has been prototyped for consideration.

4.2 Operational Considerations

The “Primary” consideration of the PRIIA 305 Single-level Passenger Trainset Technical Specification was to ensure the adequacy of the Technical Specification in addressing the operational considerations needed to procure the design, manufacture, and delivery of trainsets and to build a fleet of intercity/corridor trainsets for use in the United States. It is Mr. Salci’s opinion this Technical Specification will accomplish this objective.

The Technical Specification requires that these single-level trainsets can operate in a wide spectrum of environmental and physical conditions found throughout North America.

The Technical Specification design will allow for the creation of new fleets of equipment for establishing new services within the State corridors or Amtrak, or the addition of new trainsets to be compatible and interoperable with existing equipment as specified by the purchaser.

This design will provide for proven technology to be incorporated to the “open design” concept of the trainset definition with the objective of providing safe, reliable, maintainable, and cost effective operations with a minimum useful life of 40 years.


The Trainset design must be operationally and functionally compatible with all existing Amtrak single-level cars, diesel-electric and electric locomotives and PRIIA single level cars and diesel-electric locomotives.

4.3 Other Technical Specification Observations and Comments

Collision Energy Management (CEM) – This specification takes an advanced step with regard to passenger safety and crashworthiness by incorporating CEM requirements for FRA Tier I equipment. Chapter 1, Specification Summary, Section 1.4.4 states, “The trainset shall incorporate Crash Energy Management (CEM) features, and provide crashworthiness performance consistent with Chapter 4 (Carbody) of this specification”. Some of the features are a combination of energy absorbing or push-back couplers, carbody mounted energy absorbers and car structure deformation (crush zones and elements) provided at the end car collision interface and intermediate car collision interface (as needed), protected operator cab space, and trigger, frangible and fuse elements working in sequence with CEM operations. Section 1.4.4 also states, “the specification must be fully compliant with Tier I requirements for structural strength crashworthiness and testing per 49 CFR Part 238”.

In relation to the CEM requirements, Mr. Salci notes certain design challenges to the designer/manufacturer. In addition to the carbody requirements the CEM requirements also include the cab/baggage car design that incorporates a “Protected Operator Cab Space”. This represents a complex design challenge and will result in an entirely new design relative to any existing equipment. Carbody design is a major contractor deliverable that exists early on the procurement/project critical path schedule. This is especially true” if” the three carbody designs have structural differences, i.e., coach, cab/baggage, and café cars. This will not be known until the contractor completes and passes the finite element model analysis for carbody structural tests. It will be important to measure how similar the three carbody designs are from the test results. The carbody design impacts a major long lead material item, namely carbody materials (stainless steel, aluminum, or other steels). The Cab car is important in operating push-pull service. After completion of extensive proof of design tests and production tests, the specification requires the “Pilot trainset” (coach, café’ car and cab/baggage car) to go through extensive acceptance tests for compatibility with the following specific types of equipment:

o P32, P40 and P42 locomotives, as owned by Amtrako F59PHI locomotives as owned by Amtrak, Caltrans, and North Carolina DOTo Viewliner rail carso Amfleet I and II rail carso Horizon rail carso Any other equipment as may be specified by Customer


Mr. Salci supports the inclusion of CEM requirements; however, he brings attention to the importance for Amtrak, the States and FRA to focus on working (oversight and direction) with the Contactor to manage the CEM design phase (Project Critical Path) risk to project cost and schedule to ensure PRIIA procurement success.

Observation-100% Buy America Requirements – PRIIA Buy America requirements are defined as 100% with the ability of the Secretary of Transportation to grant wavier with documented justification of non-availability or major cost penalty. The current FTA Buy America requirement is 60% and the current Amtrak requirement (non-PRIIA Sec. 305) is 50.1%. The U.S. car building industry and major suppliers have modeled their procurement businesses to meet these current U.S. railcar industry content requirements. Most major U.S. market participant passenger car builders (all current car builders are under foreign ownership with international focus with exception of U.S. Railcar Company, formerly Colorado Railcar Manufacturing) and many suppliers base their business model on global markets, which are much larger than the U.S. railcar market and source components internationally. This has been further impacted by a large number of U.S. transit authorities who procure transit and commuter railcars on a “low bid” procurement process; often forcing prime contractor car manufactures to seek off shore components for lower costs to be price competitive. In addition, there may be components that are not available from U.S. suppliers, including recently the availability of U.S. specialty metals, e .g. austenitic stainless steel and 5000 series aluminum for carbody materials. As a result of these existing market conditions, achieving a 100% Buy America requirement may be unrealistic. I understand that the FRA has undertaken an independent analysis of this subject matter by contracting with Georgia Tech University to perform an analysis of the U.S. railcar industry.

Therefore, I recommend that this item receive major attention during the procurement evaluation phase. I would also recommend that the purchaser follow the existing FTA guidelines for pre-award and post-delivery audits for contractor compliance with the Buy America provisions, regardless of the percentage requirements.

4.4 SPECIFICATION SUMMARY

The tables shown in Section 5 of this report summarize the key or selected specification requirements approved by the Executive Committee. The purpose of this information is to assist the Review Panel in its process of determining the adequacy of the Technical Specification for approval by the Executive Board. The approval of the specification will provide for the procurement, design, and manufacture of a fleet of next generation standardized trainsets.

The table format has four columns. Column one is simply the numbering column of items reviewed. Column two provides the Specification requirement/objective. Column three is a summary of how the Trainset/Standalone Car Technical Specification adequately addresses the


requirements. Column four documents the methodology contained in the specification to verify compliance with the design requirements and references major regulatory and standards for compliance.

