July 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 Executive Summary

 Chapter 1. Background

 Chapter 2. Transit Agencies Affected

 Chapter 3. Cost Estimates

 List of Tables

 Table 1: Transit Agencies That Directly Operate Buses in Fixed Route Sytems

 Table 2: Transit Agencies That Contract with Private Entities to Operate All the Buses in Their Fixed Route 

Systems

 Table 3: Transit Agencies That Contract with Private Entities to Operate Some of the Buses in Their Fixed 

Route Systems

 Table 4: Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated Announcements

 Table 5: Transit Agency Sample Data

 Table 6: Cost Factors

 Table 7: Transit Agency Sample Costs

 Table 8: Total Costs for Seven Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated Announcements 

 Appendices

 End Notes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report estimates the costs of a proposed change to the Access Board’s transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines 

regarding stop and route announcements. The guidelines currently require buses that are more than 22 feet in length and 

operate in fixed route systems to provide a public address system for announcing stops. The Department of Transportation 

adopted the guidelines as enforceable accessibility standards and requires stops and routes to be announced on vehicles 

that operate in fixed route systems. Transit agencies can use vehicle operators or automated announcements to comply 

with the current regulatory requirements. Failure of vehicle operators to announce stops and routes has been a frequent 

source of complaints to the Department of Transportation and lawsuits against transit agencies.

The Access Board proposes to change the guidelines to require transit agencies that are public entities (i.e., State or local 

government units) and operate 100 or more buses in annual maximum service in fixed route systems, as reported in the 

National Transit Database, to provide automated stop and route announcements on buses that are more than 22 feet in 

length and operate in fixed route systems. The Department of Transportation will establish the effective date for this 

requirement when it adopts the revised guidelines as the updated accessibility standards for transportation vehicles. The

requirement will apply when buses are purchased, leased, or remanufactured. Buses currently in service do not have to be 

retrofitted to meet the requirement. 

According to the National Transit Database, 87 transit agencies that are public entities operate 100 or more buses in annual 

maximum service in fixed route systems and will be affected by the proposed change to the guidelines. More than 90 

percent of these transit agencies currently provide automated stop and route announcements on buses. The report

assumes that transit agencies that currently provide automated announcements on buses will continue to do so in the future 

and will not incur any additional costs as a result of the proposed change to the guidelines. Transit agencies are requested 

to comment on this assumption. Based on the comments received, this report may be revised at the final rule stage.

Only 7 transit agencies that are public entities and operate 100 or more buses in annual maximum service in fixed route 

systems do not currently provide automated stop and route announcements on buses. The total costs of the proposed 

change to the guidelines for these 7 transit agencies are presented below.

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements 

Costs Present Value (3%)* Present Value (7%)*

Low Cost Scenario 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 1 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
The cost estimates include one-time costs to equip new buses and to set-up backend systems for implementing automated 

announcements, and on-going maintenance and operation costs for the bus equipment and backend systems. The low cost 

and high cost scenarios account for variables that can affect costs.

Forty (40) of the transit agencies that are public entities and operate 100 or more buses in annual maximum service in fixed 

route systems contract with private entities to operate some or all of the buses. The Department of Transportation 

regulations require a private entity that acquires vehicles to operate in a fixed route system under contract with a public 

entity to comply with the accessibility standards applicable to the public entity. The report identifies the private entities that 

contract with the 40 transit agencies to operate buses in their fixed route systems. These private entities would be affected 

by the proposed change to the guidelines if they acquire buses to operate in fixed route systems under contract with the 

transit agencies. These private entities would not be affected by the proposed change to the guidelines if the transit 

agencies provide the buses to the private entities to operate, of if the private entities deploy buses from their existing fleets 

to operate in the fixed route systems under contract with the transit agencies. Information is not available on whether any 

of the private entities that contract with the transit agencies acquire buses to operate in fixed route systems under contract

with the transit agencies. Private entities that acquire buses to operate in fixed route systems under contract with the 

transit agencies are requested to provide information on the number of buses acquired on an annual basis for operation 

under contract with the transit agencies, and whether the buses provide automated stop and route announcements. Based 

on the information provided, this report may be revised at the final rule stage.

1. BACKGROUND

 1.1 Introduction

 1.2 Current Regulatory Requirements

 1.3 Compliance with Current Regulatory Requirements

 1.4 Proposed Change to Guidelines

1.1 Introduction 

The Access Board prepared this report to estimate the costs of a proposed change to the transportation vehicle accessibility 

guidelines regarding stop and route announcements. The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center produced the data 

presented in the tables and appendices under interagency agreement with the Access Board. 

1.2 Current Regulatory Requirements 

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires the Access Board to issue guidelines for transportation vehicles that are readily 

accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. The guidelines establish minimum requirements for enforceable 

accessibility standards issued by the Department of Transportation that apply to the acquisition of new, used, and 

remanufactured transportation vehicles, and the remanufacture of existing transportation vehicles covered by the Americans 

with Disabilities Act.

The Access Board issued transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines in 1991. The guidelines require buses that are more 

than 22 feet in length and operate in fixed route systems to provide a public address system for announcing stops. The 

Department of Transportation issued regulations in 1991 that adopted the guidelines as enforceable accessibility

standards. The Department of Transportation regulations require stops and routes to be announced on vehicles that 

operate in fixed route systems.

1.3 Compliance with Current Regulatory Requirements 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$9,548,280 $8,027,897 $6,534,112

Annualized Costs $795,690 $668,991 $544,509

High Cost Scenario 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$19,678,022 $16,809,905 $13,970,121

Annualized Costs $1,639,835 $1,400,825 $1,164,767

* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.

1

2

3

4

5

6

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 2 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Transit agencies can use vehicle operators or automated announcements to comply with the current regulatory 

requirements. Transit agencies that use vehicle operators to announce stops and routes have to systematically monitor

vehicle operators and enforce disciplinary procedures to ensure compliance. Failure of vehicle operators to announce stops 

and routes has been a frequent source of complaints to the Department of Transportation and lawsuits against transit

agencies. Compliance reviews conducted by the Department of Transportation show that vehicle operator compliance with 

the current regulatory requirements is rarely above 50 percent. Individuals with disabilities continue to identify failure of 

vehicle operators to announce stops and routes as a major problem.

1.4 Proposed Change to Guidelines 

Many transit agencies have deployed intelligent transportation system technologies during the past decade that can be used 

to provide automated stop and route announcements. The number of buses that provide automated announcements has 

increased from 10 percent in 2001 to 45 percent in 2008. Automated announcements provide standardized messages, 

and lessen the need to rely on vehicle operators for compliance.

