tcrp project j-7, synthesis topic sa-32 system-specific...

TCRP PROJECT J-7, SYNTHESIS TOPIC SA-32 SYSTEM-SPECIFIC SPARE BUS RATIO UPDATE

The following tables summarize the detailed responses to a survey of current practices on System-Specific Spare Bus Ratios, as part of TCRP Synthesis SA-32: System Specific Spare Bus Ratio Update. The purpose of this synthesis is to update the findings of the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis No. 11 on Spare Bus Ratio practices, published in 1995. Since then, the challenges facing transit operators have changed dramatically, becoming increasingly more complex. The TCRP Synthesis SA-32 report provides information on various factors affecting bus spare ratio levels, and agency approaches taken to reduce their spare ratios and the results.

Please refer to the report, TCRP Synthesis SA-32: System Specific Spare Bus Ratio Update for the full list of survey questions (see Appendix A) and the findings.

KEY

NA=Item Not Applicable

NR=Item Not Reported

TCRP Project J-7, Synthesis Topic SA-32 System Specific Spare Bus Ratio Update D-1 Final Draft Report

September 9, 2013

Transit Cooperative Research Program

Appendix D: Compilation of Agency Survey Responses

TABLE D1. Fleet Mix—Directly Operated

Agency

Total Number of Sub-Fleets

Less than 30-

foot buses

30-foot buses

35-foot buses

40-foot buses

Over-the-Road-3-

axle Buses

60-foot articulated

buses including BRT branded

Double-Deck Buses

Special Mall Shuttle Buses

Trolley Buses—40-foot and 60-

foot SMALL

A 1 X B 3 X X X C 3 X X X D 2 X X E 4 X X X X F 2 X X G 2 X X H I 3 X X X J 4 X X X X K 5 X X X X X L 3 X X X N 4 X X X X O 2 X X P 1 X

LARGE Q 3 X X X R 5 X X X X X S 3 X X X T 3 X X X U NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA V 4 X X X X W 5 X X X X X

VERY LARGE


September 9, 2013



Agency


Less than 30-

foot buses

30-foot buses

35-foot buses

40-foot buses

Over-the-Road-3-

axle Buses

60-foot articulated

buses including BRT branded

Double-Deck Buses

Special Mall Shuttle Buses


foot X 2 X X Y 2 X X Z 4 X X X X

AA 2 X X BB 3 X X X CC 4 X X X X DD 4 X X X X EE 2 X X FF 3 X X X

MEGA GG 4 X X X X HH 1 X II 6 X X X X X X JJ 3 X X X

KK 3 X X X LL 1 X

MM 4 X X X X NN 3 X X X

TCRP Project J-7, Synthesis Topic SA-32 System Specific Spare Bus Ratio Update D-3 Second Draft

June 2013



TABLE D2. Fleet Mix—Contracted

Agency


Less than 30-foot buses

30-foot buses

35-foot buses

40-foot buses

Over-the-Road-3-

axle buses

60-foot articulated buses including

BRT branded

Double-Deck Buses

Special Mall

Shuttle Buses


foot

Small cutaway

buses A 1 X B 3 X X X C 3 X X X D 2 X X E 4 X X X X F 2 X X


June 2013



TABLE D3. Spare Ratios, Fleet Size, and Annual Vehicle Miles—Directly Operated

Agency Year Spare Ratio (Reported)

Spare Ratio (Computed)

Vehicles Available for

Maximum Service (VAMS)

Vehicles Operated in Maximum

Service (VOMS)

Annual Vehicle Miles

Reported A 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

n/a 16% 16% 16% 16%

n/a 19% 19% 19% 23%

0 25 25 25 21

0 21 21 21 17

0 698,880 639,891 757,605 612,412

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

18% 18% 20% 18% 18%

21% 21% 25% 21% 21%

29 29 30 29 29

24 24 24 24 24

1,366,000 1,344,000 1,559,465 1,478,316 1,214,881

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13% 27% 33% 35% 31%

13% 36% 48% 54% 45%

43 49 52 54 51

38 36 35 35 35

1,481,604 1,384,422 1,222,831 1,202,371 1,147,993

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

25% 28% 26% 32% 36%

33% 40% 37% 48% 57%

52 52 52 52 52

39 37 38 35 33

1,711,760 1,676,774 1,627,984 1,570,353 1,559,313

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

24% 20% 20% 20% 20%

67 67 67 67 67

54 56 56 56 56

2,713,512 2,569,907 2,422,661 2,409,151 2,265,065

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

18% 27% 29% 23% 17%

18% 27% 29% 23% 17%

94 94 94 97

103

80 74 73 79 88

5,176,015 4,879,785 5,009,386 5,386,792 5,620,430

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

26% 25% 25% 26% 26%

96 99 99 98 96

76 79 79 78 76

3,505,600 3,386,800 3,450,200 3,387,500 3,499,600

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

19% 19% 20% 20% 20%

117 117 121 121 124

98 98

101 101 103

3,521,371 3,541,521 3,820,490 3,178,217 4,104,448


June 2013








Service (VOMS)


Reported I 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

19% 38% 21% 22% 24%

167 189 186 190 188

140 137 154 156 152

4,575,799 4,945,052 5,204,587 5,343,075 5,028,176

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6% 6% 6% 6% 6%

29% 29% 32% 32% 33%

192 192 192 192 193

149 149 145 145 145

11,441,430 11,579,400 11,527,503 11,260,759 11,211,927

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

21% 22% 21% 21% 24%

21% 22% 21% 21% 24%

220 223 223 223 223

182 183 184 184 180

7,700,000 7,700,000 7,700,000 7,700,000 7,700,000

L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

21% 21% 23% 22% 22%

26% 27% 23% 22% 21%

130 130 195 195 195

103 102 158 160 161

5,391,960 6,804,721 7,973,450 8,447,961 8,651,795

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 29% 20% 19%

20% 20% 20% 22%

19

237 240 241 230 203

198 200 201 189 170

9,288,709 9,060,307 9,243,208 8,811,544 8,600,661

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

24% 20% 32% 32% 37%

260 236 236 245 255

209 197 178 186 186

9,977,808 9,754,230 9,782,083

10,667,329 10,982,105

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

NR NR NR NR NR

263 263 263 263 263

155 155 155 155 155

9,500,000 9,500,000 9,500,000 9,500,000 9,500,000

P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

19% 20% 20% 20% 20%

19% 20% 20% 20% 32%

228 230 233 233 266

191 192 194 194 201

6,051,945 6,008,508 6,558,508 7,102,529 7,120105


September 9, 2013








Service (VOMS)


Reported Q 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

308 297 290 282 263

257 247 241 235 219

11,859,067 11,520,040 11,052,519 10,582,807 9,721,509

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

25% 26% 40% 20% 26%

22% 19% 13% 22% 20%

401 414 499 581 572

329 349 442 477 477

19,151,695 18,476,141 22,413,652 26,083,260 22,235,105

S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

23% 21% 24% 23% 23%

23% 30% 18% 26% 30%

426 431 412 424 456

345 332 350 336 349

1,296,660 1,269,071 1,322,661 1,379,428 1,389,344

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

40% 46% 66% 22% 20%

40% 46% 66% 22% 20%

452 454 516 490 552

323 310 310 401 460

15,840,492 15,407,802 15,936,316 19,991,269 21,604,388

U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

12% 13% 14% 15% 14%

12% 13% 14% 15% 14%

565 550 545 545 535

504 485 480 476 470

17,423,000 17,315,000 17,163,000 16,985,000 16,782,000

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 20% 19% 20% 19%

25% 25% 25% 25% 25%

569 584 601 605 604

454 466 479 483 482

21,633,590 21,554,935 25,815,478 23,396,825 27,001,895

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

19% 19% 17% 18% 17%

19% 19% 17% 19% 18%

594 593 612 641 631

498 496 520 540 535

22,000,000 22,000,000 22,500,000 23,000,000 23,000,000

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

26% 19% 21% 19% 21%

24% 19% 21% 20% 21%

644 657 663 673 678

518 550 550 560 559

28,699,507 29,029,992 31,107,716 31,425,086 31,887,561


September 9, 2013








Service (VOMS)


Reported Y 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

28% 29% 27% 20% 20%

28% 29% 27% 20% 20%

714 746 847 866 859

560 579 669 723 714

21,012,304 26,584,313 29,766,340 30,182,048 31,397,687

Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 19% 18% 20% 20%

20% 19% 18% 20% 20%

818 822 817 863 891

684 690 694 720 743

36,566,988 36,595,366 36,506,749 38,693,194 40,908,850

AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20% 22% 22% 20% 21%

20% 28% 30% 30% 30%

910 1050 1050 1050 1050

759 818 810 804 804

27,100,000 27,500,000 27,500,000 27,500,000 27,500,000

BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

32% 30% 29% 25% 28%

32% 30% 29% 25% 28%

972 960 946 902 900

736 737 730 719 703

37,415,361 37,193,536 39,546,724 43,561,057 44,843,407

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR 28% 26% 32% 32% 29%

573 574 598 625 642

442 450 450 468 493

24,863,369 25,461,936 25,813,656 25,058,187 27,894,161

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR 16% 20% 20% 20% 20%

1107 1131 1175 1162 1164

955 945 980 970 970

computed

43,735,115 43,448,630 43,236,851 44,154,048 41,415,677

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

22% 23% 21% 20% 20%

22% 23% 21% 20% 20%

1503 1505 1455 1460 1443

1228 1219 1203 1219 1207

48,570,160 48,847,041 49,153,923 49,634,803 48,982,862

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

17% 18% 18% 20% 23%

21% 22% 24% 26% 29%

1728 1696 1696 1692 1680

1428 1393 1371 1338 1297

55,999,082 52,741,081 50,411,648 48,053,460 44,827,970


September 9, 2013








Service (VOMS)