A list of the Specification criteria are summarized by the tables categorized below:

1. Operational/Performance Requirements2. Interoperability Requirements3. Safety Requirements4. Reliability and Maintainability Requirements5. Passenger Amenity Requirements6. Communication and Electrical Controls7. Vehicle Standardization 8. Environmental Initiatives9. Regulatory and Industry Standards10. Testing and Acceptance Requirements

This information was prepared as a summary of the key criteria and selected topics from a detailed 500 page technical specification. Mr. Salci would be pleased to address any other topics or questions about the Technical Specification the Review Panel or Executive Committee may have to support the decision/approval process.

4.5 SPECIFICATION DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS SUMMARY

Inclusive Industry Representation

Section 305 states, “Amtrak shall establish a Next Generation Corridor Equipment Pool Committee, comprised of representatives of Amtrak, FRA, host freight railroad companies, passenger railroad equipment manufacturers, interested States, and as appropriate other passenger railroad operators.” This was accomplished in January 2010.

The “Committee”, under its Bylaws and Operating Procedures adopted on January 14, 2010 created an Executive Board, which is comprised of: Amtrak, FRA, and 13 States (California, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Washington State, and Wisconsin). The Executive Board established standing committees, one of which is the Technical Subcommittee to develop the technical specification. In March 2010, Mr. Mario Bergeron, Amtrak, Chairman of the Technical Subcommittee distributed a letter inviting all interested industry parties to participate in the Technical Subcommittee Specification development process. The Technical Subcommittee was also open to all Section 305 Committee members.


The rail supply transportation industry was represented by approximately 100 industry professionals (major railcar and locomotive designers and manufactures and manufactures of equipment, components, systems, e.g. trucks, brake systems, wheels, axles, couplers, HVAC systems, door systems, interior suppliers, battery, electrical and communications component/systems suppliers. In addition, there is numerous industry management consultants’ from several disciplines of engineering, operations, maintenance, finance and administration.

A list of all of the participants on the Section 305 Technical Subcommittee is available on the AASHTO website (www.highspeed-rail.org) along with the meeting minutes of the Technical Subcommittee and its Technical Subgroups. There is a complete chronological listing of key activities and events of the Section 305 Committee and the PRIIA NGEC process. This information is available to the public and all industry interested parties.

Specification Development – Industry Input / Evaluation Process

The Bylaws state the purpose of the Technical Subcommittee is to:

1. Develop and /or evaluate alternative passenger railcar and propulsion technologies and designs; and

2. Evaluate proposed vehicle subsystems; 3. Establish performance and safety criteria and standards; 4. Respond to requests by the Executive Board; 5. Any other tasks assigned by the Executive Board

The Technical Subcommittee was provided the ability to form task forces to focus on specific vehicle components, equipment, and systems in developing technical specification (s). This was accomplished first by establishing a core team comprised of several members of the PRIIA stakeholders, Amtrak, US DOT/FRA (including representatives from the Volpe Transportation Center), and the participating states, eh AAR and AASHTO. In addition, additional staff/consultants were assigned by FRA and AASHTO to provide the Technical Subcommittee additional support and liaison with the Executive Committee.

As a starting point, the Technical Subcommittee requested the States to complete a survey of existing equipment in use as well as a survey of desired technical specification and operational characteristics, desired passenger amenities, mechanical characteristics, and service characteristics for a fleet of PRIIA vehicles. In addition, a supplemental survey was done to determine the State’s needs for trainsets and standalone cars.


http://www.highspeed-rail.org/

On April 22, 2010 a Technical Subcommittee meeting was held in Chicago. Presentations were given on topics such as: Expectations of Technical Subcommittee Performance, Facilitation of Domestic Manufacturing and Job Creation, Standardized Modular Rail Vehicle Specifications, and Integration of U.S. Rail Supplier Technologies.

After these presentations the Technical Subcommittee created Subgroups with technical team leaders for the areas as follows:

o Mechanical Sub Group-Jeff Gordon, Team Leadero Electrical Sub Group –Tammy Krause-Team Leadero Vehicle/track Interaction (VTI)-Brian Marquis – Team Leadero Structural Sub Group – Anand Prabhakarano Interiors Sub Group – Andrew Wood –Team Leader

Each of the Subgroup leaders was tasked with developing a work plan for its respective portion of the first vehicle, the bi-level specification, which was integrated and consolidated into the complete specification leading to its approval in August 2010. This process was coordinated and managed by Amtrak. This same process was followed for the development, completion, and approval of the single-level specification and the diesel-electric locomotive specification in February and March 2011 respectively.

The Technical Subcommittee began the process of development of the Trainset specification after the Executive Committee approved the Trainsets Requirements Document on November 18, 2010. The same subgroup structure was used for the development of the specification. The specification development change process was revised and included the support from an industry consultant, LTK, which proved to be effective. The Technical Subcommittee held bi-weekly meetings beginning in January 2011 to review the work progress of the technical Subgroups. Because the demand for the trainset may not be viewed as strong as the demand for bi-level and single-level cars, some equipment manufactures were less able to justify investing the time to support the trainset specification development process. However, the smaller group of contributors had several effects:

the time for generation of the document was extended by two months the review process by industry participants became more important given the reduced

number of participants requiring additional time, however; the input was still substantial and thorough given the 281 change proposals from the

industryThe culmination of the extensive work done by the Subgroup teams and the Technical Subcommittee over a 6 month period resulted in a final draft specification being completed and presented to the entire Technical Subcommittee on June 22, 2011 at its meeting in Chicago, Illinois. This draft specification included inputs/lessons learned from the bi-level and single level


specifications developed and approved; supplier inputs; State’s inputs; environmental requirements; FRA input; standardization work; and the pilot change management process.

The initial draft was completed and posted on the AASHTO website from June 1 to June 16 to allow for industry comments and or change requests. All change requests were reviewed and a final decision on all submittals was made by the respective Subgroup and a matrix of all requested changes was also posted on the AASHTO website.