The Access Board made available for public review draft revisions to the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines. 

The draft revisions considered requiring buses that are more than 22 feet in length and operate in fixed route systems to

provide automated stop and route announcements. The American Public Transportation Association commented that the 

cost of providing automated announcements would pose a hardship for small transit agencies, and recommended that 

transit agencies operating fewer than 100 buses in peak service periods be exempted from the requirement. Based on the 

comments, the Access Board proposes to change the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines to require transit 

agencies that are public entities (i.e., State or local government units) and operate 100 or more buses in annual maximum 

service in fixed route systems, as reported in the National Transit Database, to provide automated stop and route 

announcements on buses that are more than 22 feet in length and operate in fixed route systems. The Department of

Transportation will establish the effective date for this requirement when it amends its regulations to adopt the revised 

guidelines as the updated accessibility standards for transportation vehicles. The requirement will apply when buses are 

purchased, leased, or remanufactured. Buses currently in service do not have to be retrofitted to meet the requirement.

2. TRANSIT AGENCIES AFFECTED

 2.1 Eighty-Seven Transit Agencies Are Affected

 2.2 Seventy-Nine Transit Agencies Directly Operate Buses

 2.3 Forty Transit Agencies Contract with Private Entities to Operate Buses

 2.4 Eighty Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements

 2.5 Seven Transit Agencies Do Not Provide Automated Announcements

2.1 Eighty-Seven Transit Agencies Are Affected 

The proposed change to the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines requires transit agencies that are public entities 

(i.e., State or local government units) and operate 100 or more buses in annual maximum service in fixed route systems, as 

reported in the National Transit Database, to provide automated stop and route announcements on buses that are more 

than 22 feet in length and operate in fixed route systems. 

Transit agencies are required to report the number of vehicles operated in annual maximum service (VOMS) to the National 

Transit Database. VOMS is the number of vehicles operated during the peak season of the year on the week and day that 

maximum service is provided. Transit agencies report both the number of VOMS directly operated by the transit agency 

and the number of VOMS operated by contractors.

According to the National Transit Database, 87 transit agencies that are public entities operate 100 or more bus VOMS in 

fixed route systems and will be affected by the proposed change to the guidelines. It is assumed that the number of transit 

agencies that operate 100 or more bus VOMS in fixed route systems will remain stable in the near future.

2.2 Seventy-Nine Transit Agencies Directly Operate Buses 

Seventy-nine (79) of the affected transit agencies directly operate buses in fixed route systems. The transit agencies and 

number of bus VOMS directly operated by the transit agency are listed in Table 1. 

Table 1: Transit Agencies That Directly Operate Buses in Fixed Route Systems 

Bus 

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 3 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
State Transit Agency 

VOMS 

Directly 

Operated 

i

CA Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) 76 ii

CA Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (County Connection) 106 

MI Interurban Transit Partnership (The Rapid) 110 

TX El Paso Mass Transit Department (Sun Metro) 110 

TN Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) 116 

FL Palm Beach County (Palm Tran) 117 

NM Albuquerque Transit Department (ABQ Ride) 119 

WA Spokane Transit Authority (STA) 119 

IN Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) 123 

TX † Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) 123 

NE † Omaha Transit Authority (MAT) 128 

VA Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC Transit System) 136 

TN Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA) 138 

CA North County Transit District (NCTD) 139 

CA Omnitrans (OMNI) 145 

CA Santa Monica (Big Blue Bus) 147 

OH Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority (TARTA) 147 

WA Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Community Transit) 148 

WA Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) 156 

WA Pierce County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Pierce Transit) 158 

CA Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (GGBHTD) 159 

DE Delaware Transit Corporation (DART First State) 160 

AZ Tucson (Sun Tran) 163 

FL Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) 166 

WI Madison Transit and Parking Commission (Metro Transit) 167 

OH Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority (GDRTA) 170 

FL Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) 171 

CA Long Beach Transit (LBT) 179 

FL Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA) 179 

PR Metropolitan Bus Authority (MBA) 181 

NY † Central New York Regional Transportation Authority (CNYRTA) iii 183 

NY Capital District Transportation Authority (CDTA) 189 

NY Rochester-Genesee Regional Transit Authority (R-GRTA) 189 

KY † Transit Authority of River City (TARC) 190 

CA Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT) 195 

OH Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) 195 

CA † San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) 200 

RI Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) 208 

TX Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CMTA) 212 

CA San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) 213 

MO Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA) 216 

MI Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation (SMART) 230 

FL Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) 240 

FL Broward County Office of Transportation (BCT) 241 

MD Montgomery County (Ride-On) 244 

CA Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) 250 

NC Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) 261 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 4 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
2.3 Forty Transit Agencies Contract with Private Entities to Operate Buses 

Forty (40) of the affected transit agencies contract with private entities to operate some or all of the buses in the fixed route 

systems. The Department of Transportation regulations require a private entity that acquires vehicles to operate in a fixed 

route system under contract with a public entity to comply with the accessibility standards applicable to the public entity. 

The Department of Transportation regulations do not subject private entities to the requirements applicable to public entities 

because they receive an operating subsidy from, are regulated by, or are granted a franchise or permit to operate by a 

public entity. Thus, private entities would be affected by the proposed change to the guidelines if they acquire buses to 

operate in fixed route systems under contract with the transit agencies. Private entities would not be affected by the 

proposed change to the guidelines if the transit agencies provide the buses to the private entities to operate, of if the 

private entities deploy buses from their existing fleets to operate in the fixed route systems under contract with the transit

VA Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads (Hampton Roads Transit) 279 

NY Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA Metro) 286 

CT † Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTTransit) iv 317 

OH Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority (SORTA Metro) 325 

MO Bi-State Development Agency (Metro) 327 

CA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) 347 

TX VIA Metropolitan Transit (VIA) 374 

UT Utah Transit Authority (UTA) 384 

MI Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT) 408 

WI Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) 421 

CA Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) 482 

IL Pace – Suburban Bus Division (PACE) 493 

MD Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) 510 

GA Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) 522 

OH Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) 522 

CA Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) 532 

OR Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) 532 

CO Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD) 533 

TX Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) 559 

CA San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) 601 

MN Metropolitan Council (Metro Transit) 740 

MA Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) 790 

PA Port Authority of Allegheny County (Port Authority) 813 

TX Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (Metro) 837 

FL Miami-Dade Transit (Metrobus) 839 

WA King County Department of Transportation (King County Metro) 1,062 

PA Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) 1,171 

DC Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) 1,261 

NJ New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT) 1,785 

IL Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) 1,846 

CA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) 2,248 

NY Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) v 5,312 

† Indicates transit agencies that currently do not provide automated stop and route announcements.

Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007. 

Notes:

i. Includes motor buses and trolley buses. 

ii. RTA also reports 55 bus VOMS operated by contractors. See Table 3. 

iii. CNYTRA operates CNY Centro, Centro of Cayuga, Centro of Oneida, and Centro of Oswego. 

iv. CTTransit operates CTTransit Hartford, CTTransit New Haven, and CTTransit Stamford. 

v. MTA operates MTA Bus Company, MTA Long Island Bus, and MTA New York City Transit. 

18

19

20

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 5 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
agencies.

Eight (8) of the affected transit agencies contract with private entities to operate all the buses in their fixed route systems. 

The transit agencies, contractors, and number of bus VOMS are listed in Table 2. 

The other 32 transit agencies contract with private entities to operate some of the buses in their fixed route systems. The 

transit agencies, contractors, and number of bus VOMS are listed in Table 3.

Table 2: Transit Agencies That Contract with Private Entities to Operate All the Buses in Their Fixed 

Route Systems 

State Transit Agency Contractor 

Bus VOMS 

Purchased 

Transportation 

NY Suffolk County Transit (SCT) Suffolk Bus Corporation

Inter County Motor Coach

C.B.S. Lines

Educational Bus Transportation

Hampton Jitney 

138 

VA † Fairfax County (Fairfax Connector) MV Transportation 145 

MA Pioneer Valley Transit Authority (PVTA) First Transit 

UMassTransit Services

181 

NV Regional Transportation Commission of 

Southern Nevada (RTC) 

Veolia Transportation 253 

CA Foothill Transit First Transit 

MV Transportation 

256 

NY Westchester County (Bee Line System) County Coach 

Liberty Transit Lines

PTLA Enterprise 

281 

HI City and County of Honolulu (TheBus) Oahu Transit Services 424 

AZ Valley Metro ‡ First Transit 

MV Transportation 

Veolia Transportation 

Valu Trans 

Ajo Transportation 

628 

† Indicates transit agencies that currently do not provide automated stop and route announcements.

Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007 for bus VOMS purchased transportation. Transit 

agency websites for contractors. Some transit agency websites do not distinguish between contractors who 

operate vehicles in fixed route systems, and vehicles in demand responsive or paratransit service. Some 

contractors may operate vehicles in demand responsive or paratransit service.

Notes:

‡ Valley Metro is funded by the Regional Public Transportation Authority and other public entities served by 

the transit system. Some of the public entities also directly operate or contract with private entities to 

operate local circulator and shuttle services. 

Table 3: Transit Agencies That Contract with Private Entities to Operate Some of the Buses in Their 

Fixed Route Systems 

State Transit Agency Contractor 

Bus VOMS 

Purchased 

Transportation 

CO Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD) First Transit 

Veolia Transportation 

354 

CA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation 

Authority (LACMTA) 

See Note a. 

First Transit 

MV Transportation 

Southland Transit 

340 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 6 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Transportation 

Concepts 

NJ New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit) First Transit 

Veolia Transportation 

Academy Bus 

Community Coach 

PABCO Transit 

Olympia Trails 

Salem County Transit

Suburban Transit 

Trans-Bridge Lines 

327 

MN Metropolitan Council See Note b. 

First Transit 

Lorenz Bus Service 

Robinson Bus Service 

Team Transit 

306 

CA San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) Veolia Transportation 

Southland Transit 

216 

TX Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (Metro) First Transit 183 

MD Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) Veolia Transportation 

Dillon’s Bus Service 

Eyre Bus Service

Keller Transportation 

171 

IL Pace – Suburban Bus Division (PACE) See Note c. 

First Transit 

MV Transportation 

Veolia Transportation 

Colonial Coach Lines /

Academy Coach Lines 

120 

TX Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CMTA) First Transit 

Veolia Transportation 

Star Tran 

Capital Rural 

Transportation 

Services 

119 

MD Montgomery County (Ride-On) First Transit 93 

FL Broward County Office of Transportation (BCT) See Note d. 87 

CA Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) MV Transportation 74 

WA Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area 

Corporation (Community Transit) 

First Transit 72 

CA San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) MV Transportation 66 

MA Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) See Note e. 57 

CA Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) Transportation 

Concepts 

55 

WA Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound 

Transit) 

Veolia Transportation 29 

DC Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

(WMATA) 

See Note f. 24 

WA King County Department of Transportation (King 

County Metro) 

MV Transportation 24 

CT Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTTransit) New Britain 

Transportation 

Company 

Northeast 

Transportation

23 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 7 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
2.4 Eighty Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements

Eighty (80) of the affected transit agencies currently provide automated stop and route announcements. These transit 

agencies are indicated by shaded rows in Tables 1 and 2. This information was obtained from transit agency websites, 

vendor websites, and other sources listed in Appendix A. These transit agencies typically provide automated 

announcements as part of a broader deployment of intelligent transportation system technologies. It is assumed that these 

transit agencies will continue to provide automated announcements when the transit agencies purchase, lease, or 

remanufacture buses in the future, regardless of whether the transit agencies directly operate the buses or contract with 

private entities to operate the buses. Based on this assumption, these transit agencies will not incur any additional costs as 

a result of the proposed change to the accessibility guidelines. Transit agencies are requested to comment on this 

assumption. Based on the comments received, this report may be revised at the final rule stage.

Information is not available on whether any of the private entities that contract with the transit agencies listed in Tables 2 

and 3 purchases, leases, or remanufacturesacquire buses to operate in fixed route systems under contract with the transit 

agencies. Private entities that purchase, lease, or remanufactureacquire buses to operate in fixed route systems under 

contract with the transit agencies listed in Tables 2 and 3 are requested to provide information on the number of buses 

purchased, leased, or remanufacturedacquired on an annual basis for operation under contract with the transit agencies, 

and whether the buses provide automated stop and route announcements. Based on the information provided, this report 

may be revised at the final rule stage.

