1. Capitol Corridor: A Performance-Based Management Model FRA Best Practices - State IPR Corridor Management AASHTO – SCORT Annual Meeting, Washington DC [2/22/12] David B. Kutrosky, Managing Director Capitol Corridor (Sacramento-Oakland/San Francisco-San Jose)

2. Capitol Corridor Service Area 170-mile route (~290 track miles) –168 miles-UPRR –2 miles-Caltrain (SF Peninsula) 3 distinct service-area Megaregion –Sacramento / Sierra Foothills –Oakland / S.F. Bay Area –San Jose Extensive connections to local transit and communities Operated by Amtrak under management of Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) February 22, 2012 2

3. CCJPA OBJECTIVES Know your product/service Identify goals for service’s success Efficient and effective management team Incentivize your partners -- service users and providers and financiers Maintain control of service performance Guide expansion via collaborative efforts February 22, 2012 3

4. CCJPA Structure Managing Director Planning & Projects EngineeringMechanical Marketing & Communications Call Center & Customer Comments (BART) TransportationAdministration February 22, 2012 4

5. Success of Past 13 Years (1999-2012) Elevated core service: 8 daily trains to 32 – Increased frequency under flat State operating budget – 3 rd busiest Amtrak route in nation – Improved relationship with UPRR resulted in the #1 on-time performance in Amtrak system – One of the highest customer satisfaction ratings The performance data speaks for itself… February 22, 2012 5

6. (1999-2012) Performance Improvements MeasureFY 1998/99FY 2010/11% changeFY 2011/12 YTD Ridership463,0001.71 million269% improvement +7% Revenue$6.25M$27.2M335% improvement +10% System Operating Ratio 30%48%60% improvement 50% Service Level8 daily trains 32 weekday trains (22 weekend trains) 300% improvement Same On-Time Performance 86%95%Standard = 90% 94% February 22, 2012 6

7. Capitol Corridor enters into an annual operating contract –Service/Schedule –Budget and payment provisions –Performance Standards; incentives + penalties Surveys (twice a year) to gauge customer satisfaction Distinct State source of funds (diesel sales tax) –Requires early budget planning process (at least 6 months) –Lock in budget; share risk; focus on improving customer service Review performance: bi-weekly calls; quarterly meetings Make sure front line employees know what’s going on! Amtrak Operating Agreement May 15, 2011 7 February 22, 2012 7

8. Capitol Corridor amended out of national Amtrak-UP OTP agreement into a stand-alone 3-party contract –Ensure payment to RR for Capitol Corridor OTP –Eliminated penalties, “look-backs” of national OTP agreement –Each month “hit restart button” Same definition for “on-time” but bar raised to min 92% Payments increased: –by 50% if continued 92%-96%; –by 100% if continued 96+% Benefit of single RR owner who dispatches trains Results: Best OTP in Amtrak; UP earning max incentive Tri-Party On-Time Performance Agreement February 22, 2012 8

9. Part of Construction/Maintenance Agreement –Continuously revised as funds are allocated –Funding above Amtrak incremental MoW payments Private-Public Partnership/shared funding 1.Night-time surfacing gang assigned to route 2.Various track upgrades: switches, signal lights, et al 3.Safety Fences: deter trespassing Improved ride quality; no slow orders Results: Retained ridership during down economy; highest customer satisfaction Supplemental Capitalized Maintenance February 22, 2012 9

10. Ridership and Gas Prices February 22, 2012 10

11. February 22, 2012 11

12. February 22, 2012 12

13. February 22, 2012 13

14. February 22, 2012 14

15. February 22, 2012 15

16. Buy-in from service providers/operators Support from public/users; gain advocates Secure dedicated funding Get funds obligated quickly; get project “in the ground”; successful phased implementation Tout benefits to policymakers, communities; need for continual investment to meet growth demand viable alternative jobs, economic growth offset rising gas prices reduce GHG emissions THANKS!! February 22, 2012 16 CLOSING