The summary of the change requests are as follows:

Accepted 168 Amended 38 Rejected 64 Deferred (open) 11

Total Change Requests 281

At the meeting on June 22, 2011, after lengthy discussion on each of the 11 remaining open items, the final decision of the Technical Subcommittee was to approve 5 items, 5 items were withdrawn, and only 1 item was rejected. However, the one item that was not accepted was a change request (Technical Specification Change 04-31) from the FRA. The specific language of the change is as follows: “The design of the trainset must be compliant with FRA’s regulations or consistent with Engineering Task Force Guidance, and may, as an option, incorporate Crash Energy Management”. FRA stated it supports the work of the Technical Subcommittee and supports the inclusion of CEM as an option, not a requirement. Following this change request there was extensive discussion from many members of the Technical Subcommittee on the perceived potential impacts of the FRA change request, which was a change from the FRA position of supporting the inclusion of CEM in the Bi-level car, Single-level Car and Diesel-Electric locomotive specifications previously unanimously approved. Also, the Executive Board’s Requirements Document requires the inclusion of CEM as part of the design criteria. The Technical Subcommittee must follow the Requirements Document, or if in disagreement, request the Executive Board to reconsider the CEM requirement for trainsets. If interested parties want to review the entire discussion on CEM, the meeting minutes of the June 22, 2011 Technical Subcommittee are available for review on the AASHTO website referenced earlier in this Report. The Technical Subcommittee rejected the FRA request to make CEM optional in the technical specification.

Specification Approval Vote

After lengthy discussion, and due to the FRA dissenting vote of support for inclusion of CEM in the specification eliminating the possibility of a consensus vote to approve the specification, the voting procedures of the Technical Subcommittee called for a “block” vote to determine whether the motion passed or failed. The block vote representation was the States = 8 votes, Amtrak = 8 votes, and FRA = 8


votes. As a result, the States and Amtrak voted in favor of inclusion of CEM and approval of the Trainset Specification for 16 votes and FRA voted for disapproval for 8 votes. The Trainset Technical Specification was approved for submittal to the Review Panel for its consideration with CEM required.

As a result of the split vote on the CEM issue, the Technical Subcommittee Chairman requested FRA to prepare a “position paper” explaining the FRA’s CEM “option” position that would be available to be presented to the Executive Board for their consideration prior to their scheduled August 2, 2011 meeting. The August 2, 2011 meeting agenda includes the Review Panel’s recommendation to approve the trainset technical specification with CEM as a requirement.

5 SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY TABLES

The following tables summarize the key or selected specification requirements for comparative analysis with the Trainsets and Standalone Car Requirements Document:

5.1 Operational/Performance Requirements5.2 Interoperability Requirements5.3 Safety Requirements5.4 Reliability and Maintainability Requirements5.5 Passenger Amenity Requirements5.6 Communications and Electrical Controls5.7 Vehicle Standardization5.8 Environmental Initiatives5.9 Regulatory and Industry Standards

5.10 Testing and Acceptance Requirements


5.1 Operational and Performance Requirements

Item No. Specification Requirement/Objective Does Proposed Trainset Specification Adequately address Requirement (s)?

Does Proposed Trainset Specification Provide a Clear Methodology to Verify Compliance With the Design Requirement (s)?

1 Will these trainsets be operable without restriction in the United States and Canada

Yes-designated for use anywhere in the U.S. and Canada consistent with Amtrak’s single-level clearance envelope (drawing B-05-1355 rev. E). The spec includes coach cars, cab/baggage cars, café/lounge cars, and business class cars.

Yes-Ch.3, Project Management. Sec. 3.6 Design Review, carshell engineering plan, including design, dynamic testing, and measurement of critical dimensions, weights and clearances; Ch. 19 Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5 Proof of Design Tests, dimensional accuracy

2 Summarize how the specification identifies all environmental operational requirements necessary to assure the car’s performance as specified throughout the U.S.

Yes-This trainset specification shall reflect operational conditions that may be encountered anywhere the trainsets may operate in North America described in Amtrak Specification 963. All trainline functions shall operate for consist length up to 18 cars plus 2 locomotives.

Yes-The specification must comply with all federal regulations and standard industry practices which are identified in great detail throughout the specification. The spec requires the cars shall be capable of negotiating a 250 ft. radius horizontal curve, a 1000 ft. radius vertical curve (concave and convex), and shall have no more than a 50% wheel unloading on a 7 in. super-elevation.

3 Confirm cars shall be capable of revenue operation at speeds up to 125 mph (assuming track quality sufficient) under existing 49 CFR Part 238 Tier 1 equipment requirements.

Yes-All cars shall be designed and tested for revenue operation at all speeds up to 125 mph on all classes of track from FRA Class 1 to 7. All FRA and AREMA standards must be met

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements are defined for acceptance testing. In addition, the vehicles must comply with 49 CFR Part 238 Passenger Equipment Safety Standards, Subpart C, Specific Requirements for Tier I Passenger Equipment (up to 125 mph) and Subpart D, Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance Requirements for Tier I Passenger Equipment.


4 Will cars have adequate braking performance for the intended service (intercity & push-pull)? Have parking brakes hold for vehicles on grades been specified

Yes-The specification requires all trainsets shall be equipped with an Electrically Controlled Pneumatic (ECP) brake system. The braking systems shall include an electro- pneumatic system for service and emergency brake application for all cars in the trainset; control equipment to be installed on the cab/baggage car to provide braking control for the ECP brake system and a pneumatic parking brake for the cab/baggage car; a wheel slide control system and a mechanical hand brake.

All air brake equipment shall be completely compatible with 26C/26L air brake equipment, currently in use in intercity passenger rail service.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements-tests shall analyze the brake systems performance, reliability and safety under extreme conditions found in revenue service, including full service and emergency braking. Testing includes using a dynamometer or flywheel to verify design can perform satisfactorily by accelerating a simulated train to 125 mph at AW2 load followed by a stop to 0 mph. Entire brake assembly system is subject to passing 1,000,000 cycle test for applications and releases.