Company 

DATTCO 

CA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) El Paseo Limousine 21 

NY Capital District Transportation Authority (CDTA) Upstate Transit of 

Saratoga 

20 

DE Delaware Transit Corporation (DART First State) Krapf Bus Companies 15 

FL Palm Beach County (Palm Tran) Good Wheels 8 

MI Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional 

Transportation (SMART) 

Not available 8 

IN Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation 

(IndyGo) 

Not available 7 

KY Transit Authority of River City (TARC) Not available 7 

NC Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) Not available 7 

CA Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation 

District (GGBHTD) 

Not available 6 

FL Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) Not available 4 

TX Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) Not available 3

VA Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC Transit 

System) 

Not available 2 

Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007 for bus VOMS purchased transportation. Transit 

agency websites for contractors. Some transit agency websites do not distinguish between contractors who 

operate vehicles in fixed route systems, and vehicles in demand responsive or paratransit service. Some 

contractors may operate vehicles in demand responsive or paratransit service. Some transit agency websites 

also do not distinguish between contracts and subsidies. Some of the private entities may receive subsidies 

and may not be contractors.

Notes:

a. LACMTA provides funds to approximately 25 small public entities that operate buses independent of the 

LACMTA system. These small public entities operate a total of 186 of the bus VOMS. 

b. Metropolitan Council provides funds to 6 small public entities that operate buses independent of the Metro 

Transit system. Metropolitan Council also contracts with private entities to operate buses in fixed route 

systems. 

c. Three small public entities also operate PACE branded buses. 

d. BCT provides funds to small public entities that operate buses independent of the BCT system.

e. MBTA provides funds to small public entities that operate buses independent of the MBTA system. MBTA 

also provides subsidies to private entities that operate buses.

f. WMATA is the project manager for a circulator service that is funded by the District of Columbia and 

operated by First Transit. 

21

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 8 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
2.5 Seven Transit Agencies Do Not Provide Automated Announcements 

Seven (7) of the affected transit agencies listed in Table 4 do not currently provide automated announcements. 

3. COST ESTIMATES

 3.1 Transit Agency Sample Data

 3.2 Cost Factors

 3.3 Transit Agency Sample Costs

 3.4 Total Costs

3.1 Transit Agency Sample Data 

The cost estimates of the proposed change to the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines regarding stop and route 

announcements are based on sample data for the 7 transit agencies listed in Table 4 that do not currently provide 

automated announcements. Data for each of the transit agencies is presented in Appendix B, and the sample data used to 

estimate the costs is presented in Table 5.

3.2 Cost Factors 

The factors used to estimate the costs for providing automated stop and route announcements are presented in Table 6. 

The factors include one-time costs to equip new buses and to set-up backend systems for implementing automated

announcements, and on-going maintenance and operation costs for the bus equipment and backend systems. Mid-life 

software upgrade costs for the bus equipment and backend systems are listed as separate factors. Training costs for vehicle 

operators and mechanics are included under one-time costs. Low and high cost scenarios account for variable that can 

affect some of the costs. Some of the low cost scenarios apply to transit agencies that deploy automatic vehicle location 

technology. Four (4) of the transit agencies that do not currently provide automated announcements deploy automatic 

vehicle location technology.

Table 4: Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated Announcements 

State Transit Agency 

Bus VOMS 

Directly 

Operated 

Purchased 

Transportation Total

TX Fort Worth Transportation Authority (The T) 123 3 126 

NE Omaha Transit Authority (MAT) 128 0 128 

VA Fairfax County (Fairfax Connector) 0 149 249 

NY Central New York Regional Transportation Authority 

(CNYRTA) 

183 0 183 

KY Transit Authority of River City (TARC) 190 7 197 

CT Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTTransit) 317 23 340

CA San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) 200 216 416 

Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007 for bus VOMS. 

Table 5: Transit Agency Sample Data 

Buses Available for Annual Maximum Service 273 

Fixed Bus Routes 70 

Garages 5 

Vehicle Operators 520 

Mechanics 124 

Table 6: Costs Factors 

Item Cost Discussion 

One-Time Costs 

Bus Equipment 

Onboard Processor 

Next Stop Annunciator

Equipment varies from vendor to vendor. Some 

systems have integrated system controllers, and other 

22

23

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 9 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Cables & Brackets systems have separate next stop annunciators. 

Low Cost Scenario: $2,350 In the low cost scenario, the transit agency deploys 

AVL technology and equips its buses with onboard 

processors, which can be mobile data terminals. The 

additional cost for next stop annunciators with

automated voice announcement software is estimated 

at $2,350 per bus.

High Cost Scenario: 

$5,000 

In the high cost scenario, the cost for an onboard 

processor with automated voice announcement 

software is estimated at $5,000 per bus.

GPS Receiver $820 Four (4) of the transit agencies that do not currently 

provide automated announcements equip their buses 

with GPS receivers.◊ There is no cost for these transit 

agencies.

WLAN Adapter & Antenna Low Cost Scenario: $0 In the low cost scenario, the transit agency currently 

deploys AVL technology and equips its buses with 

systems to communicate data. There is no cost. 

High Cost Scenario: $585 In the high cost scenario, the cost for a WLAN adapter 

and antenna to communicate data is estimated at $585 

per bus.

Interior LED Display Sign 

for Stop Announcements

Low Cost Scenario: $0 In the low cost scenario, the transit agency equips its 

buses with interior display signs for other informational 

purposes (e.g., to announce “Stop Requested” or 

“Please Exit Using Rear Door”). There is no cost. 

High Cost Scenario: $650 In the high cost scenario, the cost for an interior LED 

display sign to announce stops is estimated at $650 

per bus.

External Speaker for Route 

Announcements 

$50 The existing guidelines require buses to be equipped 

with public address systems and internal speakers for 

stop announcements. 

Backend System 

Software & Hardware $50,000 The cost includes global information system (GIS) 

software, announcement database software, recording 

and editing software, and computers and related 

hardware. 

WLAN System Low Cost Scenario: $0 In the low cost scenario, the transit agency deploys 

AVL technology and has established backend systems 

to communicate data. There is no cost. 

High Cost Scenario: 

$43,700 per garage

In the high cost scenario, the cost for a WLAN system 

to communicate data is estimated at $43,700 per 

garage. The cost includes 7 WLAN access points per 

garage ($4,600 per access point); Cat6 or fiber wiring

($5,000); and WLAN firewall equipment ($6,500 per 

garage).

Stop Database 

Consolidation & Geocoding 

Labor Costs 

Low Cost Scenario: $0 In the low cost scenario, the transit agency has a 

current stop database and geocoded locations for the 

stops. There is no cost.