Reported GG 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

14% 17% 17% 20% 16%

14% 17% 17% 20% 16%

1792 1781 1781 2053 2132

1578 1527 1527 1707 1843

64,918,919 65,956,944 66,368,158 73,887,932 72,922,045

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

16% 15% 16% 16% 14%

19% 22% 23% 18% 15%

1857 1819 1811 1782 1737

1559 1488 1469 1503 1507

77,668,914 76,809,557 77,033,251 76,833,791 70,947,541

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

18% 17% 19% 16% 17%

18% 17% 19% 16% 17%

2186 2168 2167 2138 2113

1858 1846 1828 1838 1809

91,724,303 88,283,106 86,211,705 87,586,975 89,333,855

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

15% 15% 18% 17% 16%

15% 15% 18% 17% 16%

4431 4336 4348 4538 4561

3846 3772 3688 3887 3925

113,771,021 112,830,898 115,346,557 121,448,520 122,025,880


September 9, 2013



TABLE D4. Spare Ratios, Fleet Size, and Annual Vehicle Miles—Contracted





Vehicles Operated in

Maximum Service (VOMS)


Reported A 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

16% 0% 0% 0% 0%

19% 25 0 0 0 0

21 0 0 0 0

724,255 0 0 0 0

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

38% 35% 40% 43%

36

38% 35% 40% 43% 36%

77 84 84 83 76

56 62 60 58 56

4,067,453 3,831,857 3,642,188 3,385,627 3,588,678

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

21% 20% 19% 21% 21%

21% 20% 19% 21% 21%

104 101 80 80 80

86 84 67 66 66

6,864,338 7,111,219 5,492,244 5,000,757 4,629,849

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

18% 18% 18% 21% 21%

18% 18% 18% 18% 38%

59 58 58 58 58

50 49 49 49 42

2,697,208 2,639,441 2,598,221 2,502,165 2,595,351

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

27% 20% 14% 23% 25%

25% 18% 24% 29% 32%

160 126 91 81 80

126 105 80 66 64

5,223373 3,698,710 2,549,397 2,536,831 2,923,741

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

37% 31% 42% 41% 50%

37% 31% 42% 41% 50%

397 413 424 387 379

289 314 298 274 251

16,864,671 17,628,666 18,131,205 19,048,674 18,426,378

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR 26% 21% 21% 21% 20%

430 450 435 438 434

342 371 360 363 363

18,739,833 19,986,938 20,311,245 20,940,220 21,225,995

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13% 12% 18% 20% 20%

15% 14% 22% 24% 25%

196 179 197 199 201

171 157 162 161 161

7,266,673 7,645,968 8,120,207 8,202,319 8,089,426


September 9, 2013



TABLE D5. Contingency Fleet

Do you Have an Inactive Contingency Fleet? Yes No SMALL A X B X C X D X E X F X G X MEDIUM H X I X J X K X L X M X N X O LARGE P X Q X R X S X T X U X V X VERY LARGE X W X X X Y X Z X AA X CC X DD X EE X FF X MEGA GG X HH X II X JJ X KK X LL X MM X NN X


September 9, 2013



TABLE D6. Average Fleet Age—Direct Operation

Agency Year

Average Bus Age (years)

Has the average age or mileage affected your spare bus needs or spare ratio?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NA NA NA NA NA

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.2 6.2 8.4 7.4 6.4

Yes—As fleets age, parts availability becomes an issue as does additional work to keep the units up.

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7 9.3 8.9 7.9 7.8

Yes—As old buses replaced, spare ratio reduced

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

Yes--The older buses (1998) engines became obsolete and parts, materials were difficult to acquire. We did not have the resources to repower twenty buses at that time.

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4.9 4.3 4.7 5.8 6.3

No

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.8 7.2 6.8 5.9 6.3

Yes

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.3 7.8 7.5 6.9 8.1

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.2 7.4 9.1 9.9 9.0

Yes—as fleet ages, increased maintenance required

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.7 6.1 5.9 7.8 6.6

Yes—older vehicles need more repair and longer repair times—and replacement part shortages; major repair work performed at a distance away


September 9, 2013



Agency Year



J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.5 8.4

10.3 12.2 14.3

Yes—percentage of buses not changed radically over past five years but road calls have dropped off (as average fleet age dropped)

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5.6 8.3 7.3 6.3 6.7

Yes—older buses require more repair, less reliable, and components become difficult to acquire—increases draw on spare vehicles. Older buses require more repairs, less reliable and some legacy components become difficult to acquire, i.e. increases draw on spares and contingency--as examples, the engine in the artics or parts for maintaining the gasoline hybrids have been difficult to obtain since company bankruptcy.

L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.9 7.9 6.9 6.8 6.5

Yes. The 2007 and 2010 engine emissions caused more labor hours on these sub-fleets which resulted in more downtime. Also, Radio CAD/AVL, APC and AVA technology causes additional downtime and labor requirements.

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.8 7.1 6.0 6.4 8.9

No

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.4 8.0 8.0 7.6 9.5

Yes—older buses break down more often

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 5.0

No

P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.1 6.1 5.1 4.1

10.5

No

Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4.7 5.5 6.4 7.1 8.9

Yes Our QA dept has helped establish a level buying program

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.3 8.6 6.5 5.0 6.1

Yes-- Since we began purchasing new CNG 40-foot vehicles, the miles between road calls had an increase trending.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year



S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9.4 7.9 7.3 8.1 7.2

No

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.7 7.7 7.1 6.3 6.1

Yes—buses are less reliable as mileage increases

U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.6 8.9 8.8 9.1

10.4

No

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11.7 10.8 9.9 9.1 9.2

No

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11.0 11.0 12.0 11.0 11.0

Yes—older buses require more maintenance—parts are issue with long lead times so buses down for extended periods (drawing on spare fleet)

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13.0 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0

Yes

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.0 8.8 8.2 7.6 7.7

Yes. Funding cuts have postponed/reduced some bus purchases driving the average age of the fleet up, thus driving maintenance needs up—older fleets requirement more maintenance as fleets age.

Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.4 7.4 6.5 6.1 5.5

Yes—The older the fleet, the more maintenance downtime required

AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.5 8.2 8.0 7.5 7.0

Yes—As vehicle LTD mileage increases vehicle components reach their end of life and require repair / replacement / overhaul which increase the quantity of time OOS to repair.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year



BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.5 9.5

10.5 11.5 12.5

Yes. Old buses are more likely to fail than new buses.

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

Yes—1) the older the fleet gets, the more maintenance required to maintain it. 2) Use of corrosive salt on streets for freeze protection accelerates structure/corrosion problems. 3) implementation of advanced technologies requires buses to be taken out of service for campaigns/retrofits

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9.0 9.0

10.0 11.0 12.0

No

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8.6 9.1 9.3 8.9 8.1

No

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5.3 4.4 5.9 8.5 8.8

Yes—a program allowing for accelerated replacement of an important number of vehicles in the last four years has helped lower the average age of fleet and spare ratio.

GG 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.8 5.8 5.0 5.5 7.2

No

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6.7 6.2 5.6 6.0 6.4

No

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.2 7.5 8.5 9.1 9.1

No

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.5 8.2 8.3 7.4 8.9

Yes—the age of the fleet and duty cycle are factored into the adjustment made to each depot’s spare factor. With the complexity of new bus models and associated warranty work, the dwell time for repair is longer, thereby affecting the spare ratio.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D7. Average Fleet Age—Contracted

Agency Year Average Bus Age Has the average age or mileage affected your spare ratio?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NA NA NA NA NA

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

Yes

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

No

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4.5 6.3 6.2 6.2 5.1

Yes. The 2007 and 2010 engine emissions caused more labor hours on these sub-fleets which resulted in more downtime. Also, Radio CAD/AVL, APC and AVA technology causes additional downtime and labor requirements.

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7.1 6.1 5.1 4.1

10.5

No

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3.3 4.8 3.7 7.5 6.6

Yes

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

Yes

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0

No


September 9, 2013



TABLE D8. Advanced On-Board Technology (e.g., fareboxes, GPS tracking systems, Automated Stop Announcements and On-board Surveillance Systems.)

Agency Year Number of On-Board Advanced Technology Systems Affected Spare Bus Needs or Spare Ratio?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

n/a 2 2 2 2

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 6 4 4 4

Yes. Can run buses that have problems with these systems when they have problems. Time that mechanics spent working on mechanical issues are now spent working on ATS systems.