5 Provide documentation that the cars are fully compliant with the applicable provisions of ADA

Yes-the specification is in full compliance with all ADA requirements. Wheelchair access and toilet room are accessible, wheelchair parking station in coach and in food service car. The on board Train Information System (OTIS) (e.g. signage) must be ADA compliant, door status indicators include flashing blue LED indicators for operation of the wheelchair lift integrated with door operation and safety provisions including red LEDs for door open status.

Yes-Specification requires customer approval of all design reviews, full scale mock ups of passenger seating area, accessible toilet room, wheelchair lift. Ch. 19, Test Requirements requires proof of design for all major components, specifically door system integrity, safety, functionality, operation, and compliance with all regulations.

6 Will cars meet consist performance requirements for both duty cycle and operating range

Yes-design requires continuous operation up to 20 hours and 1200 miles per day. The operating range, with 10 % reserve, is a distance of 600 miles and duration of 20 hours.

Yes-Ch. 19 Tests, 19.5 Proof of Design tests are required on all major components and systems including the test of a pilot trainset and for compatibility with all single level Amtrak cars and locomotives.

7 Will all exterior doors, vestibules, and diaphragms be designed to prevent ingress and buildup of rain, snow and ice?

Yes-design requires exceptionally high levels of weather sealing be applied to the door systems beyond the level of design normally applied to North American commuter rail equipment. The full height of the side door pocket, the side door step threshold seal and the side doorway header must be completely sealed airtight and watertight when the door is closed.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test, 19.5.5 Door System shall be subjected to extensive testing of 500,000 cycles for functionality, operation and climatic conditions; a mock- up of the door system is also required.


5.2 Interoperability Requirements

tem No.

Specification Requirement/Objective Does proposed Trainset specification adequately address requirement (s)?

Does proposed Trainset specification provide a clear methodology to verify compliance with the design requirement(s)?

1 Will the trainset specification create a fleet of PRIIA vehicles that can be operable either as a new fleet, or allow operationally compatible with existing fleet of single-level cars?

Yes-the specification requires complete operational and functional compatibility with other single-level cars, e.g. Amfleet I, Amfleet II, Horizon, Viewliner, and Cab car trains.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test, 19.5.5 Specification requires engineering proof of design tests and detailed performance and acceptance test requirements. Ch. 19, Tests, Sec. 19.8, “After the Pilot Trainset has been delivered to the Customer’s facility and have undergone and passed all applicable acceptance tests, it shall be combined with other rail equipment as designated by the Customer to verify operational compatibility and coupler tests with other car and locomotive types that may constitute part of the Customer’s existing rail service.

2 Will the trainset developed using this specification is functionally compatible with existing fleets of single-level cars and intercity locomotives?

Yes-The specification requires operational compatibility, mechanical, electrical and pneumatic, with other single-level car fleets. Amtrak Amfleet I & II, Horizon, and Viewliner cars and P32, P40, and P42, and F59PHI locomotives owned by Amtrak, Caltrans, and North Carolina DOT.

Yes-Specification requires proof of design for carbody, and all major components, trucks, couplers, brakes, door systems, HVAC, lighting, communications, and food service, water and waste, and cab controls. Final acceptance tests must be satisfactorily met as a condition of Customer acceptance of the trainset and includes acceptance testing with Amtrak single level cars and locomotives for compatibility.

3 Does trainset specification allow for easy passenger walkthrough from an existing car to a new car (aligned end door location, diaphragm, walkway, end door compatibility, etc.)?

Yes-both operational and functional compatibility are required by the specification with other single-level fleets, however, a trainset consists of semi-permanently coupled cars which will provide for passenger walkthrough.

Yes-Specification requires proof of design and detailed acceptance test requirements.

4 Does the specification allow Amtrak/States to tailor or customize interior layout for the special purpose cars (e.g., food service and business class) without altering the car’s operational and safety characteristics? Does spec allow Amtrak/States to tailor interior and exterior industrial design points (colors, floors, seats, CCTV)?

Yes- the specification requires the design of four car types: coach, cab/baggage, café, and business class. A conceptual floor plan for all car types is provided for use by the Contractor as guidance to design the general layout of the trainset/standalone cars. At the discretion of the Customer, a business class car may be configured out of a coach car or cab/baggage car. Interior décor shall provide for

Yes-Specification, Ch. 9, Interiors, provides for design and specification of all interior requirements and options for reclining seats (track mounted for pitch adj.), energy absorbing work station tables, materials including fiberglass reinforced plastic, decorative laminates, fabric covered wainscot panels below window, track mounted reading light units, etc.


several customer options, e.g., seat types, seat fabrics, colors, curtains, carpeting, etc.

Chapter 23, Customer Variables, accommodates specific requirements of different customers for variables such as exterior graphics, paint and styling, decals and exterior arrangement, seat specifications, and interior décor items.

5 Are ADA requirements identified? Yes-all ADA regulations are included in the specification for design and manufacturing compliance.

Yes-Specification requires compliance with all federal regulations including 49CFR, Subtitle A, Intercity rail Car, 49 CFR parts 27, 37, 38 and all applicable industry standards.

6 Is there a requirement for a mock up vehicle interior to facilitate system design optimization?

Yes-The specification requires a full-scale mock up for customer review and fine tuning:

a. Passenger seating areab. Café/lounge galley and seating areac. Accessible toilet room and unisex toilet

roomd. Cab control compartmente. Enclosed overhead luggage binsf. Complete side door and vestibuleg. Bike rack/baggage roomh. Vestibule ceiling and wall area to simulate

access to equipmenti. Heater grilles and diffusers

Yes-Ch. 19, Tests, 19.6 Proof of Design, Interiors is required of all major interior components and functional testing of luggage bins, seats, etc.


