# XpressWest (nee DesertXpress) Adopts "Buy American"



## leemell (Sep 1, 2013)

XpressWest has published an extensive "Buy American" plan for most, if not all of their purchases including provisions of their purchases to require their suppliers make or buy goods made within the US. This appears to be their answer to the FRA on the roadblock to lending it the finances to build. It should be interesting to see how the FRA responds. Incidentally, it details the rolling stock sets and time frame.


----------



## Andrew (Sep 1, 2013)

What is the chance that Washington gives Xpress West the Green Light for an RRIF Loan?


----------



## Anderson (Sep 1, 2013)

I'd say a bit better than even now. The main issue at the moment is that there's no clear, funded plan to get the train from Victorville/Palmdale down into LA proper, so you've got a potential stumbling block there for which Metrolink is a dubious substitute (since two hours on a commuter train plus a transfer is...really not what most people have in mind when they're thinking of a bullet train).


----------



## afigg (Sep 1, 2013)

leemell said:


> XpressWest has published an extensive "Buy American" plan for most, if not all of their purchases including provisions of their purchases to require their suppliers make or buy goods made within the US. This appears to be their answer to the FRA on the roadblock to lending it the finances to build. It should be interesting to see how the FRA responds. Incidentally, it details the rolling stock sets and time frame.


Interesting counter-move from Xpress West. Could put the FRA and the administration on the spot about whether they are willing to take the political heart and approve the loan. The odds of actually getting the approval? Beats me.

The RIFF loan application gas dragged on for so long, I'm wondering why XW did not do this sooner. My guess is that XW really wanted to get extensive waivers for the Buy America requirements from the FRA, so both XW and the FRA kept talking pass each other. Another possibility is that XW was ok with the loan application process getting dragged out because that provides time for the CA to settle on a Palmdale to Victorville route for the highway and HSR ROW. Shortens the number of years that a Victorville to Vegas HSR line would run before an extension to Palmdale is complete as a large step closer to LA and eventually meeting up with the CA HSR route.

XW is seeking to order 20 eight car EMU trainsets initially. Then 8 more 5 years later. If XW does not team with Amtrak and CA HSR, the smaller order size with long gaps in delivery blocks will limit the number of viable bidders for HSR trainsets.

The XW plan does state for the record that their plan is to eventually extend service to LA. Which will mean running over CA HSR tracks. "Finally, XpressWest expects fourteen (14) additional train sets will be required for the Victorville — Palmdale — Los Angeles extension. This expectation does not presently consider the potential needs required after the California High Speed Rail project connects with XpressWest at the Palmdale station. The total estimate of the XpressWest rolling stock demand is approximately forty-two (42) train sets."


----------



## Anderson (Sep 1, 2013)

afigg said:


> leemell said:
> 
> 
> > XpressWest has published an extensive "Buy American" plan for most, if not all of their purchases including provisions of their purchases to require their suppliers make or buy goods made within the US. This appears to be their answer to the FRA on the roadblock to lending it the finances to build. It should be interesting to see how the FRA responds. Incidentally, it details the rolling stock sets and time frame.
> ...


28 sets for Palmdale-Victorville-Vegas? Wow. That's more than the Acela has, and the Acela covers a lot more ground in terms of both time and distance WAS-BOS. Assuming 90 minutes Victorville-Vegas and another 30 Palmdale-Victorville, you're looking at 120 minutes each way. Hourly service would require six sets plus spares (allowing an hour to turn the train). Service every 30 minutes would require twelve sets. So...they seem to be looking at service every 15 minutes (at least, near peak hours) with less frequent service to Los Angeles (which makes sense, as they would presumably run transfers with CAHSR for some frequencies).

Also, something I just noticed: Anyone else find it interesting that their website only has one foreign language: Chinese. I wonder where they're looking for investors?