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4 4 4 4 3

Yes—Buses w/non-functioning electronic fireboxes are replaced with spares

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7 7 7 7 7

No

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13 NR NR NR NR

Yes. Advanced technology vehicles require more downtime for repairs, have add’l lead times for parts, and require more frequent maintenance. BRT, different fleet sizes and high volume operational requirements make impossible to maintain a 20% spare.

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 9 9

Yes. For each added technology comes additional repair work, increased down time, and sometimes additional staffing.

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6 6 6 6 6

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 6 5

Yes—technology advancement creates additional systems to check along with more systems subject to failure at some point.


September 9, 2013




I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10 9 9 8 8

No

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11 10 7 6 6

No

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 8 6 2 1

No

L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

14 13 13 13 13

Yes. New technology, lacking maturity, vendor bankruptcy further compounding the issue. More complex periphery systems require maintenance attention and these systems tend to become an expected function necessary for service operations. If we add up the items of which can break and place a bus out of service or initiate a roadcall, this list has been growing, particularly in the last few years.

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 8 8

Yes. As noted above; this technology requires more labor hours and therefore downtime; have had to use contingency fleet in order to compensate for technology installs, updates, campaigns and programming which are always ongoing requirements.

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7 7 6 5 5

No

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 7 4 3 3

No

P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 9 9

No


September 9, 2013




Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10 10 10 9 9

Yes. There are more components that can fail in a modern bus; since all electronic systems are required to be fully functional for revenue service, any system failure removes the bus from service. Hence, minimizing vehicle availability.

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11 9 9 8 8

Yes-- Inclusions of advanced technologies over the last five years has increased the need for servicing of the additional hardware and software components that draws from the fleet spare ratio.

S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 9 9

No

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11 11 8 8 7

No

U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 9 9

Yes. Emission system DPF failures, electronic component failures, etc.

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8 9 9 9 9

No

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5 5 5 5 2

No

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13 13 13 13 13

No

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

2 2 2 2 2

No


September 9, 2013




Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

16 7 6 6 6

Yes. We are in the early stages of deploying current advanced technologies, and attempting to maintain a spare ratio of <20% by applying the savings from other technologies we project will reduce our required level of maintenance efforts (e.g. low floor ramps, disc brakes, LED lighting, etc.)

AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 8 8 8 8

Yes-- Technologies on the vehicle have grown. New maintenance procedures have been added such as swinging a bus to clean the DPF. Preventative Maintenance procedures have also been added for many of the new technologies, such as a PM for on-board devices, a more thorough PM on the electronic fare box, digital radio, passenger counters, etc. As well as reduced mileage intervals on oil changes due to the newer emission engines.

BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6 6 6 6 6

Yes-- Additional Maintenance downtime required on all electronic add-ons.

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

12 12 11 11 11

Yes. Additional Subsystems require additional maintenance

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 9 9 9

Yes. Advanced technologies have limited life spans and when became obsolete they required retrofits to new equipment. Retrofits required buses to be taken out of service affecting spare ratios.

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9 9 8 5 5

No

GG 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10 9 9 8 8

No.

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3 3 3 3 3

No.


September 9, 2013




II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

11 11 11 11 11

No

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5 5 5 5 4

Yes--The introduction of advanced technology systems along with the introduction of other advanced bus technologies contributed to a 2% increase in maintenance spares requirements starting in 2009.

KK 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10 7 7 6 6

No

LL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7 7 7 6 5

Yes. We do not directly consider advanced technology systems in determining the spare ratio. However, the presence (or lack) of these systems may affect the scheduled and unscheduled maintenance work, training, vendor maintenance, or other issues involving the spare factor. Therefore, indirectly, they affect the spare ratio.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D9. Alternatives Fuels/Energy—Directly Operated and Contracted

Agency Year Gasoline Diesel

Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric

Gasoline CNG LNG Battery Electric

Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell

Diesel/ Electric trolley

Affected Spare Bus Needs or Spare Ratio?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

20 29 20 20 16

5 5 5 5 5

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5 5 3 0 0

48 43 38 36 34

2 2 0 0 0

Yes. Hybrid buses have failed as has manufacturer - no support and vehicles are down counting against DR spare ratio but unable to repair.

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10 10 10 10 10

9 17 17 17 9

31 27 27 27 27

Yes—CNG vehicles have fewer injector and fuel system issues

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

52 NR NR NR NR

Yes. Natural Gas systems require additional maintenance and repair times are longer. CNG fuel components require additional lead times to acquire and technician training is far more arduous and lengthy.

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

67 67 67 67 67

No


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

60 70 56 66 56

0 0 0 3 3

126 118 120 125 125

No

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

66 73 76 79 86

30 26 23 19 10

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

72 87

100 100 113

45 30 21 21 11

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NR NR NR NR

No

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

62 62 59 58 88

9 9 9 9 9

121 121 121 121 119

Yes

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

184 186 188 192 192

No


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

67 134 134 134 159

89 89 89 89 64

64 Yes. Newer technologies at an Agency typically require additional resources, new / advanced skills sets for the Mechanics, lack reliability and cause a need for contingencies. This contingency fleet requires service and maintenance regardless of the actual amount of time or miles used. From a cost per / XX basis, it can become an expensive and resource draining insurance policy.

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

0 10 20 20 10

82 104

71 49 9 0 0

141 141 206 215 215

No

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

168 151 151 141 114

1 1 1 0 0

68 88 89 89 89

No

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

13 13 13 13 13

12 12 12 12 12

235 211 211 220 200

No


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

126 126 126 126 126

24 20 20 0 0

35 35 35 35 35

No

Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

287 288 291 291 324

No

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

302 291 284 282 263

6 6 6

Yes. The changes to engine emissions purchase of electric diesel buses (qty 6, 2010). Particulate filters and several warranty campaigns have had an effect on the adherence to the spare ratio and bus needs.

S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

225 285 300 265 302

120 76 72 70 70

52 52 52 52 7

Yes--Advanced fuel technology - CNG, Electric Hybrids, regenerative braking, new diesel technology, exhaust after treatment devices (DPF) - very technical and maintenance complex vehicles. These highly advanced technical systems require longer downtimes to ensure a safe and quality repair.

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

45 45 45 45 50

291 316 297 379 403

90 70 70 0 0

No.


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

431 433 495 469 531

21 21 21 21 21

Yes. Hybrid component failures

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

0 0 0 0 4

36 30 62

111 229

0 0 0 2 2

0 0 2 2 2

333 317 298 319 186

192 193 228 228 229

No

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

565 550 545 545 535

No

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

557 572 589 603 601

12 12 12 3 3

No

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

609 609 609 609 609

2 2 2

No

Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

463 468 482 492 496

33 149 167 181 181 182

Yes—Early adopted of LNG


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

682 718 821 860 853

32 28 26 6 6

Yes-- I only answer yes, due to the increased maintenance to the newer emission and Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) engines. Which increase maintenance and down time. Until DPF's were introduced, we never had to swing a bus to "regen" the DPF due to a check engine light.

BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

775 779 774 863 891

43 43 43

No

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

527 547 603 603 603

25 25 25 25 0

360 360 360 360 360

28 28 28 28 28

32 32 32 32 32

Yes- Advance fuel technology requires additional maintenance and has show to introduce additional failure modes.

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

966 954 940 896 894

4 4 4 4 6

Yes. Maintenance technology issues, Emissions technology, and fueling electronic technology have resulted in less reliability.

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

956 977 988

1018 1031

11 11 9 9 9

36 36 36 36 36

Yes. Alternative / clean fuel technologies are not as reliable as proven diesel technology and required additional and more frequent repair and maintenance.


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

728 752 796 862 918

141 141 141 62 2

188 188 188 188 188

Yes. Specialized alternative fuel systems require higher spare ratio due to higher maintenance requirements.

GG 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

632 842 970

1028 1026

713 505 326 275 258

158 158 159 157 159

No.

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

1720 1688 1688 1684 1672

8 8 8 8 8

No.

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

1555 1553 1553 1835 1982

237 228 228 228 150

No

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

1166 1126 1117 1088 1189

691 693 694 694 548

Yes. The introduction of Hybrid Electric/Diesel systems has required an increase in maintenance spares over the last five years. A number of retrofit campaigns have been required and continue to be required to address issues related to Hybrid Electric/Diesel Technology.


September 9, 2013




Hybrid Electric-

Diesel

Hybrid Electric


Overhead Catenary-

Trolley Fuel Cell



KK 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

2299 2264 2281 2216 2231

7 7 7 7 7

76 76 76 76 76

No

LL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

2600 2588 2564 2818 3453

1288 1287 1293 1226 629

543 491 491 494 479

Yes. We have a very diverse fleet, including three different fuel types: ultra low sulfur diesel, CNG, and hybrid diesel-electric. The CNG buses require specialized fueling stations, whereas the diesel and hybrid buses do not. Therefore, CNG buses can only be assigned to two of our depots. When adjustments to the spare factor are made, these constraints are taken into consideration.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D10. Agency Service Profiles and Essential Vehicle Features

Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)

Commuter Express Routes

(non BRT)

Regional Trunk Routes

Local Route

Neighborhood Circulator/

Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service

Have these services affected Spare

Vehicle Needs/Spare Ratio?