5.3 Safety Requirements

Item No.



1 Does the specification meet the Federal safety regulations, standards, mandates, and industry standards and recommended practices

Yes-Chapter 2, References and Glossary, provides a listing of regulations, standards, specifications, and drawings. However, the Contractor is responsible for ensuring that all applicable regulations, standards and specifications are followed when complying with the specification.

Yes- The specification has provisions for customer approval at various stages of design and Ch. 19 Test Requirements for verification of the suitability of design and workmanship of each car. The Contractor Test Plan has four basic test requirements:

Material Certification Tests Proof of Design Tests Production Tests Acceptance Tests

2 Does the specification represent an advancement in safety compared to a current design Tier I car

Yes-The specification requires compliance with 49CFR Part 238 (FRA) Passenger Equipment Safety Standards, Tier I. In addition, the specification incorporates Crash Energy Management (CEM) as an overlay on the base set of requirements. The CEM requirements for the carbody, anti-climber, push-back couplers, interior workstation tables, and a protected operator cab space, will provide improvements to passengers and train crew.

Yes-Ch. 4, Carbody, Sec. 4.0 –Carbody -Structural Design Details incorporates all of the safety areas included in 49CFR Part 238, and Sub-Sec. 4.17 incorporates Crash Energy Management Design, Validation, Analysis and Testing.

3 Are safety requirements defined for major components:

Yes- The specification requires safety standards be incorporated into the design of the car shell and all major components and subcomponents, e.g. seats, in accordance with federal regulations and industry standards.

Yes-specification requires compliance with CFR49 Part 238 and all industry standards. Ch. 19, Test Requirements, requires tests for proof of design, and acceptance tests before vehicle acceptance.

Does the cab- car control architecture provide for PTC implementation

No. PTC specification requirements need to be added to Ch. 16 Cab and Train Controls, to make the trainset/standalone Cars FRA regulatory design compliant. Add the following language: Each Cab/baggage car shall be designed to be equipped with Positive Train Control (PTC). The PTC system shall conform to all applicable Amtrak, AAR, APTA,

Yes-Ch. 19, Tests, Cab and Controls, Sec. 19.5.13.2 Operations of Positive Train Control, require proof of design tests to validate all systems and functions and requirements including component performance, integrity of system architecture, data collection and retention functions and trainset status evaluations.


and FRA Standards and regulations, and be fully functional with PTC systems in use or planned for use on the host railroads over which Amtrak trains operate. The PTC system shall be Wabtec’s Electronic Train Management System (ETMS) or approved equal. PTC system design, including brake system interface and system isolation procedures, shall be evaluated during design review.


5.4 Reliability and Maintainability Requirements

Item No.



1 Does the specification contain objectives for the reliability of the vehicle major components, cars, and train? Are these objectives measurable and obtainable?

Yes-The specification reliability requirement is a mean distance between train delays (MDBTD) of at least 150,000 miles. There are also component reliability requirements of mean distance between component failures (MDBCF) for major subsystems as follows:

Major Systems Miles (MDBCF)a. Brakes 300,000b. Doors 300,000c. HVAC 380,000d. Couplers 300,000e. Trucks/Suspension 750,000f. PA Systems 600,000g. Aux Power 360,000h. Lighting 1,000,000i. Food Svc 750,000j. Toilet 750,000k. Cab Control 450,000

Yes-Ch. 19, Test Requirements, Sec. 19.9 Reliability and Post Delivery Tests requires on a monthly basis the Contractor shall issue a report detailing the performance of the car fleet and its equipment with regard to maintenance actions (which shall be detailed) and the calculated period and cumulative Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBFs) and Mean Time Between Failures (MTBFs) as appropriate. Any components or systems found to be causing and/or related subsystems and/or whole car MDBF/MTBF to fall below the required performance level shall be subject to redesign and modification.

2 Does the specification identify maintainability requirements, including time to replace requirements, easy maintenance access to equipment and systems, (interior, undercar, car ends)?

Yes-Maintainability shall be the primary criterion for the design of the under floor equipment, equipment rooms and access doors. By example, Contractor shall design the layout to enable a 95th percentile male crew member to safely navigate within the equipment room. Equipment that needs routine maintenance and inspection shall be located in physically accessible areas.

Yes-Ch. 3, Project Mgmt., provides for design review at various stages of design and approval by the Customer. Sec. 3.5.2.1 Maintainability Plan, The Contractor shall prepare and submit for review at the PDR, a maintainability program plan utilizing design standards that minimize Mean Time To Repair (MTTR), Sec 3.5.2.2, cleaning and maintenance costs throughout the car’s intended useful life. The Plan shall include the system MTTRs and a car goal for each proposed car.


3 Does the specification identify maintenance requirements of equipment? Does the specification call for mock-ups and actual cars for a demonstration of maintainability for equipment? Will the cars be cost effective to operate and maintain?

Yes- Amtrak is currently the operator for state run passenger rail transportation in the US, maintenance intervals and procedures are specified to meet current Amtrak preventative maintenance programs. Ease of access for inspection, maintenance intervals, and repairs is a major design consideration.Component reliability requirements are substantial. Maintenance intervals and procedures are specified to meet Amtrak preventative maintenance programs.Customers will also have option of selecting contractor for trainset maintenance.

Yes-Ch. 3, Project Mgt. provides for design review at various stages of design and approval by the Customer. Sec. 3.5.2.3, Maintainability Demonstration, The adequacy of the car design for maintainability shall be evaluated to the satisfaction of the Customer using product components and equipment, mockups and actual cars during the design, production and acceptance phases. This demonstration shall include a shop exercise including troubleshooting, change out of components, corrective maintenance, and Contractor supplied special tools. The components/systems are enumerated in the specification.

