BCFS - Performance Term 5 Plans - April 2020 to March 2025

[Low Light Mike]

The process has started for the next 5-year reporting term for BC Ferries, with regards to items approved by the Ferry Commissioner. This process shows us what BC Ferries has in the plans for this term, and also has them making their case for what they think the plans and operations will cost.

Performance Term 5 covers the period of April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2025.

----------

Here's a link to the BCFS Capital Plan for this period, which also includes years beyond 2025:
- PDF page #28
CAPITAL PLAN HERE

- 6 major vessels retired, replaced by 7 new ships
- 11 minor vessels retired, replaced by 14 new ships

To improve fleet resilience while at the same time dealing with capacity challenges, BC Ferries is planning to increase the number of vessels in the fleet. With the upcoming Bowen Class replacement, there is a clear need for increased capacity over the existing 60 AEQ ferries. Although deploying a single 100 AEQ vessel could meet the need for increased capacity, BC Ferries believes that deploying two 47 AEQ vessels will provide a better customer experience with more frequent sailings on the affected routes.

[Low Light Mike]

More items from HERE

In addition to the previously-approved project to acquire two new 47 AEQ Island Class ferries, the following vessel replacement projects meet the major capital expenditure threshold set by Order 17-02:

• Three Bowen Class Vessel Replacements
The three Bowen Class vessels, Powell River Queen, Bowen Queen, and Mayne Queen, are nearing end of life, and the Company plans to retire them in fiscal 2021. BC Ferries has considered several options for the replacement of these ships. The Capital Plan assumes the acquisition of one Salish Class vessel and four Island Class vessels with capital expenditures occurring from fiscal 2019 through fiscal 2021.

• Six Major Vessel Replacements
Four major vessels, including the Queen of Coquitlam, Queen of Alberni, Queen of Cowichan and Queen of New Westminster are scheduled to retire in PT5. The Capital Plan reflects the assumption that these vessels will be replaced with five new major vessels in a series-build, British Columbia Ferry Services Inc. Page 30
Capital Plan Fiscal Years 2019 Through 2030 September 25, 2018
advancing towards further fleet standardization and resiliency, while providing an opportunity to take advantage of expected favourable multi-vessel purchase pricing. Two more major vessels, the Queen of Surrey and Queen of Oak Bay are scheduled to retire several years later in fiscal 2031, and are assumed to be replaced with two vessels of the same design.

• Six “K,” “T” and “Q” Class Vessel Replacements
The Quinsam, Kahloke, Klitsa, Tachek, Quadra Queen II, and Quinitsa are currently expected to be replaced between fiscal 2028 and fiscal 2031 with Island Class ferries as a series-build, with the Quinsam being replaced with two ferries instead of one. The reduction of classes in the replacement ships further allows BC Ferries to realize the benefits of fleet standardization as described above. The Capital Plan reflects capital expenditures for these vessel replacements during the period fiscal 2026 through fiscal 2030, with additional expenditures planned for fiscal 2031.

-------------

Swartz Bay Berth 3 Replacement
Berth 3 at Swartz Bay currently serves as an operational minor and intermediate ferry berth, and as a tie-up berth for major vessels. Under the major routes initiative, as described in BC Ferries’ Strategies for Enhancing Efficiency in Performance Term 5 and Beyond, the Company is contemplating the addition of a fifth vessel to serve during the peak season on the Tsawwassen to Swartz Bay route. The Capital Plan assumes Berth 3 will be replaced in fiscal 2025 with a standardized major berth to accommodate major vessels.

[Low Light Mike]

Here's the full 297 page BCFS Performance Term 5 submission document.

Have a read....
HERE

Outline:

This submission is composed of five reports:

Part 1: The Performance Term Four Report responds to the information requirements of section 40(1)(a) to (f) of the Act. It provides an overview of the ferry services the Company has provided and expects to provide in performance term four (April 1, 2016 – March 31, 2020) (“PT4”) in relation to each regulated ferry route.

Part 2: The report on Fuel Management Plan Outcomes in Performance Term Four describes the progress the Company has made in PT4 in its strategies for fuel procurement, minimizing fuel consumption and transitioning to alternate fuels. This report is submitted in accordance with British Columbia Ferry Commission Order 15-03 Final Decision on Price Caps for the Fourth Performance Term Pursuant to the Coastal Ferry Act, dated September 16, 2015.

Part 3: The Capital Plan (fiscal 2019 through 2030) responds to the specific information requirements of section 64.1(1) of the Act and provides information on the capital expenditures the Company anticipates incurring over the next 12 years.

Part 4: The Company’s strategies for realizing further efficiencies in the upcoming performance term are described in the Strategies for Enhancing Efficiency in Performance Term Five and Beyond. This plan addresses the information requirements of section 40(1.1) of the Act.

Part 5: BC Ferries’ Traffic Demand Forecast (fiscal 2019 through 2024) is provided as supplemental information to help inform the price cap determination.