Essential Vehicle

Features

Have the lack of these features

affected ability to meet pullout?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No Special branding; Maneuver-ability

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

Yes. Added workload to an already small staff.

Special exterior branding

Yes. Pullout has been affected only a couple of times, but spares are not there to adequately schedule PMI's and trade outs to retrieve buses for PM's are regular

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No Special branding; Low floor

No

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No Special exterior branding

No

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Operating different service profiles creates a sub-fleet of the total fleet. You then need spare buses for the sub-fleet to maintain a high level of core and customer enhanced

Special exterior branding; low floor; more than one door

Yes. Special branding effectively pulls these vehicles out of the regular service requirements. You must have more vehicles which are specifically branded as spares to maintain the


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



services service. F 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X Yes Special branding; Exterior Wood Trim; Premium Seating/other amenities

No

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No Low floor; more than one door

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. BRT service requires unique vehicles which can only be used in this type of service

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; low floor; more than one door.

Yes. For BRT service, with left side passenger doors, this specific bus can only operate on these routes.

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; low floor; ability to maneuver in confined areas; more than one door.

No

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. We service a large diverse operating area that rely on buses from one main facility that services the

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; ability

Yes. We have buses that have high wheel chair capacity that are unsuitable for regular line service due to


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



largest metropolitan area that has the fleet size adjusted for buses to meet our service requirements, with 20% spares. We need to supply spares from our spare ratio to keep those for smaller population areas fleet in safe operating condition. This creates a shortage of spares for us to use in our larger fleet for maintenance and repairs within the largest UZA.

to maneuver in confined areas; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

State DOT regulations on seated to standee ratio Certain routes, we are limited to operate our fleet due to bus size &safety. Routes that are intercity in nature require luggage compartments and certain seating (Coach Service) Most of our routes require at least 2 doors and all of our special events require 2 doors for passenger shuttle service.

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; ability to maneuver in confined areas; low floor; more than one door.

No

L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No Special exterior branding; low floor; more than one door.

No.

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; ability

No


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



to maneuver in confined areas; premium seating/ amenities; luggage racks/storage; low floor; more than one door.

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X


No

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No Low floor; more than one door.

No

P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X


No

Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No None NA

R 2012 2011 2010 2009

X X X X

X X X X


No


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



2008 X X S 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door

No

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; ability to maneuver in confined areas; Luggage racks; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door; small capacity vehicle; single door express.

Yes. Small sub fleets that are equipped or branded for specific service and cannot be used for other service types are difficult to maintain a fleet 20% spare ratio. For example, the spare ratio for a 5 bus sub-fleet would be 1 coach. If a yard's total fleet was comprised of 5 different sub-fleets of 5 buses each, and a serviceable spare was required for each service type, the entire spare ratio of 20% (5 buses) would need to be up and available all the time to provide the stand-by coaches and none would be


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



available for maintenance. The 20% should be available for O & R, Maintenance, repairs and serviceable stand-by coaches. The spare ration should be applied to sub-fleet at a given yard, not for the total fleet.

U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; Exterior wood trim; ability to maneuver in confined areas; Luggage racks; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

No

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X

X X

Yes. Having different types of services for each dedicated fleet restricts the ability to mix and match vehicles for the spare ratio.

High passenger carrying capacity; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

No

W 2012 2011

X X X

X X

X X

No special exterior branding; low

No


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



2010 2009 2008

X X X

X X X

X X X

floor.

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; Luggage racks; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

No

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X


No

Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes-. The FTA looks at the <20% spare ratio standard at the aggregate fleet level without consideration of sub-fleet configuration requirements and multiple garage assignments. This can conflict with allocations at the sub-fleet level due to mathematical rounding, sub-fleet peak requirements,

Special exterior branding; ability to maneuver in confined areas; Luggage racks; premium seating/ amenities; more than one door; limited seating (for lesser licensing requirements of operator.).

Yes. The FTA looks at the <20% spare ratio standard at the aggregate fleet level without consideration of sub-fleet configuration requirements and multiple garage assignments. This can conflict with allocations at the sub-fleet level due to mathematical rounding, sub-fleet peak requirements,


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



and sub-fleet performance.

and sub-fleet performance.

AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X

Yes. Different types of service require different types of vehicles. Each vehicle type needs to maintain a spare ratio for that type of service. Example: you can’t place an articulated bus on a route that requires a 35 foot bus due to terrain and tight turns or other size constraints. And in the same principal, you can't place a 35 bus on a dedicated bus way. You could, but your customer complaints would shoot through the roof due to the passengers left standing at the curb. The goal of public transit is to get the riders from point A to point B, not leave them standing at the curb. That being said, each fleet/service type needs to maintain a corresponding spare ratio.

High passenger carrying capacity; ability to maneuver in confined areas; premium seating/ amenities; more than one door; more than two doors.

Yes. If you are short on 35 foot buses due to maintenance. The operator will have to wait for one to return from service and leave the division late for his run. Also, there may be a need to send a 40 foot bus on an articulated bus run if not enough are available at a particular operating division.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Fleet is now segregated by type of service. Basically, each type of service has its own specific spare ratio.

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; luggage racks; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

Yes. Fleet is now segregated by type of service. Basically, each type of service has its own specific spare ratio.

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. BRT line had dedicated buses and reduces the availability for maintenance

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; luggage racks/storage; low floor; more than one door

No.

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. CVIP Inspections for highway a regional buses and additional maintenance

High passenger carrying capacity; luggage racks/storage; Bike racks; working radios

Yes. Buses with non-functioning radios on hold.

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Different type of services required different types of buses and one bus type may not be used for a different service.

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; ability to maneuver in confined areas; luggage racks/storage;

Yes. Buses with specialized features cannot be used for a different type of service.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door.

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No. Special exterior branding; luggage racks/storage; premium seating/ amenities; low floor; more than one door; wheelchair accessible.

No

GG 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. BRT and Electric Trolley Bus (ETB) Fleet carry some risk of running with high spare ratios. We has a long history with ETBs and occasionally encounters periods where a portion of the fleet must be dieselized, resulting in higher than necessary spares. BRT service has been launched more recently with the intent of no interlining and no coach substitution that would result in unbranded coaches

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding;

No.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



providing BRT service. As a result, we a have operated with a somewhat higher spare ratio on BRT service.

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No. low floor; more than one door’

No

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No. High passenger carrying capacity; low floor; more than one door

No.

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X

X X X X X

No. Luggage racks/storage; low floor;

No

KK 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. When BRT-type services were introduced on two routes in 2008 & 2009, buses were uniquely wrapped and equipped, thereby requiring a spare ratio for those specific vehicle types within the two garages which house this equipment. This slightly increased

High passenger carrying capacity; special exterior branding; luggage racks/storage; more than one door.

No.


September 9, 2013



Agency Year

Bus Rapid

Transit (BRT)


(non BRT)


Local Route


Feeder Shuttle

Route Deviat

ion

Select Bus

Service



Essential Vehicle

Features



our need for spare vehicles by creating such a sub-set of service.

LL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. As stated in the response to question 8, the spare factor is adjusted based on many factors for each depot, including the type of transit service. For example, artic fleets for the Select Bus Service (SBS) have a higher spare ratio (20%), instead of the usual 15% since those buses have a specialty wrap. Also, some buses are used to provide airport service and have luggage racks. Those also have the higher 20% spare factor.

High passenger carrying capacity; luggage racks/storage; low floor; more than one door; special exterior branding.

No.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D11. Special Vehicle Needs

Agency Year Special Events

Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for

Overloads, schedule Training

Other Emergency

/Special Need

Have these special needs affected Spare Vehicle Needs/Spare Ratio?

A 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

No

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X

No

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NA NA NA NA NA No

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

No

F 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. For the most part, we run close to the 20% spare ratio being held for maintenance. When special circumstances arise, at times we release buses that are in for scheduled maintenance.


September 9, 2013




Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for


Other Emergency

/Special Need


G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. On certain special community events, it can stretch availability very thin, especially when PMI schedules are coming due.

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X No

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Special and intermittent service for large events in the area are almost exclusively handled by our fleet, because we have the equipment and the personnel to move large crowds. When we are doing these events we do not cut service and there may be overlapping events that require all of our equipment including the spares to meet our obligations to our riders.

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

L 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. These special needs often draw down on the spares of which otherwise would have been available for day to day scheduled needs and often require special cleaning, advertising and preparation

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X

X X X X X

Yes. None of this service is part of the fixed route scheduled pullout, therefore we must use our spares from the pullout to make this special service.


September 9, 2013




Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for


Other Emergency

/Special Need


N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No.

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

P 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Campaign and Fleet defects as noted previously, along with training needs has greatly affected our ability to cover all bus requirements. Over the last five years with an unexpected operator attrition and with expanded service, training was often left short, due to meeting pull-out requirements.

