Source: http://access-board.gov/transit/refresh/costs.htm
Timestamp: 2013-06-19 15:05:12
Document Index: 193856376

Matched Legal Cases: ['ART) 166', 'ART) 230', 'ART) 559', 'arts 5', '§12204', '§12149', '§1192', '§1192', 'art 38', '§37', '§ 37', '§5335', 'art 630', '§37', '§37']

Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements
Cost Estimates for Automated Stop and Route Announcements July 2010
Chapter 2. Transit Agencies Affected
Chapter 3. Cost Estimates
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
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.
Present Value (3%)*
Present Value (7%)*
* Present value is based on discount rates in OMB Circular No. A-94.
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
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.1 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.2 The Access Board issued transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines in 1991.3 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.4 The Department of Transportation issued regulations in 1991 that adopted the guidelines as enforceable accessibility standards.5 The Department of Transportation regulations require stops and routes to be announced on vehicles that operate in fixed route systems.6
1.3 Compliance with Current Regulatory Requirements 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.7 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.8 Compliance reviews conducted by the Department of Transportation show that vehicle operator compliance with the current regulatory requirements is rarely above 50 percent.9 Individuals with disabilities continue to identify failure of vehicle operators to announce stops and routes as a major problem.10 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 2008.11 Automated announcements provide standardized messages, and lessen the need to rely on vehicle operators for compliance.12 The Access Board made available for public review draft revisions to the transportation vehicle accessibility guidelines.13 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.14 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.15 VOMS is the number of vehicles operated during the peak season of the year on the week and day that maximum service is provided.16 Transit agencies report both the number of VOMS directly operated by the transit agency and the number of VOMS operated by contractors.17 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
State Transit Agency Bus VOMS Directly Operated i † 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. 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 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 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.18 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.19 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 agencies.20 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. 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 † 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. NY Suffolk County Transit (SCT) Suffolk Bus Corporation
C.B.S. Lines
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 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.
State Transit Agency Contractor Bus VOMS Purchased Transportation 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. 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 Transportation Concepts 340 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 Company DATTCO 23 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
VA Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC Transit System) Not available 2 2.4 Eighty Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements Eighty (80) of the affected transit agencies currently provide automated stop and route announcements.21 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.
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. Table 4: Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated Announcements
State Transit Agency Bus VOMS Directly Operated Purchased Transportation Total
Source: National Transit Database Report Year 2007 for bus VOMS. 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)
CA San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) 200 216 416 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.
Table 5: Transit Agency Sample Data
Buses Available for Annual Maximum Service 273 Fixed Bus Routes 70 Garages 5 Vehicle Operators 520 Mechanics 124 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.22 Four (4) of the transit agencies that do not currently provide automated announcements deploy automatic vehicle location technology.23
Table 6: Costs Factors
Item Cost Discussion Source: Estimates are based on discussions with transit agencies and vendors. Labor cost sources are listed in Appendix C. Notes: ◊ 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. One-Time Costs Bus Equipment Onboard Processor Next Stop Annunciator Cables & Brackets Equipment varies from vendor to vendor. Some systems have integrated system controllers, and other 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-to-date 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. High Cost Scenario: $83,125 In the high cost scenario, the transit agency re-evaluates 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 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 7.24 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.25 Table 7: Transit Agency Sample Costs
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 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 8.26 Table 8: Total Costs for Seven Transit Agencies That Do Not Provide Automated Announcements
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 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
Appendix A: Sources Confirming Transit Agencies Provide Automated Announcements
Transit Agency Source Alameda-Contra 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 Authority (CTA) http://recruitment.transitchicago.com/news/default.aspx?Archive=y&pg=8&All=y&ArticleId=1420 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 Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) http://www.indygo.net/news.asp?ID=221 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 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 (Ride-On) 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 Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Pierce Transit) http://www.piercetransit.org/news.htm 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) Rochester-Genesee Regional Transit Authority (R-GRTA) 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 County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Community Transit) http://www.initusa.com/share/reference_english/Everett_Reference.pdf 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) 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
The T MAT Fairfax Connector CNYRTA TARC CTTransit MTS Sample Data Used to Estimate Costs 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. 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 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 industry-wide 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 ⅓ 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 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
On-Going Operations & Maintenance Costs
Mid-Life Software Upgrade
Present Value (3%) *
Present Value (7%) *
– $221,349
$206,869
– – $450
– $90,650
– – $680
– $90,880
$83,168
– – $910
– $91,110
– – $1,130
– $88,930
– – $1,360
– $91,560
– – $1,590
– – $1,820
– $92,020
– – $2,040
– $89,840
– – $2,270
– $92,470
– – $2,500
– $92,700
– – $2,730
– $92,930
– – – $12,600
– – $12,600
Total $655,200
$1,263,303
$1,062,642
$865,532
Annualized $105,275 $88,554 $72,128
$138,270 $430,425 $12,344 $77,138 $35,000 – $693,177 $672,988 $647,829
$144,555 – – $450 $35,000 – $180,005 $169,672 $157,223 2012
$144,555 – – $680 $35,000 – $180,235 $164,941 $147,125 2013
$144,555 – – $910 $35,000 – $180,465 $160,341 $137,676 2014
$138,270 – – $1,130
$35,000 – $174,400 $150,439 $124,345 2015
$144,555 – – $1,360 $35,000 – $180,915
$151,513 $120,551 2016
$144,555 – – $1,590 $35,000 $24,474 $205,619 $167,187 $128,049 2017
$144,555 – – $1,820 $35,000 – $181,375 $143,179 $105,562 2018
– – $2,040 $35,000 – $175,310 $134,361 $95,357
$144,555 – – $2,270 $35,000 – $181,825
$135,295 $92,431 2020
$144,555 – – $2,500 $35,000 – $182,055 $131,520 $86,493
$144,555 – – $2,730
$35,000 – $182,285 $127,851
$80,937 2022-2032
Total $1,715,805 $430,425
$107,218 $420,000 $24,474 $2,710,266 $2,317,086 $1,927,819 Annualized $225,856 $193,091 $160,652
End Notes 1 42 U.S.C. §12204.
2 42 U.S.C. §§12149.
3 56 Federal Register 45530, September 6, 1991 (codified at 36 CFR §1192).
4 36 CFR §1192.37.
5 56 Federal Register 45584, September 6, 1991 (codified at 49 CFR Part 38).
6 49 CFR §37.167 (b) and (c).
7 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. 8 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. 9 The compliance review reports are available at: http://www.fta.dot.gov/civilrights/ada/civil_rights_3899.html. 10 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. 11 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.
12 Vehicle operators will have to announce stops and routes if automated announcements fail.
13 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. 14 49 CFR §§ 37.71, 37.73, 37.75 and 38.21 (a). 15 49 U.S.C. §5335; 49 CFR Part 630.
16 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.
17 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.
18 49 CFR §37.23 (b).
19 49 CFR §37.37 (a).
20 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. 21 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.
22 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.
23 The Omaha Transit Authority, Transit Authority of River City, Central New York Regional Transportation Authority, and San Diego Metropolitan Transit System deploy AVL technology. 24 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.
25 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. 26 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.