4 Are the cars designed to have a minimum 40 year service life?

Yes – The carbody and all its structural elements, including trucks and running gear shall have a minimum design life of 40 years of operation at full seated passenger load. Carbody or trainset shall meet or exceed APTA Std. SS-C&S-034-99 for the design and construction of passenger rolling stock.

Yes-Ch. 19 Proof of Design, verification of design and minimum 40 year service life is verified.


5.5 Passenger Amenities & Convenience Requirements

Item No.



1 Passenger loading and unloading (doors, doorways, aisles) requirements

Yes-Specification requires each vestibule end of each car shall have two exterior side entrance doors (and steps except at the cab end) and a vestibule sliding door between the vestibule and the passenger seating area. The general arrangement shall be as shown in the conceptual drawings in Chapter 9. Doorways shall meet ADA standards, and shall have “minimum” clear dimensions of 32 in. to provide clear passage. Each car shall provide access between two coupled cars through the diaphragm passageway. Diaphragms shall be installed to be compatible with existing fleet of single-level equipment, passage ways shall be a minimum of 32 in. in width.

Yes-Specification requires Contractor design for all doors must comply with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 37, Part 38 Subpart F, Part 238 and APTA Std. SS –C&S-034-99. Specification provides for design review process and Customer approval. Ch. 19, Test Requirements, includes Proof of Design Test.

2 HVAC System requirements Yes-The HVAC System shall be powered from the 480 VAC, three phases, 60 Hz HEP. The microprocessor controlled temp. Controls shall operate from a 120VAC, one phase, and 60 Hz supply. The car’s interior temperature, including the engineer’s cab, shall be maintained to the specified value (68 degrees to 76 degrees F) under all specified circumstances.

Yes-Ch. 19, Test Requirements—the performance of the entire assembled HVAC System as installed in a completed car shall be verified at the Climate Room Test specified in Ch. 19.

3 Interior lighting requirements Yes-Specification for lighting shall provide for five modes of interior lighting, normal, quiet car, standby, and emergency and off. Interior and exterior lighting shall be provided by Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) or a combination of LEDs and fluorescent lights. The use of LED is the preferred method for interior lighting. Contractor shall prepare a lighting plan for Customer review that describes the type of lighting to be used in all applications, including fixture type, voltage, color temperature, illumination levels, and the Plan must

Yes-Ch. 19, Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5.8 – The function and intensity of all lighting systems shall be tested in the first car to verify compliance with the specification requirements. Performance of electronic ballasts shall be verified, all modes of operation shall be verified, and verification of light levels shall meet APTA Std. SS-E-013-99, 49 CFR Section 238.115


comply with emergency lighting and signage regulations and standards.

4 Communication System architecture requirements for passenger use, including Wi-Fi capability, PA and PIS systems requirements?

Yes-The Communications Specifications requires four primary subsystems: Public Address (PA), Intercommunications (IC) system, Onboard Train Information System (OTIS), and Passenger Information System (PIS). The PA and IC systems shall be fully compatible with existing single-level rail cars operating in intercity service. The OTIS and PIS systems (including wireless connectivity for passengers) shall be based on current technologies. The OTIS and PIS shall provide both audible and visual passenger information and be fully automated. The Car Control Unit (CCU) shall be microprocessor controlled with open architecture; utilize not more than 60% of available memory capacity. Electrical outlets provided at each passenger seat.

Yes-Ch. 19, Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5.9 –the communication system shall be tested on the first car of each type to verify that it functions in accordance with the requirements. The diagnostic function of each individual system shall be tested as a separate test or in combination with other functional testing.Sec. 19.5.9- PA/IC system performance shall be tested to verify all performance requirements.

5 Water and waste system requirements Yes-the specification requires a pressurized fresh water system shall be provided on each car to supply potable water for drinking, hand washing, toilet flushing, and Café car galley requirements. Particulate and antibacterial filtration will be used to provide potable water at drinking stations on both levels, as well as supply water for café galley.

The water storage capacity shall be a minimum of 1.5 gal per revenue seat serviced by any water and waste system, except those serving galleys, which shall have a minimum 224 gal. Storage for café/lounge cars. The Waste System shall be a vacuum system with sufficient capacity to collect and retain all black water generated on the car during a 48 hour period in a single tank. Minimum waste capacity shall be 0.3 gal per revenue seat. Bathrooms are well ventilated and bathroom exhaust is diverted away from passenger exterior side doors.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirement, Sec. 19.5.12 Water and Waste- a set of equipment that simulates the fresh water distribution system and waste retention system on a car shall be assembled and connected to operate. The system shall be piped to simulate actual car piping and verify system pressures, temperatures, flow rates, safety controls, vacuum levels, and tank level indicators.


6 ADA compliance for PA & PIS systems Yes-the PA systems is required to maintain specified volume levels, even in emergency situations. The specification for interior signs must meet all ADA requirements.

Yes-Ch. 19, Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5.8- Post Delivery of Pilot Trainset -the communication system shall be tested on the first car of each type to verify that it functions in accordance with the specification.

7 Describe how the cars use interior space efficiently, providing a balance between need for revenue seating and other uses, such as luggage storage, bicycle racks, trash recycling, etc.

Yes-At Customer options baggage storage area shall be configured with a partition at the B-end and the size of the baggage room shall be at the option of the customer. A checked baggage storage area shall be located at the F end of the car.

Storage/Baggage room shall contain folding baggage shelves on both sides of the central aisle that allows converting individual sections into bicycle racks. Passengers will be able to self-load luggage and bicycles at high-level platforms.

Trash recycling is provided for in all cars.

Yes-Ch. 19, Test, Proof of Design is required for interior seating layout. Ch. 3, Project Management. Section 3.6 design reviews provides for Customer involvement and approval of use of interior space arrangements.