S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Literally millions of tourists ride the resort corridor. In addition to large conventions that require addition service hours to meet demand, New Year's Eve requires all vehicles that are safe to operate deployed to meet this influx of visitors.


September 9, 2013




Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for


Other Emergency

/Special Need


T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X

No

U 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X

X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X

No

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X

X X

X X X X X

No

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Sometimes we have to defer the request for added buses to meet our daily pullout requirement. Training and special events often have to be rescheduled around bus availability


September 9, 2013




Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for


Other Emergency

/Special Need


Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. It does create pressure and strain on limited resources. To compensate for that effect, we formally suspend scheduled maintenance activities such as preventive maintenance inspections to provide the required additional vehicles during such events as referenced in #30 above(intermittent/special service needs)

AA 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. These additional bus needs are not calculated into the 20% spare ratio. Spare ratio is based on peak vehicle needs, nothing more.

BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

No.

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Additional unscheduled mileage increase preventive mtce intervals and increases failures

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Back-up buses for construction detours and training.

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Pulls buses from repair & pm maint. Special services buses were not counted against peak services demand but they took away available spares.

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No.


September 9, 2013




Rail Back-

Up

Plug Buses for


Other Emergency

/Special Need


GG 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X

No.

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

No.

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes--Although the agency budgets/plans for intermittent service requirements, from time-to-time the actual requirements exceed the budgeted/planned requirements. Currently the agency has an active contingency fleet to accommodate service requirement variations that occur.

KK 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X

No

LL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

Yes. Providing service for special or intermittent needs does not increase our spare factor since often this service is provided with buses that we were about to retire. However, these instances force us to keep end-of-life buses for a longer period of time.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D12. Peak-to-Base Ratios (and resulting bus maintenance time window), Unique Climatic Conditions and/or other Operating Factors, Duty Cycles

Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio

Affected Spare Bus Needs/ Spare Ratio?

Unique/ Climatic conditions

Has this affected Spare Bus Needs/ Spare

Ratio? Duty Cycle Categories

Has this affected Spare Bus Needs/

Spare Ratio? A Contracted 1.0 No Extreme Heat/

Humidity Yes. A/C essential—if goes out, must use spare

Heavy-16% Medium-84% Light-0%

No

B Direct Operation

1.0 Yes. Not enough spares to schedule maintenance effectively.

Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; extremely rough pavement

Yes. in heavy snow delays in the system tax the spares to maintain headways and high heat conditions at times create issues, long part lead times for repair parts for ac systems and multiple refrigerants are needed for the fleets (R12 / R22 /R134a)


Yes. Brake wear, transmissions are overworked as are engines and overutilization of newer buses vs. older buses at times.

C Direct Operation

1.8 No Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives

No Heavy-84% Medium-2% Light-14%

No

D Direct Operation

1.2 Yes--Maintenance windows changed because for the AM & PM demand. This really strains the quantity of vehicles available. Spare buses are vital and necessary to maintain the services to our customers, and to safely maintain the fleet. Further, we must adhere to many statutory inspections/repairs.

Extreme Heat NA Heavy-80% Medium-20% Light-0%

Yes.Severe duty, standing loads and the need for more vehicles continue to strain our operational and maintenance objectives regarding the number of available buses. The 20% rule is not manageable and very archaic. It hamstrings our ability to provide flexibility and quality services to our customers now and into the future. With the multitude of transit products, sub-fleets, technologies and prevailing conditions its nearly impossible to


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? maintain only a 20% ratio.

E Direct Operation

1.0 No Extreme Heat/Humidity No. Heavy-100% Medium-0% Light-0%

No

F Direct Operation Contracted

1.3 1.2

No Extreme Heat Yes. In the heat of the summer, HVAC and cooling systems work harder which increase the chance of road failure. Whenever a bus is replaced due to road failure that is one less spare.

NR No

G Direct Operation

1.1 Yes—Have adjusted the PM interval mileage

Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; extremely rough pavement


No

H Direct Operation

n/r Yes—generally the morning peak has been lighter than the afternoon peak resulting in vehicle shortages or temporarily release a partially completed bus for service to meet pullout times.

Very rainy conditions; occasional very wet snow creaking slick conditions

Yes. On extreme wet or snow, slippery conditions, due to lack of experience, there are vehicle accidents causing tight spare ratios.


No

I Contracted 1.2 No. Extreme Heat/Humidity No Heavy-90% Medium-0% Light-10%

No

J Direct Operation

1.7 Yes. Our PM programs and subsequent follow up repairs have resulted in an adequate measurement of miles between service interruption, however, our success is due to our policy of not using a bus that is unsafe for operation.

Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; steep hills; extremely rough pavement

Yes. The bulk of our fleet have single pane inoperable windows that do not allow us to use a vehicle that has no A/C for service. Our buses need to have operating heat for defrosters and passenger heat for safe operation and window clearing. Salt and


Yes. Start and stop corner to corner, extreme weather conditions, rough road surfaces, structural corrosion of the buses. CNG buses with a higher center of gravity maneuvering through the city streets puts more wear on


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? corrosive elements corrode bodies, wheel chair accessibility devices, structural components. This has affects the level of daily buses on hold for heavy repairs. Our service area includes hilly terrain that places additional strain on brakes, differentials and transmissions. This requires time consuming repairs that can cripple a vehicle (longer repair and parts downtime). Rough pavement from freezing and thawing destroys the paved surface streets, consequently wearing out our steering and suspension components, also accounting for time consuming repairs.

suspension and steering parts causing the need for longer shop time in order to address repairs.

K Direct Operation

1.2 No Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; steep hills.


No

L Direct Operation

1.3 Yes. Less buses return mid-day of which could offer additional time for routine maintenance, or spares for bus exchanges, un-planned tripper use for increasing temporary passenger capacity or re-use for roadcalls, etc.

Occasional heavy rain. Yes. The bulk of the 25 contingency buses are the result of the unpredictable and unreliable nature of the gasoline hybrid fleet, ie 89 of our 224 bus fleet are hybrids, and 64 of our fleet are new CNG's of which can only be fueled at one of our two sites.


No


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? M Direct

Operation Contracted

1.1 1.1

No Extremely rough pavement

No NR No

N Direct Operation

2.9 No. Extreme Heat/ Humidity/Cold; extremely rough pavement; heavy rain


No

O Direct Operation

1.1 No None NA Heavy-90% Medium-0% Light-10%

No

P Direct Operation

1.7 No Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; extremely rough pavement


No

Q Direct Operation Contracted

NR NR

No No

Steep Hills No Heavy-15% Medium-75% Light-10%

No

R Direct Operation

1.8 Yes. Our peak to base ratio has increased 18% ove the last five (5) years along with an increase of bus maintenance time.

Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives.

Yes. Extreme weather results in higher road calls and increased maintenance servicing (engine overheats).


No.

S Contracted 1.2 Yes-- Limited time available for fueling, cleaning and maintenance. RTC operates high levels of service on every day of the week, the time available for vehicle servicing must be sandwiched between revenue service hours. Nearly 40 percent of routes operate 24-hours a day, seven days a week, while the majority of remaining routes

Extreme Heat Yes. The service area is notorious for extremely high operating temperatures that prevail during summer months. When temperatures reach a certain level, the reliability of a vehicle, regardless of age, becomes a challenge and additional vehicles are


Yes. It is not uncommon for a vehicle to reach the 500,000 mile threshold in a time frame that is well under the FTA 12-year standard for heavy duty transit vehicles. As one of the most efficient transit systems in the U.S.,most vehicles remain in-service 21-26 hours


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? operate at least 21 hours a day. required to fill in for

breakdowns. per day. Vehicles work hard, coming back to the yard for short periods of time, before returning to service.

T Direct Operation

1.4 Yes. We have a sub-fleet that runs 24 hour service 7 days a week with very high miles and very high degree of maintenance due to the duty cycle and the high commuter ridership and the effects of the overnight homeless riders. As you can imagine, the overnight homeless riders have make the cleaning requirements greater and more time consuming than we see with regular commuter ridership. Additionally, with the spare ratio split among the sub-fleets, the am and pm requirements require that all shifts must be flexible and perform PM/Inspection activities, running repair, servicing and defects all hours of the day. The spares available for standby service is much more volatile with sub-fleets that don't have their own spare ratio.

None NA Heavy-65% Medium-25% Light-10%

Yes. Only to the extent that a sub-fleet which is associated with a specific service type/duty cycle affects spare ratio. But, duty cycles that are heavier on one run and lighter on others, that can accommodate standard buses on each does not affect spare ratios because we will alternate what coaches are assigned to to even out the wear and tear.

U Direct Operation

NR No Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; extremely rough pavement

Yes. Winter damaged are very hard on suspension components


No


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? V Direct

Operation Contracted

1.3 2.1

No No

Extreme Heat No Heavy-78% Medium-9% Light-13%

No

W Direct Operation

2.5 Yes. Relatively low base bus requirement has allowed a substantial amount of work to be performed on the more productive day shift


Yes. Peak service demands occur during winter months which also have a greater level of bus defects.