Part 4 is likely the interesting stuff, and it starts on PDF page #225.

[Kahloke]

It seems like both BC Ferries and Washington State Ferries are employing similar strategies when it comes to replacing vessels;  ie. going with multiple smaller vessels of the same design to replace a single vessel, and increasing sailing frequency.  Replacing PRQ with 2 smaller Island Class vessels, and doing the same with Quinsam, would certainly aid in standardizing the fleet, and the bump in frequency will allow the current holding lots to function for a longer period of time without needing to increase their footprints.  Washington State is thinking along the same lines when it comes to replacing Walla Walla and Spokane.  Rather than a like-for-like replacement, the thinking is to build additional Olympic Class vessels and employ three of them on the Edmonds-Kingston Route, thus increasing frequency, and also decreasing the need for major infrastructure upgrades, especially on the Edmonds side.

[Nick]

Oct 3, 2018 7:26:45 GMT -8 Kahloke said:

It seems like both BC Ferries and Washington State Ferries are employing similar strategies when it comes to replacing vessels;  ie. going with multiple smaller vessels of the same design to replace a single vessel, and increasing sailing frequency.  Replacing PRQ with 2 smaller Island Class vessels, and doing the same with Quinsam, would certainly aid in standardizing the fleet, and the bump in frequency will allow the current holding lots to function for a longer period of time without needing to increase their footprints.  Washington State is thinking along the same lines when it comes to replacing Walla Walla and Spokane.  Rather than a like-for-like replacement, the thinking is to build additional Olympic Class vessels and employ three of them on the Edmonds-Kingston Route, thus increasing frequency, and also decreasing the need for major infrastructure upgrades, especially on the Edmonds side.

Foreshore infrastructure has gotten incredibly expensive in the last couple of decades. Environmental impact assessments, community/public involvement studies and hearings... probably cheaper in the long run to pay the higher operating cost on more vessels. And you get the added flexibility for scheduling and maintenance/breakdowns.

[Neil]

There's all sorts of interesting tidbits in the capital plan, but for now, I'll just refer to one point that seemed a real head scratcher for me. Maybe someone has some insight.

It was noted that the Langdale terminal is going to be upgraded to provided 'ticketing capabilities'.

Since the 1960s, the fare structure of paying at Horseshoe Bay northbound, or Saltery Bay southbound, has taken into account either return fares to Langdale, or fares through to Saltery Bay. Why is ticketing needed at Langdale? Is there now some notion that people are going one way  (without their car) with BC Ferries, and with another carrier the other way?

I don't know how reservations work on route three. Can you reserve, one way, from Langdale, announcing your reservation at the booth? If so, I don't know why they would alter things with regard to fares.

[Low Light Mike]

Oct 3, 2018 20:58:58 GMT -8 Neil said:

Since the 1960s, the fare structure of paying at Horseshoe Bay northbound, or Saltery Bay southbound, has taken into account either return fares to Langdale, or fares through to Saltery Bay. Why is ticketing needed at Langdale? Is there now some notion that people are going one way  (without their car) with BC Ferries, and with another carrier the other way?

I think it's likely that they are moving to a more formal "free ticket" paper trail process for foot passengers, allowing them a more accurate or easier count of passenger numbers for an upcoming sailing, rather than just counting as people step across the gangway.

[yak]

Oct 3, 2018 21:16:17 GMT -8 Low Light Mike said:

Oct 3, 2018 20:58:58 GMT -8 Neil said:

Since the 1960s, the fare structure of paying at Horseshoe Bay northbound, or Saltery Bay southbound, has taken into account either return fares to Langdale, or fares through to Saltery Bay. Why is ticketing needed at Langdale? Is there now some notion that people are going one way  (without their car) with BC Ferries, and with another carrier the other way?

I think it's likely that they are moving to a more formal "free ticket" paper trail process for foot passengers, allowing them a more accurate or easier count of passenger numbers for an upcoming sailing, rather than just counting as people step across the gangway.

I don't know if that is the reason but it would make sense. Passenger counts are hugely important, especially in an emergency. An accurate headcount influences decisions around things like sending a fire team into a potentially dangerous situation.

It has been more than a few times that seniors are found milling about the deck after arrival expecting a return trip without notifying anyone because it is "free".

[Nickfro]

To answer Neil's question, yes you can reserve one way from Langdale. All vehicles go through one of two ticket booths. If you're reserved, you declare such at the booth. If not reserved, all they do is direct you down a lane. No official passenger count is done from what I can see, but I bet the booth agent guesses from only a visual.

Langdale is pretty much an open terminal where anyone can enter the terminal on foot. I wouldn't be surprised that this plan may create a more 'secure' terminal where all passengers will need to be processed in order to enter the terminal, regardless of whether fares are implemented in the future.

Gambier and Keats passengers must also get processed and buy their tickets at terminal booths, if this is the direction Langdale is moving towards.

The overhead foot passenger walkway is required now, as they struggle to keep schedule on busy days with the current foot passenger setup using the lower car deck.