Edit: Another point of interest:

http://www.xpresswest.com/network.html

I find it interesting that San Diego-Palmdale lights up first, followed by Victorville-Vegas, then Palmdale-Victorville, then the rest of CAHSR, then Phoenix, then SLC. Interesting order...is there something I'm missing, though, about plans for someone else to do something in Southern CA?

Edit 2: Ok, a thought came to mind. Does anybody know how much Chinese investment there is or isn't in Las Vegas? I know I might be reading too much into that language selection, but it's _really_ surprising that they have Chinese on the site and _not_ Spanish. Call it the dog that didn't bark.


----------



## cirdan (Sep 2, 2013)

Anderson said:


> 28 sets for Palmdale-Victorville-Vegas? Wow. That's more than the Acela has,


Maybe something got lost in translation? It depends for example how you would define a set.

Maybe a set is just a three car unit or something along those lines. Several such sets would normally be combined into a single train, but smaller sets would permit capacity to be flexibly taylored to demand rather than having to run a year-round service with monster trains that are only really filled in the peak season?

The Eurostar trains for example are actually two sets. These sets have a driving cab at only one end and the other end is flat. It has a diaphragm connection and auto-coupler and in normal service you probably woundn't notice you could split the train there. But being able to do so is useful for maintenance purposes (you don't have to take an entire train out of service if only part of it needs maintenance). Now if you imagine those sets to be shorter you could have end sets with a driving cab at one end and mid-train sets that have no driving cab. But these sets all have auto-couplers and distributed equipment meaning you can combine any number of them to make any length of train. Just a thought.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 2, 2013)

It's pretty explicit:



> XpressWest will require the acquisition of approximately twenty (20) electric multiple unit train sets (each consisting of 8 cars). Eight (8) additional train sets (each consisting of 8 cars) will be purchased to satisfy demand and to increase fleet size for operational purposes after the fifth year of operation.


Basically, either the plan is to run a lot of 8-car trains or there would be some plan to 16-car trains as a double set. However, given that there haven't been corridor trains that long with any regularity in a _long_ time, I'd be a bit surprised. Also, there's this:



> It should be noted that each vehicle within the 8-vehicle train for XpressWest is slightly different in its configuration. For instance, all vehicles may not be powered and therefore may not have traction motors and propulsion equipment; only two of the vehicles are end cars and therefore include driver’s cabs;


That implies pretty strongly that you wouldn't be able to "pop" two sets together to become one train.


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

Being able to split the Eurostar trains is a Channel Tunnel Fire Safety requirement and is not primarily due to maintenance requirements. In practice those sets are seldom split apart.


----------



## afigg (Sep 2, 2013)

Anderson said:


> 28 sets for Palmdale-Victorville-Vegas? Wow. That's more than the Acela has, and the Acela covers a lot more ground in terms of both time and distance WAS-BOS. Assuming 90 minutes Victorville-Vegas and another 30 Palmdale-Victorville, you're looking at 120 minutes each way. Hourly service would require six sets plus spares (allowing an hour to turn the train). Service every 30 minutes would require twelve sets. So...they seem to be looking at service every 15 minutes (at least, near peak hours) with less frequent service to Los Angeles (which makes sense, as they would presumably run transfers with CAHSR for some frequencies).


The number of trainsets is a lot, but the route will not an evenly distributed NEC travel pattern with AM and PM peaks in both directions. The peak periods will be from LA region to Vegas on Friday late afternoons and evenings, then Vegas to LA region on Sunday afternoons and evenings. The plan may be to build storage tracks, first at Victorville, then at Palmdale and have a large number of trainsets stored there on Fridays. Then send them every 20 or 30 minutes for the peak Friday period. Then store the extra trainsets at Vegas for the return surge on Sundays (or Mondays of holiday weekends). Not the most efficient use of equipment, but they should have accounted for this in their business model.
XW will be the only user of the Palmdale to Vegas tracks, so they will have a lot of flexibility and capacity in how they use it. But they will be aggressive in keeping their operating cost low as a for profit private operator. If they can couple the 8 car trainsets together at full operating speed, they could double up the trainsets for the peak periods while not expanding the crew besides possibly the food service attendant(s).