No

X Direct Operation

1.6 No Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement


No

Y Direct Operation

1.3 No None No Heavy-90% Medium-10% Light-00%

Z Direct Operation

2.1 Yes-- The windows of base period deployment have reduced and caused constraints due to shop capacity issues at times and 8.5 consecutive hour work rule requirements.

Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; extremely rough pavement


No

AA Direct Operation

1.0 Yes-- The window between AM peak and PM peak as well as PM peak to AM peak do not allow for heavy maintenance. Therefore heavy maintenance needs swung and repaired or runs through one of the peak periods, utilizing spare buses.

Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement

Yes. Salt usage due to winter weather causes body corrosion and extensive body repair not seen in the non snow belt states. Also, our terrain causes the need for several fleet types, so we can get to these hilly, tight turning neighborhoods. We are not on a grid type system. Many times heavy traffic congestion due to our tunnels and multiple bridges also causes delays in buses returning to the


Yes-- Oil change intervals have changed due to the newer emission engines as well as the heavy duty cycle. DPF maintenance has also increased due to the duty cycle. Brake and suspension maintenance is also higher due to the terrain.


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? operating locations.

BB Direct Operation

NR No. Extreme Heat/Humidity; salt and corrosives.

No. Heavy-90% Medium-10% Light-00%

No.

CC Direct Operation

2.3 NR Extreme Heat/Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement

Yes. LF artic buses can not operate in the snow


Yes. Heavy stop / start with average speed @ 10 MPH and fully loaded adds to wear & tear on vehicle = additional maintenance

DD Direct Operation

5.5 Yes. Differing bus peak requirements make it difficult to schedule maintenance works


Yes. Extreme Cold and Ice condition would cause a lot of thermal related failures such as doors problems, brake freeze....etc


Yes. excessive brake wear, front air bags and steering

EE Direct Operation Contracted

NR NR

Yes. To retain workers, we must keep a large portion of workers on day shift where buses are out to meet service demand and thus less spare buses are available for maintenance and repair.

Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives Steep Hills; high altitude; spread-out service area.

Yes. High altitude creates unique operating issues such as reduced engine power, engine combination and cooling issues. Climatic conditions cause buses to be down for various maint. needs that are in addition to regular maintenance and pm work. Buses accumulate more miles due to spread out service area.

NR Yes. Heavy duty cycles reduce brake life and create more structural engine and transmission problems.

FF Direct Operation

1.4 No. Extreme humidity; salt and corrosives Steep Hills.

No. Heavy-70% Medium-25% Light-5%

No.

GG Direct Operation

2.2 No Steep Hills; extreme humidity; extremely rough pavement

No. NR No.

HH Direct Operation

NR No. Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt

No. NR No.


September 9, 2013



Agency Type

Peak to

Base Ratio






Spare Ratio? and corrosives Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement

II Direct Operation

1.7 No Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement


No

JJ Direct Operation

1.8 No Extreme Heat/ Humidity/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives Steep Hills; extremely rough pavement

Yes-- Extreme heat/cold situations sometimes results in an increased number of change off requests. Also major winter storms have recently resulted in an increase in Hybrid Electric related failures. An active contingency fleet helps to address these out-of-the-ordinary circumstances.


No

KK Direct Operation Contracted

2.1 1.5

No No

Extreme Heat/Cold; heavy snow and ice; salt and corrosives; extremely rough pavement

No NP NP

LL Direct Operation

1.6 No. None. NA Heavy-100% Medium-0% Light-0%

Yes. Duty cycle is one of the major factors affecting the spare ratio. All our buses operate in a heavy duty cycle, with excessive stops and starts and heavy passenger loads. They all undergo maintenance at regular intervals, so all these issues are factored into the spare ratio.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D13. Agency Fleet Maintenance Programs

Agency

Technician to-buses ratio DO= Directly

Operated CO=

Contracted Unmet Training needs

not being addressed/why

Have a Bus Replacement

schedule? HD=Heavy Duty

Buses MLD= Medium to Light Duty

Buses

Have a Bus Rehab schedule?

HD=Heavy Duty Buses

MLD= Medium to Light Duty Buses Explain

Bus is Removed from

Service if it Adversely

affects: Facility constraints Affects Spare Bus

Needs/ Spare Ratio? A DO—NA

CO-.04

Electronic training on vehicle wiring. Anti-lock systems training. NR

No No Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cosmetic appearance; cleanliness.

None N/A

B 0.10 Engines, ITS Systems No No Safe operation; Accessibility; Cleanliness; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue;

Limited number of bays or lifts; Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

No

C 0.14 NR Yes HD-14 years MLD-8 years

No Depends on available funding at the time. CNG must be replaced due to tanks expiring.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Cleanliness; Collection of revenue

None NA

D 7.5:1 Soft skills (computer, windows, memo-writing skills, record keeping) Lack of funding and schedule conflicts to maintain the required numbers of buses.

Yes HD-12 years

Yes Varies

We will rehabilitate engines and transmissions on a needs basis. This includes 8 year repainting.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue; customer info.

Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

No

E 0.30 NA Yes HD-10-12 years

Yes MLD-4-7 years

n/r Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cosmetic appearance; Cleanliness; Collection of

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.)

No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? revenue; customer info.

F 0.13 NR Yes Yes HD-12 years MLD-5 years

No FTA guideline 12 Years

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue; customer info.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts; Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

No

G 0.14 Hybrid training due to lack of available trainers at the OEM level. Limited employee training availability during peak service times.

Yes HD-12 years MLD-7 years

Yes HD-10 years MLD-0

Buses are scheduled to be replaced within the 12 year window but this is all based on available funding and in reality most are not replaced until they have operated between 12-15 years. Bus rehab is only scheduled for buses we now are going to exceed the 12 years as we work through the replacement. process.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness; Collection of revenue; customer info.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts

No

H 0.18 budget constraints have tightened training sessions. Internal training staff availability when doing training.

Yes HD-15 years MLD-7-10 years

No the standard FTA requirement is 12 years, but our board has directed 15 year replacement scheduling, except when not feasible.


Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts

No

I 0.25 Special Tools NR NR NR Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer

None No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? comfort; Cleanliness; Collection of revenue; customer info.

J 0.32 0.32

We are limited to the amount of training we can offer due available funds and manpower.


No. As needed Buses are rehabbed as needed due to corrosion or major component failure


Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

Yes. Our fleet spares are used to support outlying garages placing heavy stress on our core service.

K 0.20 Some vendor and major component training is missed due to lack of manpower to back-fill while in training.


No Based on age of bus and funding


Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts; Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG

Yes. Buses are out of service for longer periods of time based on hoist availability

L 0.25 Some technician difficulties due to un-filled positions, balancing workload to training opportunities.



We are currently in a jam, as we have about a 100 or so buses coming due for

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs;

Yes. Tends to further stratify bus type and location such that the actual spares are not


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? Floor time is always first. replacement, the

likely and only fuel choice will be CNG, we have only one fueling site at near max Mcapacity (fuel and parking) and the other is is already space constrained and would be difficult to modify to CNG

comfort; Cleanliness; Cosmetic damage/blemish Collection of revenue

Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG

homogenous resulting in multiple sub-fleet spares, particularly compounded by small sub-fleeets, ie having only 13 artics or 64 CNG buses that can only be fueled at one of the sites, etc.

M .62 NR Yes HD-16 years MLD-7 years

No As part of upcoming reductions we have extended life of CNG and diesel bus replacement from 14 to 16 years.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness; customer info.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts; Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

No

N 0.22 None Yes HD-12 years

No 12 years / 500,000 miles

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue;

None No

O 0.31 NR No No Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness; customer info.

None No

P 6.5

NR Yes HD-12 years MLD-7 years

Yes HD-6 years MLD-0

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue;

None NA


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? customer info.

Q DO .25

CO .19

NR Yes HD--16 years

NR Traditionally SamTrans replaces its buses after 12 years. Due to shortage of funds, it has been recommended to extend the service life on some of our sub-fleet to 14-16 years.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cosmetic appearance; cleanliness; collection of revenue; customer info.

None NA

R 3.8 NR Yes HD-12 years

NR 12 years or 500,000 miles. Level Buying Program established and in place.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort;

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.)

Yes. The spare ratio and bus needs can be compromised at times due to transferring vehicles between locations for heavy repairs, accident repairs and campaign work.

S 0.15 NR Yes HD-9 years

NR NR Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Collection of revenue

None No

T 0.41 NR Yes HD 13-15 years MLD 5-7 Years

Yes HD 7 years

Safe operation; Accessibility; Cleanliness; Customer info.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

No

U 2.825 NR Yes HD-12 years MLD-12 years

No Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort;

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major

No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? Cleanliness. component overhaul,

PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

V DO 0.20

CO NR

NA Yes HD-12 years MLD-5 years

Yes HD-6 years

NR Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cosmetic appearance; cleanliness; collection of revenue; customer info.

None No

W 0.22 NR Yes HD-18 years MLD-NA

Yes HD-10-15 years

Approximately 31 buses are purchased per year to achieve an average age of approximately 9 years, Replacements and refurbishments are on a condition basis, not age alone, as a result, buses may be retained for over 18 years if they are in good condition.

