SVM MIS/DEIS - 3.5 Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

	SVM Project List SEPTA	Search
History Timeline Alternatives MIS/DEIS Bibliography

Major Investment Study / Draft Environmental Impact Statement
3. Conceptual Engineering, Operations Analysis, and Costs

3.5 OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS

The O&M cost of the project plays an integral role in the selection of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) and is equally important in the evaluation of the project by the Federal Transit Administration as part of a New Starts Funding Request. O&M cost estimations were performed for the six short-listed build alternatives, as well as a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative. All costs presented are therefore incremental to the No-Build Alternative.

3.5.1 O&M COST METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS

A detailed description of the O&M estimation process, the cost components identified and the assumptions made can be found in Technical Report 2.8 - Operating and Maintenance Cost Estimation Methodology.

The SVM O&M cost estimation methodology is primarily based on SEPTA's experienced operating and maintenance costs for fixed-route bus, light rail and regional rail systems. The following basic assumptions were used in the development of O&M costs for each of alternative.

All costs are in 1999 dollars.
An inflation rate of 3.5% was applied uniformly to escalate any prior year costs to 1999 dollars.
Bus and light rail O&M unit costs and service levels were developed from service level and O&M cost data obtained from the 1997 Dallas report (Non-strike year) and are consistent with those used in the SEPTA Cross County MIS/DEIS.
Commuter rail O&M unit costs and service levels were developed from SEPTA's 1997 Regional Rail Operating Budget and are consistent with those used in the SEPTA Cross County MIS/DEIS. This allows for a comparison between recently proposed new start projects in the region.

It should be noted that the cost allocation model is developed on the basis of overall system, operating and financial statistics, and for this reason is not intended to respond to all unique situations at a detailed level. In addition, this costing technique is not intended for use as a budgeting tool, where resources and expenditures by cost centers are analyzed and projected at a detailed level. However, this cost allocation technique is well suited for the MIS/DEIS to investigate the operating cost consequences of various transit options. The model is capable of providing reliable operating cost estimates for individual alternatives in a consistent framework and is recommended for this use by the Federal Transit Administration.

3.5.2 OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST RESULTS

Alternatives 1D, 1E and 2D propose commuter rail transit service as the primary mode of transportation in the form of diesel locomotive hauled coaches and cabs and/or EMU trains. Table 3.5-1 presents the estimated O&M costs by alternative and service lines for the commuter rail alternatives.

Alternatives 5E and 5ET propose light rail transit service as the primary mode of transportation in the form of dual voltage (low voltage DC, high voltage AC) articulated vehicles and Alternative 6 proposes service using an FRA-compliant vehicle. Table 3.5-2 presents the estimated O&M costs by alternative and service line for Alternatives 5E, 5ET, 6, as well as the TSM.

A detailed description and tabulation of costs by service level for each alternative can be found in Technical Report 2.9 - Operating and Maintenance Cost Estimation Results.