The 8 car trainsets will have, what?, seating capacity in the 450 range? I figure XW would have 1 first class car with ~40 seats with food service, 2 business class cars with ~50 seats each, 5 coach class cars with ~65 seats on average?

If XW is allowed to run over CA HSR tracks to LA, the CA HSR designers will have to reconsider their design capacity for the LA to Palmdale segment. May need to study building it with space to add a 3rd track to handle the XW traffic. Although that could be very expensive upfront with the miles of tunnels to be dug out for the segment. So they will probably stick with the lower cost 2 track option, and expand it later at a much greater cost if the capacity gets overloaded.


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

From that it sounds like there will be a large number of sets with relatively poor utilization. One can't help that if the traffic pattern is such though.

Maybe they could do some equipment pooling with CAHSR and get better equipment utilization rather than have them all sitting around doing nothing in yards for extended periods of time.

BTW, are they asking for 85' independent cars? Or are they going for articulated sets with shorter individual cars, e.g. Valero with diesel powerheads or some such?


----------



## Andrew (Sep 2, 2013)

Thus, what is a realistic timeframe for the RRIF Loan's Green Light and start-up revenue service for Xpress West?

I have heard the EIS for the Victorville-Palmsdale Segment should be completed in late 2013. How does this impact Washington's Xpress West funding commitment?


----------



## cirdan (Sep 2, 2013)

Andrew said:


> Thus, what is a realistic timeframe for the RRIF Loan's Green Light and start-up revenue service for Xpress West?
> I have heard the EIS for the Victorville-Palmsdale Segment should be completed in late 2013. How does this impact Washington's Xpress West funding commitment?


 I think construction may at best start in 2013. I don't think anything will be finished that quickly.


----------



## cirdan (Sep 2, 2013)

jis said:


> From that it sounds like there will be a large number of sets with relatively poor utilization. One can't help that if the traffic pattern is such though.


Poor equipment utilization is also poor personnel deployment. There aren't that many train engineerts who are willing to sign up for part-time jobs. And all the equipment sitting at one end of the line waiting also means all the staff is there, clocking up costs staying in hotels or whatever. It would be much more sensible to arrange shifts sô staff can return to their home station on the same day. So economically, both in terms of equipment utilization and staff effectiveness it would make sense to run trains both ways even if the demand only goes one way. Cheap and attractive offers can help fill seats the other way and at least provide some income to offset costs.


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

I agree.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 2, 2013)

Could be that part of the Deal is that the Casinos/Hotels will give them Comp Rooms so the Employees will stay and Lose their Money! In Lost Wages? I'm Shocked! Shocked! to know that Gambling goes on there! :giggle:


----------



## Paulus (Sep 2, 2013)

The number of train sets that they want does help to further erode any remaining confidence in their business plans, though it's marginally redeemable if they're all or mostly utilized doubled up for 400m sets in practice. That said, there's not enough going to be enough traffic to justify that.


----------



## afigg (Sep 2, 2013)

jis said:


> From that it sounds like there will be a large number of sets with relatively poor utilization. One can't help that if the traffic pattern is such though.
> Maybe they could do some equipment pooling with CAHSR and get better equipment utilization rather than have them all sitting around doing nothing in yards for extended periods of time.
> 
> BTW, are they asking for 85' independent cars? Or are they going for articulated sets with shorter individual cars, e.g. Valero with diesel powerheads or some such?