5.6 Communications and Electrical Control Systems

Item No.



1 Car electrical & power systems and Inter-car connections

Yes-The specification requires trainset and the locomotive to trainset power and signal trainline circuits to be functionally compatible with the existing single-level fleet of Amfleet I, Amfleet II, Horizon, Viewliner, and Cab cars and Amtrak P32, P40, P42 and F59PHI locomotives. The inter-car connections (480VAC, three phase, 60 Hz, 27-point trainline and 27 point MU) that are required are what is currently in use and is specified in APTA RP-E-016-99 and RP-E-017-99. The receptacles and (push-pull control) jumper cables to be installed at each end of the car are as specified in APTA RP-E-018-99 and RP-E-019-99. The HEP load is limited by the current capacity of the 4/0 wire used in the 480VAC jumper cables.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5.1 Electrical tests-one completed car of each type shall be tested to determine the actual electrical loads, their phase balance and power factor. This shall be done under at least three different conditions: maximum heating load, maximum cooling electrical load and ventilation. These values shall be used to verify specification compliance.

Trainline tests shall be conducted at both ends of the first car of each type. All receptacles for the HEP, MU and COMM trainline circuits shall be tested for proper functionality using a trainline test unit.

Tests shall meet EMI/EMC requirements of APTA Standard ss-E-010-98.

2 Communications architecture requirements for control, operations, and communications

Yes-the specification requires that the Contractor shall be capable of utilizing up to date technologies, must include open architecture and still interface with systems that may already be installed in existing single-level cars operating in intercity service. The Communication System shall comply with APTA Std. SS-PS-001-98.

Yes- Ch. 19 Test Requirements, Sec. 19.5.9 The Communications System shall be tested on the first car of each type to verify that if functions in accordance with the requirements.

3 Does the cab –car control architecture allow for PTC implementation

No-PTC specification requirements for PTC need to be added to Ch. 16, Cab and Train Controls, to make the trainset/standalone cars FRA regulatory design compliant. Recommendation-Add the following language in Ch. 16: “Each Cab/baggage car shall be

Yes-Ch. 19, Tests, Cab and Controls, Sec 19.5.13.2 Operations of Positive Train Control, require proof of design tests to validate all systems and functions and requirements including component performance, integrity of system architecture, data collection and


designed to be equipped with Positive Train Control (PTC). The PTC system shall conform to all applicable Amtrak, AAR, APTA, and FRA standards and regulations, be fully functional with PTC systems in use or planned for use on the host railroads over which Amtrak trains operate. The PTC system shall be Wabtec’s Electronic Train Management System (ETMS) or approved equal. PTC system design, including brake system interface and system isolation procedures, shall be evaluated during design review.

retention functions and trainset status evaluations.

4 Passenger Convenience Outlets Yes-The 120VAC power is distributed throughout the car utilizing three 480 /120VAC step down transformers and switch and circuit breaker panels located in the electrical equipment locker. A flush style 120VAC duplex convenience outlet shall be installed in the wall panel at each revenue seat location using the GFCI circuits. Two duplex outlets shall be installed at each revenue seat facing table. The outlets are intended to provide power for passenger electronic equipment. Two outlets shall also be installed at each table.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements, Electrical tests-one completed car of each type shall be tested to determine the actual electrical loads, their phase balance and power factor.


5.7 Standardization Initiatives

Item No.



1 The NGEC Corridor Equipment Pool was created to address the design, development and procurement of “Standardized” Next Generation Rail Equipment for both intercity and states corridor requirements. Has a Standardization process been incorporated into the Single-level design?

Yes- The Trainset/standalone Car Requirement Document identifies candidate components or systems for standardization:

Vehicle structure for common platform Component attachments: Trucks, seats,

tables, HVAC Components at

form/fit/function/input/output level: truck, wheels, axle, couplers, cab controls, HVAC units, static inverters, batteries, lighting, tables, doors, inter-car gangways, inter-car jumpers

Seek commonality in components with bi-level and Single-level PRIIA vehicle types

Yes-The NGEC Executive Board’s Standardization Working Group developed recommendations as follows:

Standardize specification layout and language

Standardize key interfaces so components are interchangeable with common performance requirements

Standardize design of a particular component or system, resulting in identical and interchangeable components/systems for all fleets of the same car

The Executive Board tasks the Technical Subcommittee to incorporate these potential standardization recommendations in the procurement of vehicles. The process will require monitor and reporting on progress as specifications move to the procurement phase.


5.8 Environmental Initiatives

Item No.



1 Describe how the specification promotes:a. Energy efficiencyb. Use of sustainable or recycled materials,

that lessen the impact from the manufacturing process

c. Capture of recyclables from the passenger waste system

Yes-Ch. 3 Project Management, Sec. 3.4.2, Initiatives the Promote Sustainability in the Manufacturing Process. These initiatives shall identify the means by which manufacturing waste and energy consumption will be reduced, including:

a. Creation and utilization of reusable packaging for transport of materials;

b. Use of recyclable materials for packagingc. Use of recycled materials in the

production process;d. Reuse of recycling of excess materials

created during the manufacturing process;

e. Capture of reusable materials such as office paper, cardboard, copier toner;

f. Employee awareness campaigns the promote reduction in unnecessary use of energy.

Yes- Ch. 3, Project Management, Design Objectives provide the Customer with the ability to audit and monitor the Contractors behavior and plans for meeting the design objectives for initiatives of reducing energy and materials waste in the production and manufacturing process.

The Contractors waste reduction program shall provide to the Customer quarterly reports that document the status of the program and the level of success program is achieving.

2 Does specification require use of R-400 series refrigerants?

Yes-Specification requires the use of R-400 series refrigerants that lessen the impact on depletion of the ozone layer.