High Cost Scenario: 

$1,000 per route & $2,000 

for data base set-up 

In the high cost scenario, the cost to consolidate the 

stop database and geocode locations for the stops is 

estimated at $1,000 per route, plus $2,000 to set-up 

the data base.

Announcement Database 

Set-Up Labor Costs

Low Cost Scenario: 

$35,625 

In the low cost scenario, the transit agency has up-todate operator call sheets that can be readily entered 

into the announcement database. The announcement 

database set-up costs involve full-time work by an 

IT/GIS specialist and quarter-time oversight by an IT 

project manager during a 3 month period. 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 10 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
High Cost Scenario: 

$83,125 

In the high cost scenario, the transit agency reevaluates what stops to announce, and incurs 

additional labor costs in transferring data from the 

scheduling database (e.g., HASTUS) to the 

announcement database because the database 

schemas do not match exactly. The announcement

database set-up costs involve full-time work by an 

IT/GIS specialist and quarter-time oversight by an IT 

project manager during a 7 month period.

Recording & Editing Labor 

Costs 

$500 The stop and route announcements must be recorded 

and edited, and the recordings must be entered in the 

announcement database. 

System Testing Labor 

Costs 

Lost Cost Scenario: 

$2,100 

In the low cost scenario, the stops that are announced 

are few or highly separated, and minimal system 

testing is required to ensure that the geofences do not 

overlap or conflict. System testing involves 40 hours 

work by an IT/GIS specialist. 

High Cost Scenario: 

$6,300 

In the high cost scenario, a high density network of 

stops is announced, and every route is tested to ensure 

that the geofences do not overlap or conflict. System 

testing involves 120 hours work by an IT/GIS 

specialist.

Training 

Vehicle Operators $23 per vehicle operator All vehicle operators receive one hour training on using 

automated announcements. Refresher training can be 

incorporated in the transit agency’s training program at 

minimal cost. 

Mechanics $31 per mechanic Ten (10) percent of the mechanics receive one hour 

training on repairing automated announcement 

equipment. 

On-Going Operations & Maintenance Costs

Bus Equipment 

Spare Parts 5 percent of the total bus 

equipment costs 

The estimate excludes the interior LED display signs 

because transit agencies and vendors report that the 

signs rarely fail or need repair.

Repair Labor Costs $10 per bus annually Transit agencies reported the number of equipment 

failures per week for automated announcements and 

the total number of buses operated by the transit 

agency. The average weekly equipment failure rate 

per bus was 0.3 percent. The average repair time for 

each equipment failure was 2 hours. The bus 

equipment repair cost is estimated at $10 per bus 

annually [.003 average weekly equipment failure rate 

per bus x 52 weeks x 2 hours per repair x $31 

mechanics labor cost]. 

Backend System 

Periodic Scheduling and 

Routing Updates & 

Hardware and Software 

Maintenance Labor Costs

$35,000 annually Performing operations and maintenance tasks on the 

backend system involves work by an IT/GIS specialist 

1 month per quarter, or 4 months per year. 

Mid-Life Software Upgrade 

Bus Equipment $145 per bus 

Backend System $1,419 

Source: Estimates are based on discussions with transit agencies and vendors. Labor cost sources are 

listed in Appendix C. 

Notes:

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 11 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
3.3 Transit Agency Sample Costs 

The low cost and high cost scenarios for a transit agency to provide automated announcements based on the transit agency 

sample data in Table 5 and cost factors in Table 6 are presented in Appendices D and E, and summarized in Table 7. It is 

assumed that the transit agency will replace one-twelfth of its buses each year based on the 12 year minimum useful life 

policy for large, heavy-duty buses established by the Federal Transit Administration.

3.4 Total Costs 

The total costs of the proposed change to transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines regarding stop and route 

announcements for the seven transit agencies that do not currently provide automated announcements based on the transit 

agency sample costs in Table 7 are presented in Table 8.

APPENDICES

 Appendix A: Sources Confirming Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements

 Appendix B: Transit Agency Data

 Appendix C: Labor Cost Sources

 Appendix D: Low Cost Scenario – Transit Agency Sample Costs

 Appendix E: High Cost Scenario – Transit Agency Sample Costs

◊ The Fort Worth Transportation Authority, Transit Authority of River City, Central New York Regional 

Transportation Authority, and San Diego Metropolitan Transit System equip their buses with GPS receivers.

Table 7: Transit Agency Sample Costs 

Costs Present Value (3%)* Present Value (7%)*

Low Cost Scenario 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$1,263,303 $1,062,642 $865,532 

Annualized Costs $105,275 $88,554 $72,128 

High Cost Scenario 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$2,710,266 $2,317,076 $1,927,819 

Annualized Costs $225,856 $193,091 $160,652 

* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.

Table 8: Total Costs for Seven Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated 

Announcements 

Costs Present Value (3%)* Present Value (7%)*

Low Cost Scenario 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$9,548,280 $8,027,897 $6,534,112 

Annualized Costs $795,690 $668,991 $544,509 

High Cost Scenario 

Total Costs Over 12 

Year Bus 

Replacement Cycle

$19,678,022 $16,809,905 $13,970,121 

Annualized Costs $1,639,835 $1,400,825 $1,164,767 

* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.

24

25

26

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 12 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Appendix A: Sources Confirming Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements 

Transit 

Agency Source 

AlamedaContra Costa 

Transit 

District (AC 

Transit) 

http://www.actransit.org/planning_focus/details.wu?item_id=49

Albuquerque 

Transit 

Department 

(ABQ Ride) 

http://www.cabq.gov/transit/documents/full_report-dec-final-090209_2.doc

Bi-State 

Development 

Agency 

(Metro) 

Transit agency representative 

Broward 

County Office 

of 

Transportation 

(BCT) 

Transit agency representative 

Capital 

District 

Transportation 

Authority 

(CDTA) 

http://www.initusa.com/en_projects/p_albany.php

Capital 

Metropolitan 

Transportation 

Authority 

(CMTA) 

http://www.capmetro.org/riding/senior_ada.asp

Central Contra 

Costa Transit 

Authority 

(County 

Connection) 

http://www.cccta.org/pages/posts/2009_gillig_voith_hybrid.htm

Central Florida 

Regional 

Transportation 

Authority 

(LYNX) 

http://www.golynx.com/?id=1155584

Central Ohio 

Transit 

Authority 

(COTA) 

http://www.cota.com/Riders-with-Disabilities.aspx

Central Puget 

Sound 

Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(Sound 

Transit) 

http://www.soundtransit.org/documents/pdf/about/board/motions/2007/Motion%20M2007-

78sr.pdf

Charlotte Area 

Transit 

System 

(CATS) 

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/CATS/Riding+CATS/accessibility.htm

Chicago 

Transit 

http://recruitment.transitchicago.com/news/default.aspx?