On the trainsets, I have not looked deeply enough at the publicly available documents to see if there is in-depth info on the trainset specifics. XW may leave that open to the companies that respond to the RFI and RFP who are willing to assemble the trainsets in the US. XW will presumably lay out specs such as platform height, power, clearance envelope that match the CA HSR.
XW has the luxury of starting with a clean sheet system with the exception of someday wanting to run their EMU trainsets to LA Union Station. With regards to the crew staffing and utilization issue, I expect XW will strive to have the smallest crew size possible. No lifting of tickets on the train. Same as the FEC & AAF, XW will start with entirely new stations at Victorville, Vegas, eventually Palmdale (possibly a combined station with a closed off XW only platform section, perhaps the same at LA Union Station). Build a faregate system to scan eTickets, smartphones, compatible credit cards on entry and exit with assigned seating.

With an unbalanced travel pattern, at least on a daily travel basis, XW may have to do a fair number of deadhead equipment and crew moves between Vegas and Victorville/Palmdale. The ability to link 8 car trainsets into a 16 car set for equipment moves, likely at a slower speed at night to save on power consumption, might be part of the RFP. Or perhaps as combined 16 car sets at full speed for the peak travel periods.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 2, 2013)

Hey, if nothing else...if the sets are NEC-compatible, XpressWest might just end up backdooring a set of Acela IIs for Amtrak!

I will say that, given the short nature of the run (90 minutes), I can't speak for the cost of physically running the trains, but it would probably be cheaper to return a set to Victorville (or to Vegas, depending on where the crew is based) than to keep the crew there more than overnight due to held-away time issues. You might nominally make it a revenue move with odd timing (i.e. a return starting at like midnight on Friday) or might make it a deadhead, but it's a short enough trip...and if it's "after hours" you could just return the train at a lower speed to save on electricity.

The other option would be to run a single "employee return" run while keeping a few sets at the other end of the line. If the cost is substantial to run the train from end to end, you could simply load a half-dozen crews onto one train bound for the other end of the line while keeping a batch of the sets in place, and then return them on the "return day". Given that the last train of the evening on almost any line rarely sells out, bringing everyone home on a train at 2330 or 0000 shouldn't be an issue, especially if the traffic is highly directional.

Of course, what bugs me is more the idea that they'd have sets sitting idle 4-5 days per week and for most of another day or two. It would really make a bit more sense, operationally, to demand manage those peak hours on Friday and Sunday but to also run the service as late as they can keep cycling trains.

Edit: One other thought is that CAHSR could use those sets on Friday evening and Sunday. They could probably lease them for use to CA on weekdays...in an ideal world, you'd see XW lease out sets M-F for peak-hour use SAN-LAX and then run a bunch of them through to Vegas on Friday evening, return them Sunday (think the Acela schedule on Sundays), and be in place for use on Monday. You'd either need locomotive-capable sets or something like that, as well as capacity boosts LAX-SAN, but it's certainly a valid use of the equipment IMHO. You could do the same thing on the "main" CAHSR line with loaned sets, too, and equipment rentals would certainly be a valid, viable revenue stream under these circumstances.


----------



## afigg (Sep 2, 2013)

Andrew said:


> Thus, what is a realistic timeframe for the RRIF Loan's Green Light and start-up revenue service for Xpress West?
> I have heard the EIS for the Victorville-Palmsdale Segment should be completed in late 2013. How does this impact Washington's Xpress West funding commitment?


You keep asking questions that can't really be answered by anyone here. Or sometimes, by anyone anywhere. On getting a RRIF loan approval, I doubt if even the FRA, XW, US DOT minders could tell you that. The FRA staff will have to be very careful to make sure that ALL of the decisions and numbers are documented, justified, and the i's dotted & t's crossed if they are going to approve the lean. Odds are good that if the loan is approved, the House will haul the FRA staff and managers in front of a committee or two and go over every detail, with the Republicans accusing them publicly of wasting $X billion of government money. If you are a mid to upper level federal employee, there is no career benefit from being called to testify in front of a hostile (or 1/2 plus 1 hostile) Congressional committee. Which would make the reviewers reluctant to recommend approving the application. AAF will have an easier path.

If XW gets the RRIF loan approved and has the rest of their funding lined up, IIRC, the expected contract award, final design, and construction time for Victorville to Las Vegas was about 5 years.