Yes-Ch. 10, Sec. 10.5 Air Conditioning, states, “The HVAC units shall all be identical. The units shall be designed for an approved refrigerant, conforming to 40 CFR Part 82. Also, Ch. 19, Tests, requires Proof of Design Tests.


5.9 Regulatory and Industry Standards

Item No.



1 Does the specification meet all federal regulations that are applicable for complying with the requirements of the specification?

Yes-the specification references all federal regulations, including federal regulations promulgated by/for ADA, DOE (Energy), EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), FDA (Food & Drug Administration) and FRA (Federal Railroad Admin.), specifically 49 CFR Transportation, Section II, Parts 200-299.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements- The Contractor shall provide proof of compliance for those items so governed before the first train set is accepted. The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that all applicable regulations, standards, and specifications are followed when complying with the requirements of the specification. Sec 19.7. The tests shall be satisfactorily completed as a condition of acceptance. A complete, orderly and comprehensive check of each and every vehicle system shall be made to verify its proper operation before commencement of revenue service.

2 Does the specification meet all industry standards and recommended or best practices?

Yes- by example the specification references all standards of the AAR (Association of American Railroads), Aluminum Association, ANSI (American National Standards Institute), APTA (American Public Transit Association), ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers), ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers), ASTAM (American Society of Testing and Materials), AWS (American Welding Society), IEC (International Electro-technical Commission), IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), IFI (Industrial Fasteners Institute), ISO (International Organization of Standardization), NFPA (National Fire Protection Association), and Amtrak specifications and drawings.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements- The Contractor shall provide proof of design compliance for those items governed before the first train set is accepted. The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that all applicable regulations, standards, and specifications are followed when complying with the requirements of the specification. Sec. 19.7. The tests shall be satisfactorily completed as a condition of acceptance.


5.10 Testing and Acceptance Requirements

Item No.



1 Does the specification contain adequate requirements for design verification through modeling or testing?

Yes-The contractor is responsible (CDRL) for submitting an engineering plan for accomplishing the engineering design functions and objectives within 30 days of NTP. This is part of the Project Management Plan requirements for submitting, within 45 days of NTP, an approved industry standard computer driven CPM (Critical Path Method) plan to schedule all activities related to this contract, including its work, and the work of its subcontractor’s and major supplier’s work.

Yes-Ch. 19, Sec. 19.5-The Contractor shall develop a series of tests (Proof of Design) to evaluate the design of the car shell and each car system, subsystem and major component to verify that the performance requirements of the car shell structure, systems and components have been met, that the system and all component parts function as intended and within all specified parameters. Further, these tests shall validate the design of all systems and components as supplied by the Contractor and all subcontractors, and prove that these designs are fully compliant with all applicable specifications, regulations, standards, and performance requirements.

2 Does the specification contain adequate requirements for Quality Assurance testing?

Yes- The Contractor shall develop and implement a Quality Assurance (QA) program that conforms to FTA-IT-90-5001-02.1 of February 2002: Quality Assurance and Quality Control Guidelines. Required elements include Corporate Organization Chart, Role of Customer in QA Process, Process for engineering changes, configuration management, production control (including subcontractors), and process for auditing production to ensure policies are being implemented and maintained.

Yes-Ch.19 Test Requirements, Sec. 19.1-As part of the production of the cars under this contract, the Contractor shall be responsible for a comprehensive series of tests (material certification tests, Proof of Design tests, Production Tests, and Acceptance Tests) to be performed to verify both the suitability of design and workmanship of each car. The Contractor must fulfill all requirements called for by FRA 49CFR Sec. 238.111 (b) for Tier I equipment, for submission by the Customer to the FRA.

3 Does the specification contain adequate requirements for acceptance testing?

Yes-Acceptance Tests consist of production car tests to be performed on each car by the Contractor after delivery of each car to the Contractor’s field site or Customer’s facilities to demonstrate conformance with the Technical Specifications, to ensure that no system functionality was lost during shipment and transit of the vehicle, and as a condition for acceptance.

Yes-Ch. 19, Sec 19.7, Acceptance Tests-The tests specified in this section are to be performed by the Contractor on the Customer railroad, or as otherwise designated by the Customer. The Pilot Trainset after passing applicable acceptance inspection shall be tested for compatibility with all designated locomotives and single level cars. The tests shall be satisfactorily completed as a condition of acceptance.


All tests shall be performed on all cars (including the pilot cars) unless otherwise specified by the Customer.

4 Are there provisions in the specification for customer participation in the design review, production inspection and acceptance of the new cars?

Yes-Ch.3, Project Management, Sec. 3.6.1, Customer Involvement-The Customer shall be an integral part of all aspects of the design, inspection, testing and approval program for the railcars.a. There are four types of design review: 1)

Preliminary Design Review; 2) Intermediate Design Review; 3) Mock Up Review; and Final Design Review.

b. The Customer shall be allowed to participate in all Contractor and/or subcontractor tests and inspections of all components of the equipment, at the Contractor’s and subcontractor’s plants, continuously through production. The Contractor shall establish inspection hold points in the car manufacturing process to provide for critical inspections by the Contractor’s quality staff and the Customer’s representative of completed operations/installation or to inspect items that are about to be covered by succeeding assembly operations.

Yes-Ch. 19 Test Requirements, Sec. 19.7.1 requires acceptance tests of all cars. In addition, after receipt of each car at the Customer site and before it is operated, it shall be carefully inspected jointly by the customer and the Contractor, and any part, device or apparatus which requires adjustments, repair, or replacement shall be noted by the Contractor who shall make such adjustments, repair or replacement before acceptance testing is begun.


Trainset Final Report Ver 4.0 7-23-11.docx20305%20DocSpec... · Web viewLarry Salci was retained as...

Documents

Transcript of Trainset Final Report Ver 4.0 7-23-11.docx20305%20DocSpec... · Web viewLarry Salci was retained as...