Archive=y&pg=8&All=y&ArticleId=1420

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 13 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Authority 

(CTA) 

City and 

County of 

Honolulu 

(TheBus) 

http://www.thebus.org/AboutTheBus/newsletter/fall.pdf

Dallas Area 

Rapid Transit 

(DART) 

http://www.dart.org/riding/accessibility.asp

Delaware 

Transit 

Corporation 

(DART First 

State) 

http://dartfirststate.com/information/paratransit/app.pdf

Denver 

Regional 

Transportation 

District (RTD) 

http://www.drcog.org/documents/ProjectLists_RTD.PDF

Detroit 

Department of 

Transportation 

(DDOT) 

Transit agency representative 

El Paso Mass 

Transit 

Department 

(Sun Metro) 

http://www.macro.com/transportation_portfolio_summary.htm

Foothill 

Transit 

http://www.orbitaltms.com/OurCustomers/PublicTransit/CurrentProjects/tabid/70/Default.aspx

Golden Gate 

Bridge, 

Highway and 

Transportation 

District 

(GGBHTD) 

http://www.pr-inside.com/ge-transportation-to-serve-golden-gate-r1030711.htm

Greater 

Cleveland 

Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(GCRTA) 

Transit agency representative 

Greater 

Dayton 

Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(GDRTA) 

http://passengertransport.apta.com/aptapt/issues/2009-02-16/24.html

Greater 

Richmond 

Transit 

Company 

(GRTC Transit 

System) 

http://www.vatransit.com/docs/GRTC-APTA_Award.pdf

Hillsborough 

Area Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(HART) 

http://www.orbitaltms.com/OurCustomers/PublicTransit/CurrentProjects/tabid/70/Default.aspx

Indianapolis http://www.indygo.net/news.asp?ID=221

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 14 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Public 

Transportation 

Corporation 

(IndyGo) 

Interurban 

Transit 

Partnership 

(The Rapid) 

http://www.itpwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/fy-2009-proposed-budget-1.pdf (page 5 

of 6) 

Jacksonville 

Transportation 

Authority 

(JTA) 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Sept_9/ai_n6187899/

Kansas City 

Area 

Transportation 

Authority 

(KCATA) 

http://www.kcata.org/documents/uploads/troost-brt.pdf

King County 

Department of 

Transportation 

(King County 

Metro) 

http://your.kingcounty.gov/kcdot/aboutus/intransit/InTransit_08Jul-Aug.pdf

Long Beach 

Transit (LBT) 

http://www.lbtransit.com/Guide/Transmart.aspx

Los Angeles 

Department of 

Transportation 

(LADOT) 

Transit agency representative 

Los Angeles 

County 

Metropolitan 

Transportation 

Authority 

(LACMTA) 

http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/atms/default.htm

Madison 

Transit and 

Parking 

Commission 

(Metro 

Transit) 

http://www.cityofmadison.com/Metro/Schedules/RoutesSchedules/RoutesSchedules.html

Maryland 

Transit 

Administration 

(MTA) 

http://www.marylandtransportation.com/Planning/Plans%20Programs%

20Reports/Programs/CTP%2002-07/mta_construction_bus.pdf (page 2 of 9) 

Massachusetts 

Bay 

Transportation 

Authority 

(MBTA) 

http://www.mbta.com/riding_the_t/accessible_services/default.asp?id=17363

Memphis Area 

Transit 

Authority 

(MATA) 

http://memphis.bizjournals.com/memphis/stories/2009/03/09/story1.html

Metropolitan 

Atlanta Rapid 

Transit 

Authority 

(MARTA) 

http://www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/AdminViewSurvey07.asp?

SSN=TM&AgencyID=76&Year=2007

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 15 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Metropolitan 

Bus Authority 

(MBA) 

FTA regional official 

Metropolitan 

Council (Metro 

Transit) 

http://www.macro.com/transportation_portfolio_summary.htm

Metropolitan 

Transit 

Authority 

(MTA) – NY 

http://www.mta.info/mta/ada/transit.htm#buses

Metropolitan 

Transit 

Authority 

(MTA) – TN 

http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/aptapt/issues/2009-01-19/7.html

Metropolitan 

Transit 

Authority of 

Harris County 

(Metro) 

http://www.init-ka.de/share/reference_english/Houston_ITCS_Reference.pdf

Miami-Dade 

Transit 

(Metrobus) 

http://www.miamidade.gov/citt/advertorials/english/august3.pdf

Milwaukee 

County 

Transit 

System 

(MCTS) 

http://www.fta.dot.gov/news/news_events_10478.html

Montgomery 

County (RideOn) 

http://www.orbitaltms.com/tabid/112/Default.aspx

New Jersey 

Transit 

Corporation 

(NJ TRANSIT) 

http://www.nj.com/south/index.ssf/2008/02/nj_transit_to_roll_out_new_bus.html

Niagara 

Frontier 

Transportation 

Authority 

(NFTA Metro) 

http://www.nfta.com/news/displayArchivedArticle.phtml?id=1085408631

North County 

Transit 

District 

(NCTD) 

http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=437

Omnitrans 

(OMNI) 

http://www.omnitrans.org/about/agendas/06-09_agenda.pdf (page 72 of 180) 

Orange 

County 

Transportation 

Authority 

(OCTA) 

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_syn_73.pdf (page 19 of 114) 

Pace –

Suburban Bus 

Division 

(PACE) 

http://www.pacebus.com/sub/vision2020/intelligent_bus_system.asp

Palm Beach 

County (Palm 

Tran) 

http://www.pbcgov.com/newsroom/0906/09-15-06_palm_tran_print.htm

Pierce County http://www.piercetransit.org/news.htm

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 16 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
Public 

Transportation 

Benefit Area 

Corporation 

(Pierce

Transit) 

Pinellas 

Suncoast 

Transit 

Authority 

(PSTA) 

http://www.pinellascounty.org/mpo/mpo_minutes/mpomin-2009-4-08.pdf (page 3 of 12) 

Pioneer Valley 

Transit 

Authority 

(PVTA) 

http://olver.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=165&Itemid=35

Port Authority 

of Allegheny 

County (Port 

Authority) 

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/Pittsburgh_Final_Report_010206.doc