Checking the Caltrans website for the High Desert Corridor project and a July 2013 news article, it looks that they are still working on the Tier I EIS, but it could be done this year. If the EIS with a HSR corridor component receives a Record of Decision from the US DOT, that should provide support for the Victorville to Vegas segment as the Palmdale to Victorville segment will be closer to getting built. But the schedule for starting construction on the High Desert Corridor will be determined by the state of CA and county government, not XW.


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

Also keep in mind, even after the DEIS is submitted, the FRA can sit on it for virtually as long as it wants to before giving an ROD.


----------



## afigg (Sep 2, 2013)

jis said:


> Also keep in mind, even after the DEIS is submitted, the FRA can sit on it for virtually as long as it wants to before giving an ROD.


The High Desert Corridor (HDC) is primarily a highway project with a ROW component suitable for a 180 mph railroad corridor. My first thought was that the FRA would not have much of a say in the DEIS because XW would have to submit their own followup EIS for the specifics of the railroad line. However I found this July 2013 Open House presentation (~2.5 MB PDF) which states that they are also performing a rail alternative analysis which shows example images of alternate routes for a connecting Wye, routes and speeds. So the HDC DEIS and FEIS will include a substantial HSR route component.

I doubt that the FRA would sit on the DEIS and FEIS because they would be blocking the highway project as well. The schedule as of July 2013 now has the Draft EIS due in Spring 2014 and the Final EIS in Fall 2014.


----------



## Andrew (Sep 2, 2013)

So when will real construction begin?


----------



## Anderson (Sep 2, 2013)

Andrew,

As has been said several times, we do not know for sure. We're not all deep insiders in the rail industry or at state DOTs. I know you're curious about this, but...really, we've told pretty much everything we know on here and we've added whatever speculation we reasonably can (as well as some unreasonable guesses and shots in the dark/wild speculation as well).

Also, since you're a regular contributor, have you considered registering an account?


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

afigg said:


> I doubt that the FRA would sit on the DEIS and FEIS because they would be blocking the highway project as well. The schedule as of July 2013 now has the Draft EIS due in Spring 2014 and the Final EIS in Fall 2014.


I would never put it past FRA to do absolutely any weird thing. They have been sitting on the NY State EIS now for 14 months with no action. It took them over a year to give a ROD on the ARC SEIS.
But clearly with that schedule they still have some time.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 2, 2013)

Just a serious side question, but if a project doesn't involve federal funding, does it need a federal ROD?


----------



## jis (Sep 2, 2013)

RRIF is federal funding. It needs a ROD to get an RRIF loan. If it does not use any federal fund then it does not need a federal NEPA. It just needs to fulfill whatever requirements are there for the states involved.

For example, the RiverLINE in NJ was built with state funds, so there was no need for any federal EIS.


----------



## afigg (Sep 3, 2013)

jis said:


> RRIF is federal funding. It needs a ROD to get an RRIF loan. If it does not use any federal fund then it does not need a federal NEPA. It just needs to fulfill whatever requirements are there for the states involved.


According to the fact sheet for the HDC project, the NEPA and EIS are funded with a mix of local, state, and federal money. The material on the project raises the possibility of a private-public arrangement for a 31 mile toll road segment, but I would expect a highway project of this size to have a considerable federal funding component regardless. The EIS for the HDC is going to be subject to federal review and a ROD.


----------



## CHamilton (Sep 24, 2013)

Harry Reid Vows to Save Vegas HSR





> Back in July it emerged that XpressWest’s federal loan application was being put on hold owing largely to concerns that the project would not meet federal Buy America rules. Nevada Senator Harry Reid vowed to work to save the project, and according to a radio interview he gave in Nevada last week, he is still working at it:
> 
> _In an interview last week on “Nevada Newsmakers,” a political television program produced in Reno, Reid said he has spoken recently with White House officials about getting the project back on track._
> 
> ...


----------