Regional 

Transportation 

Commission 

of Southern 

Nevada (RTC) 

http://www.prnewswire.com.au/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-17-

2002/0001650320&EDATE=

Rhode Island 

Public Transit 

Authority 

(RIPTA) 

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/AnnReports/RIPTA.pdf (page 22 of 25) 

Riverside 

Transit 

Agency (RTA) 

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/RTA_Report_June_29_2007.pdf (page 22 of 42) 

RochesterGenesee 

Regional 

Transit 

Authority (RGRTA) 

http://www.rgrta.org/Data/Documents/new%20buses%20(3).pdf

Sacramento 

Regional 

Transit 

District (RT) 

http://www.sacrt.com/disabledelderlyservices.stm

San Francisco 

Municipal 

Railway 

(MUNI) 

http://www.sfmta.com/cms/raccess/mag2003.htm

San Mateo 

County 

Transit 

District 

(SamTrans) 

http://www.samtrans.com/disabled.html

Santa Clara 

Valley 

Transportation 

Authority 

(VTA) 

http://transit.511.org/accessible/providers/providerinfo.aspx?cid=SC

Santa Monica 

(Big Blue Bus) 

http://www.bigbluebus.com/pdf/Riders_Guide.pdf (page 16 of 17) 

Snohomish http://www.initusa.com/share/reference_english/Everett_Reference.pdf

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 17 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
County Public 

Transportation 

Benefit Area 

Corporation

(Community 

Transit) 

Southeastern 

Pennsylvania 

Transportation 

Authority 

(SEPTA) 

http://www.septa.org/access/vehicle.html

Southwest 

Ohio Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(SORTA 

Metro) 

http://www.go-metro.com/accessibility.html

Spokane 

Transit 

Authority 

(STA) 

http://www.spokanetransit.com/aboutsta/documents/FEB13_08_STACACMinutes.pdf (page 21 of 

36) 

Suburban 

Mobility 

Authority for 

Regional 

Transportation 

(SMART) 

http://www.smartbus.org/Smart/News+and+Info/Press+Releases/ARRA+funds.htm

Suffolk 

County 

Transit (SCT) 

http://www.sct-bus.org/images/12.11.08_sct_svc_policy.pdf (page 4 of 9) 

Toledo Area 

Regional 

Transit 

Authority 

(TARTA) 

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=iYQUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=tAMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3929%

2C329429

Transportation 

District 

Commission 

of Hampton 

Roads 

(Hampton 

Roads

Transit ) 

http://www.gohrt.com/faresandinformation/accessibility.html

Tri-County 

Metropolitan 

Transportation 

District of 

Oregon 

(TriMet) 

http://trimet.org/bus/asa.htm

Tucson (Sun 

Tran) 

http://www.suntran.com/access_buses.php

Utah Transit 

Authority 

(UTA) 

Transit agency representative 

Valley Metro http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=524

VIA 

Metropolitan 

Transit (VIA) 

http://www.viainfo.net/AccessibleService/CustomerGuide.pdf (page 7 of 23) 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 18 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
 

 

Washington 

Metropolitan 

Area Transit 

Authority 

(WMATA) 

http://www.wmata.com/accessibility/metrobus.cfm

Westchester 

County (Bee 

Line System) 

http://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/release.asp?prid=524

Appendix B: Transit Agency Data 

The T MAT Fairfax 

Connector CNYRTA TARC CTTransit MTS 

Sample 

Data Used 

to 

Estimate 

Costs 

Buses Operated in Annual 

Maximum Service 

126 128 149 183 197 340 416 

Buses Available for Annual 

Maximum Service 1

152 151 195 232 215 420 547 273 

Fixed Bus Routes 45 34 59 125 55 156 82 70 

Garages 2 – – 3 – – – 6 5 

Vehicle Operators 524 157 – 666 251 657 602 520 

Mechanics 124 30 – 105 124 175 657 124 

Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007 for buses operating in annual maximum service, buses 

available for annual maximum service, vehicle operators, and mechanics. Transit agency websites for fixed bus routes 

and garages. 

Notes:

1 Buses available for annual maximum service include spares, out of service vehicles, and vehicles in or awaiting 

maintenance. It does not include buses waiting sale and emergency contingency vehicles. NTD Glossary at: 

www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/Glossary.htm.

2 Data on the number of garages are available for only 2 of the transit agencies. 

Appendix C: Labor Cost Sources 

Labor Costs (Salary and Benefits) 

Vehicle Operator: $23 per hour

Mechanic: $31 per hour 

Source: The National Compensation Survey (http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/outside.jsp?survey=cm) reports industrywide average total compensation costs for transportation and material moving occupations is $23 per hour for vehicle 

operators and $31 per hour for mechanics in the first quarter of FY 2009. Benefits are estimated to make up approximately 

1⁄3 of the total compensation costs.

The Occupational Employment Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_485100.htm) reports the 

public transit agency average wage is $15 per hour for vehicle operators and $20 per hour for mechanics in the first quarter 

of FY 2009. Multiplying the average wages by 1.5 to adjust for benefits yields total compensation costs of $23 per hour for 

vehicle operators and $30 per hour for mechanics. 

IT/GIS Specialist: $105,000 per 

year 

Source: Discussions with transit agencies and cross-checked with BLS Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and 

Wage Estimates for Local Government Occupations (http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999300.htm). 

Estimates assume the employees work 50 weeks per year. 

IT Project Manager: $150,000 per 

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 19 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
 

 

year 

Source: Discussions with transit agencies and cross-checked with BLS Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and 

Wage Estimates for Local Government Occupations (http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999300.htm). 

Estimates assume the employees work 50 weeks per year.

Appendix D: Low Cost Scenario – Transit Agency Sample Costs

Year

One-Time Costs On-Going Operations 

& Maintenance Costs Mid-Life 

Software 

Upgrade

Total Cost

Present 

Value (3%) 

*

Prese

Valu

(7%) 

Bus 

Equipment

Backend 

System Training Bus Equipment

Backend 

System

2010 $52,800 $88,225 $12,344 $32,980 $35,000 – $221,349 $214,902 $206,8

2011 $55,200 – – $450 $35,000 – $90,650 $85,446 $79,1

2012 $55,200 – – $680 $35,000 – $90,880 $83,168 $74,1

2013 $55,200 – – $910 $35,000 – $91,110 $80,950 $69,5

2014 $52,800 – – $1,130 $35,000 – $88,930 $76,712 $63,4

2015 $55,200 – – $1,360 $35,000 – $91,560 $76,680 $61,0

2016 $55,200 – – $1,590 $35,000 $24,474 $116,264 $94,533 $72,4

2017 $55,200 – – $1,820 $35,000 – $92,020 $72,641 $53,5

2018 $52,800 – – $2,040 $35,000 – $89,840 $68,855 $48,8

2019 $55,200 – – $2,270 $35,000 – $92,470 $68,806 $47,0

2020 $55,200 – – $2,500 $35,000 – $92,700 $66,968 $44,0

2021 $55,200 – – $2,730 $35,000 – $92,930 $65,179 $41,2

2022-2032 – – – $12,600 – – $12,600 $7,800 $4,2

Total $655,200 $88,225 $12,344 $63,060 $420,000 $24,474 $1,263,303 $1,062,642 $865,5

Annualized $105,275 $88,554 $72,1

* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.

Appendix E: High Cost Scenario – Transit Agency Sample Costs

Year

One-Time Costs On-Going Operations 

& Maintenance Costs Mid-Life 

Software 

Upgrade

Total Cost

Present 

Value (3%) 

*

P

Va

Bus 

Equipment

Backend 

System Training Bus Equipment

Backend 

System

2010 $138,270 $430,425 $12,344 $77,138 $35,000 – $693,177 $672,988 $

2011 $144,555 – – $450 $35,000 – $180,005 $169,672 $

2012 $144,555 – – $680 $35,000 – $180,235 $164,941 $

2013 $144,555 – – $910 $35,000 – $180,465 $160,341 $

2014 $138,270 – – $1,130 $35,000 – $174,400 $150,439 $

2015 $144,555 – – $1,360 $35,000 – $180,915 $151,513 $

2016 $144,555 – – $1,590 $35,000 $24,474 $205,619 $167,187 $

2017 $144,555 – – $1,820 $35,000 – $181,375 $143,179 $

2018 $138,270 – – $2,040 $35,000 – $175,310 $134,361 

2019 $144,555 – – $2,270 $35,000 – $181,825 $135,295 

2020 $144,555 – – $2,500 $35,000 – $182,055 $131,520 

2021 $144,555 – – $2,730 $35,000 – $182,285 $127,851

2022-2032 – – – $12,600 – – $12,600 $7,800

Total $1,715,805 $430,425 $12,344 $107,218 $420,000 $24,474 $2,710,266 $2,317,086 $1,

Annualized $225,856 $193,091 $

* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 20 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
END NOTES

 42 U.S.C. §12204.

 42 U.S.C. §§12149.

 56 Federal Register 45530, September 6, 1991 (codified at 36 CFR §1192).

 36 CFR §1192.37.

 56 Federal Register 45584, September 6, 1991 (codified at 49 CFR Part 38).

 49 CFR §37.167 (b) and (c).

 American Public Transportation Association, Draft Recommended Practice for a Fixed Route Stop Announcement and

Route Identification Program (April 2, 2008) at 7-10. The document is available at:

http://www.aptastandards.com/Portals/0/Accessibility/StopAnnc/FRSA_draft_1_from_editor_1%20July%

203%202008.pdf.

 Tandy v. City of Wichita, 380 F. 3d 1277 (10 Cir. 2004); Martin v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 225 F. 

Supp. 2d 1362 (N.D. Ga. 2002); Neff v. VIA Metropolitan Transit Authority, 178 F.R.D. 185 (W.D. Tex. 1998). See also

Daniels-Finegold v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, C.A. No. 02 CV 11504 MEL (U.S. Dist. Ct. Mass. filed July 

25, 2002) alleging system-wide problems in providing accessible public transportation, including failure to announce stops 

and routes. 

 The compliance review reports are available at: http://www.fta.dot.gov/civilrights/ada/civil_rights_3899.html.

 National Council on Disability, Current State of Transportation for People with Disabilities in the United States (June 13, 

2005). The report is available at: http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2005/current_state.htm.

 American Public Transportation Association, 2009 Public Transportation Fact Book at 17. The document is available at: 

http://www.apta.com/gap/policyresearch/Documents/APTA_2009_Fact_Book.pdf.

 Vehicle operators will have to announce stops and routes if automated announcements fail.

 The draft revisions to the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines and public comments on the draft revisions are 

available at: http://www.access-board.gov/transit. 

 49 CFR §§ 37.71, 37.73, 37.75 and 38.21 (a). 

 49 U.S.C. §5335; 49 CFR Part 630.

 VOMS does not include atypical days (e.g., July 4th holiday) or one-time special events (e.g., political convention). NTD 

Glossary at: http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/Glossary.htm.

 Vehicles operated by contractors are reported as “purchased transportation services” in the National Transit Database. 

NTD Glossary at: http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/Glossary.htm.

 49 CFR §37.23 (b).

 49 CFR §37.37 (a).

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 21 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010
 If the transit agencies provide the buses to the private entities to operate, the transit agencies are responsible for 

providing the automated announcements. If the private entities deploy buses from their existing fleets to operate in the 

fixed route systems under contract with the transit agencies, the buses are not required to be retrofitted with automated 

announcements, but the vehicle operators would have to announce stops and routes. 

 Transit agencies that recently received federal grants to provide automated announcements or are in the process of 

procuring automated announcements are included among the transit agencies that currently provide automated 

announcements.

 Automatic vehicle location (AVL) technology uses global position satellite (GPS) receivers to calculate the real-time 

location of a vehicle, and transmits the data to a central facility by radio or other wireless communications systems. The 

data is used to monitor on-time performance and improve adherence to schedules. Automated stop and route 

announcements can be integrated with AVL technology.

 The Omaha Transit Authority, Transit Authority of River City, Central New York Regional Transportation Authority, and 

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System deploy AVL technology. 

 The cost estimates in Appendices C and D do not include GPS receivers since 4 of the transit agencies that do not 

currently provide automated announcements equip their buses with GPS receivers.

 The bus equipment spare parts costs are assumed to be incurred in the 1st year of the 12 year bus replacement cycle, 

and the mid-life software upgrade costs are assumed to be incurred in the 7th year of the 12 year bus replacement cycle. 

 The cost estimates in Table 7 include the costs for GPS receivers for the 3 transit agencies that do not equip their buses 

with GPS receivers. 

 

21

22

23

24

25

26

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements Page 22 of 22

file://C:\Program Files\Documentum\CTS\docbases\ProDocbase\config\temp_sessions\7583017845408406978\A... 7/26/2010