Safe operation; Cleanliness.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts.

No

X 0.31 NR Yes HD-12 years MLD-7 years

No Over the road vehicles are replaced at 14 years.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness; Customer info.

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body,

No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

Y 0.25 lack of resources,trainers to teach, can't spare technicians from floor,

Yes HD-16 years

Yes HD-7-8 years

Current schedule is to replace buses 40 per year for next 5 years based on financial resources Zavailable

Safe operation; Accessibility;

Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.).

No

Z 0.37 NR Yes HD-12 years MLD 5 years

Yes HD-5-6 years MLD-None

Bus replacement & refurbishment programs are an integral part of agency 20-year financial plan adopted by Board of Directors on an annual basis.

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cleanliness.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PMs

Yes. Limited impact, but at times capacity constraints have caused modifications to maintenance plans as a result of consolidation of fleet in to fewer facilities to reduce overhead expenses.

AA 0.42 Training staff has been cut along with funding cuts. Not enough staff to backfill technicians. Not enough adequate training room at each location to provide proper training.

Yes HD-12 yearsmin.

Yes HD-6 years

Goal is to replace buses at 12 years, this does not always happen and often buses run into their 13th and sometimes 14th year of revenue service, or well over 500,000 miles. Also, Our rehab staff and facility can not rehabilitate an entire fleet. We only mid life overhaul a portion of each fleet due to Manpower

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness.


No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? and facility constraints.

BB NR NR Yes HD-14 years

No NP Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cleanliness.


No

CC 0.24 Frequency of training & refresher training due to lack of staff to back fill

Yes HD-12 years

Yes HD-6 years

Lack of funding usually pushes the overhaul and replacement schedules out significantly

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cleanliness; collection of revenue;


Yes. Unable to transfer buses due to fuel type (CNG).

DD 0.11 NR Yes HD 18-20 years MLD N/A

Yes HD 10-11 years MLD N/A

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cleanliness; collection of revenue; customer info.


Yes. Extra time is needed to maintain buses, get parts and move out of the facility - One old facility is crowded and has hoists that are limiting, poor wash racks and poor bus circulation.

EE DO 4.3

CO

5.65

Not enough staff to backfill technicians while in training. Training space is used for vehicle maintenance/repair/retrofits.

Yes HD-12 or more years MLD-12 or more years

No Schedule

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cosmetic appearance; cleanliness; collection of

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major

Yes. Shuttling vehicles take away labor for maint. Lack of bays reduces repair efficiency. CNG requires special accommodation resulting in more time for maintenance.


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? revenue component overhaul,

PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain buses

FF 0.15 NP Yes HD-17 years

Yes HD-8 years

Based on detailed life cycle costing analysis performed in-house.


None No

GG 0.24 Quality Assurance is not addressed due to lack of training staff.

Yes HD-12 years

No Follow FTA Replacement Guideline—may extend HHfrom 12 to 15



No

HH 0.20 NP Yes HD-16 years MLD-5 years

No

Safe operation; Customer comfort; Cleanliness Collection of revenue; customer info.

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG

Yes. The spare ratio had to be raised for depots encountering these types of constraints.


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? fueling, etc.)

II 3.2 buses for every light and

heavy maintenance

technician

The lack of funding for the replacement staff has the biggest impact on our ability to properly and timely train and retrain all of our employees.

Yes HD > 12 years

Yes HD > 6-7 years

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; Cosmetic damage/blemish Cleanliness; Collection of revenue customer info.


No

JJ 0.31 n/r Yes HD-18 years MLD-None

Yes HD-9 years MLD-None

There are various bus rehabilitation programs in place including 6 year, 9 year, 12 year and 15 year programs. The major program is a mechanical and body overhaul program that currently occurs at the KK9 year mark. Over the years, timelines for programs are adjusted depending on needs.

Safe operation; Customer comfort;


No

KK DO 3.2

CO

0.12

n/a Yes HD-12-14 years

No Schedule

40' Transit bus replacement cycles are scheduled at 12 yr intervals; 3 axle commuter bus replacement cycles are scheduled at 14

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cleanliness; collection of

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Need to shuttle vehicles between facilities for certain maintenance needs

No


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? year cycles revenue;

customer info (e.g., major component overhaul, PM's, paint/body, etc.). Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

LL 0.31 All training that is required is provided.

Yes HD-12 years

Yes HD-4,8,6 years if applicable

The useful life of a bus is 12 years. NYCT DOB performs Preventive Maintenance operations on its fleet of buses based on mileage and duty cycle. Local buses undergo a Scheduled Operations (S.O.) inspection after 3,000 miles or 4,000 miles. All express buses undergo an S.O. after 6,000 miles. Mileage readings used to calculate the maintenance interval are obtained from the vehicle’s hub-odometer. S.O. inspections are completed within a 500-mile window. This allows for flexibility in scheduling and even distribution of workload. In addition, the buses

Safe operation; Accessibility; Customer comfort; cleanliness; customer info

Limited number of maintenance bays or lifts. Inability to support certain bus types (e.g., artics, CNG fueling, etc.)

Yes. Since there are a limited number of maintenance bays or lifts, the number of buses that can be repaired at any one time is limited. Therefore, the dwell days of an out-of-service bus needs to be factored into the spare factor calculation.


September 9, 2013



Agency


Operated CO=






Buses


HD=Heavy Duty Buses


Bus is Removed from



Needs/ Spare Ratio? go through a Heavy Shop Overhaul program at 4 and 8 years of age. Also, buses may go through a 6-year mid-life overhaul of major components, on an as needed basis.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D14. Fleet Reliability (mean distance between mechanical failures)

Agency Year

Direct Operation: Mean distance

between mechanical failure Definition Used

Contracted: Mean distance between

mechanical failure A 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

0 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500

NR 7,500

B 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NA

C 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

34,257 11,426 10,503 7,980 3,946

NR NA

D 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

2,000 2,500 2,500 1,800 1,800

Engine Transmission W/C Ramp Electrical system CNG system Brakes Lighting and controls All electric HVAC systems

NA

E 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10,209 10,805 10,145 9,707 9,429

A system failure that is mechanical in nature that prevents the vehicle from completing its scheduled trip or prevents it from starting its next scheduled trip.

NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure F 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000

Service interruption NA

G 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

6,267 7,690 8,075 7,093 7,723

a defect or problem that will not allow the bus to continue in revenue service for the entire schedule this does not include changes for defects outside the area of repair that are not preventable i.e. flat tires and vehicle accidents.

NA

H 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4,331 3,476 3,400 3,209 3,280

all road calls where the bus is removed from service and exchanged with a replacement bus.

NA

I 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NA any time a bus had to be removed from revenue service resulting in a delay in the scheduled run

13,500 16,000 16,000 11,750 6,600

J 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

36,345 20,143 16,094 1,6342 14,247

Any major failure that causes a vehicle to not start or finish its intended run NA

K 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4,532 NP NP NP NP

Buses changed off on road for mechanical faults. NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure L 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

4,219 5,807 5,384 5,716 5,904

Any failure causing the bus to be incapable of completing it's assignment, close to NTD definition

NA

M 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3,245 3,181 3,256 3,666 3,724

Any road failure for mechanical reasons that causes the bus to not complete or start it's next trip. Plus, any other mechanical failure that requires a mechanic to go into the field to make a repair regardless of whether a trip is missed or not.

5,338 5,448 5,122 5,687 6,214

N 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

8,498 7,378 8,496 8,336 8,294

Major Mechanic System Failures These are failures of a mechanical element of the revenue vehicle that prevents the vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or from starting the next scheduled revenue trip because actual movement is limited or because of safety concerns. Examples of major bus failures include breakdown of air equipment, brakes, doors, engine cooling system, steering and front axle, rear axle and suspension and torque converters. Other Mechanical System Failures These are failures of some other mechanical element of the revenue vehicle that, because of local agency policy, prevents the revenue vehicle from completing a scheduled revenue trip or from starting the next scheduled revenue trip even though the vehicle is physically able to continue in revenue service. Examples of other bus failures include breakdowns of fireboxes, wheelchair lifts, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and other problems not included as a major mechanical systems failure.

NA

O 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10,500 10,000 8,500 6,500 4,500

any failure that will make a bus not complete its schedule trip NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure P 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

Any failure that keeps the bus from completing its route NA

Q 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

26,313 25,352 21,862 21,989 20,578

NR 42,144 46,306 37,117 41,703 64,884

R 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3,467 3,468 3,053 2,957 3,424

We define a mechanical failure as any bus related delay that prevents a vehicle from no completing its scheduled revenue trip or does not start its next scheduled trip regardless if there is a delay in revenue service or not.

NA

S 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NA A mechanical failure of a bus in revenue service that necessitates removing the bus from service until repairs are made.

13,110 15,577 17,487 16,707 14,200

T 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

10,398 10,869 9,864 8,471 7,518

Any downtime related to a mechanical failure such as brake complaints, engine, transmission, overheat, lifts. Items that are not Mechanical failures are accidents, air conditioning, farebox, or other items that can either continue until met or are caused by other factors.

NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure U 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

6,819 5,980 6,695 5,649 5,389

A failure that results in the inability for the bus to continue in revenue service NA

V 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

17,361 16,700 14,016 12,029 12,657

Failure of any components of functions that have the potential to impact safety, reliability, or customer service.

15,550 13,998 14,736 11,915 16,182

W 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

9,521 9509 8,910 7,922 7,860

We track stalls while a bus is in revenue service as this is the most relevant statistic for our operations.

NA

X 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5,830 6,205 5,763 6,212 6,354

Service interruption due to material malfunction consisting of crack, displacement, misalignment, and/or fatigue.

NA

Y 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100

Any failure that requires removing bus from service. NA

Z 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5,528 5,278 7,083 7,629 6,743

Use National Transit Database reporting definitions for both major mechanical failures and other mechanical failures.

NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure AA 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

8,045 6,457 6,261 7,143 7,203

Any mechanical failure resulting in a loss of revenue service >14 minutes or requiring a coach change on road.

NA

BB 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NP NP NP NP NP

Any defect that prevents the safe operation of the bus because of a mechanical defect or agency policy

NA

CC 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

12,500 10,500 9,150 8,200 8,000

NR NA

DD 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

NR NA

EE 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

27,780 29,920 29,168 27,268 25,474

Any failure occurring on the road that results in lost service. 33,345 34,049 33,462 35,194 25,360

FF 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

NR NR NR NR NR

All mechanical failures such as Air Systems, Brakes, Engines, Front & Rear Doors, Heaters, Mirrors & Wipers, Seat, Windows & Dest. Signs, Steering, Suspension, Tires, Trans & Driveline, Wheelchair Lifts.

NA


September 9, 2013



Agency Year




mechanical failure GG 2012

2011 2010 2009 2008

2,473 2,219 2,375 2,715 3,095

Use NTD definition of major and ‘other’ failures NA

HH 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3,221 2,882 2,479 2,172 1,832

When a road call from the driver causes a bus to be replaced in service with another bus.

NA

II 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

5,246 4,979 5,032 4,084 3,708

Any engine, transmission and other mechanical system failure that precludes the safe and reliable operation of the bus.

NA

JJ 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

3,841 3,654 3,940 3,798 2,975

Data is based on Mean Miles Between Delay. In this case, mechanical failure is defined as a mechanical failure that results in a service delay.

NA

KK 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

7,890 6,976 6,181 5,938 6,043

Any failure, safety related or otherwise that requires the bus to be either immediately removed from service or changed over later in route

108,458 50,302 43,424 48,534 47,307

LL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008

4,517 3,332 3,677 3,913 3,931

A mechanical failure is a roadcall that involves a failure of the bus while in customer service. Roadcalls which are not mechanical in nature, such as accidents or vandalism are not calculated in the MDBF.

NA


September 9, 2013



TABLE D15. Other Factor and Challenges Affecting Spare Ratios, to Include: Financial Challenges (including past or planned significant service reductions/expansions; staffing reductions, etc.)

Agency

Have Financial Challenges

impacted spare ratio? If so, Describe

A No NA Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels

Reduced dollars available for needed training Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles .(and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet) Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement Reduced funds available for state of good repair State’s limited or slow response to requests

B Yes Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement C No NA Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels

Reduced dollars available for needed training Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles .(and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet) Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement

D No NA E No NA F No NA G No NA H Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels

Reduced dollars available for needed training Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement Reduced funds available for state of good repair

I Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles .(and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet) Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement

J Yes Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement Reduced funds available for state of good repair Increased costs on the back of employees - no pay raises for 3 years and increased contributions towards benefits


September 9, 2013



Agency



(pension & health). Condition standard has been lowered and deferred maintenance on the rise. K No NA L No NA M No NA N No NA O Yes Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet)

Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement P No Q Yes Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet) R Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels.

Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement

S Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair

T Yes Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet) U No V Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels.

Reduced dollars available for needed training Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair

W Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement.

X Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Modifications of service delivery methods that require a rapid change in vehicle configuration, quantities, and/or amenities beyond team's ability to modify in the field.


September 9, 2013



Agency



Y Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Reduced dollars available for needed training Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair

Z Yes Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair

AA Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Reduced dollars available for needed training Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair

BB Yes Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced maintenance staffing levels.

CC Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Transit service reductions resulting in unused vehicles (and expansion of the spare vehicle fleet). Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement.

DD Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. On-going funding challenges have changed service levels, spare ratios and staffing levels.

EE No FF No

Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels. Reduced dollars available for needed training Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Reduced funds available for state of good repair


September 9, 2013



Agency



GG No HH No II Yes Reduced maintenance staffing levels.

Reduced capital dollars available for needed bus replacement. Since appropriate funding for new bus purchases is not always in the budget, we are forced to keep buses past their 12-year useful life. These older buses have a lower MDBF and are out of service more often. Therefore, this affects the spare factor.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D16. Compliance with FTA Spare Ratio Guidelines (including FTA response to non-compliance)

Agency

Have you exceeded FTA 20% guideline in past 5 years? FTA Response

A No NA B No NA C Yes We are small enough to not hit the FTA requirement; however we are attempting to meet the 20% number for both systems we operate. D Yes Use of an annual conditional waiver. We have been tirelessly working to change the federal spare ratio requirements for the past 4

years. We have assembled an excellent working professional team and we have APTA approval. We have discussed all elements of the proposed recommendations with the FTA. We continue to wait for FTA acknowledgement and additional meetings to move our solid recommendations forward. This rule must change or continue to experience erosion and inefficiencies in public transit operations.

E Yes We were required to submit an action plan & we did. F No NA G Yes when we are in the process of transition with receiving new buses and replacing old buses. During the transition our numbers will

exceed 20% for a very limited time frame. H No NA I Yes Conditional waiver because of MOU with city to evacuate during Hurricane seasons. Allowed to maintain a contingency fleet. J Yes NR K No NA L Yes FTA provided an exemption that expires this fiscal federal year. M No NA N No NA O No NA P No NA Q Yes Required an action plan to reduce vehicle count and to improve the spare ratio. R Yes Requirement to develop an action plan to meet 20% threshold. S Yes Until clarification was received from the FTA in 2012, COTA would round up to the next complete bus for the spare ratio. COTA now,

rounds down to stay below the 20% level. T Yes Action plan U Yes Waiver with a requirement to develop an action plan to meet 20% V Yes The FTA required OCTA to develop an action plan to meet the 20% threshold. W No NA X No NA


September 9, 2013



Agency

Have you exceeded FTA 20% guideline in past 5 years? FTA Response

Y No NA Z Yes Have received no response to notices sent in previous years.

AA Yes We were required to develop and implement an action plan. BB No NA CC Yes Required to develop action plan to meet the 20% DD Yes NA EE Yes Requirement to develop an action plan to meet 20% threshold. FF No NA GG Yes Communication between FTA and our agency has occured to resolve the issue of exceeding the spare ratio threshold. HH No NA II No NA JJ No NA

KK No NA LL No NA


September 9, 2013



TABLE D 17. Spare Fleet Adequacy and Agency Approaches to Reducing Spare Ratios

Agency

Is your spare ratio sufficient to meet your needs?

If no, why not? Top3 reasons.

Able to reduce Spare Ratio in past 5 years?

If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe

A Yes No No B No Cannot keep

buses in for PM Inspections Cannot create a refurbishment program due to lack of spares With additional ITS in buses, keeping up creates issues in itself

No NR

C No Difficult to make morning pull out. Pressure on shop to make pull out.

Yes Newer vehicles and fleet standardization reduced spares ratio from ~35% to under 20%

No

D No Advanced technologies; Sub-fleets Maintainability

No Yes

E Yes Yes Retired buses, added services

No

F Yes No No G No Extend PM

intervals. reduces available repair time;

No No


September 9, 2013



Agency





long term major repairs reduce spare bus numbers.

H No special use mini fleets can influence ratio budget constraints limiting number of staff more vehicle emissions, technologies, and added support systems to keep repaired

No No

I Yes No No

J No Base FTA definition does not take into account repairs done at main UZA for non-UZA properties. Additional Time to repair vehicles due to technology, qualified techs etc.. difficulty in parts supply

No. Yes. During service cuts we, at one point, exceeded the 20% limit. We were able to reduce the fleet size and come within compliance by reducing teh fleet size only through a major replacement (purchase) in 2012/13


September 9, 2013



Agency





K Yes No No No Unreliability of

Gasoline Hybrid Fleet. Lacking back-up CNG fueling site. Lack of labor resource.

No Yes. Alternative Fuels is the biggest contributor to need of more coaches, thus trying to diversify and maintain a solid path with CNG as a reliable choice. Also embraced long-term asset management strategy.

L No Communication System Fareboxes Outdated 2007 & 2010 Engine Platforms

No No

M No Too many inoperable spares. Mixed fleet of transit and express buses

No No

N Yes NA Yes Aggressive PM program

No

O No NR No No P Yes NA Yes Bus retirement

into contingency fleet (21% to 20%). Sale of buses to

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe reduce the over-all number of buses in the fleet due to reduced service (maintaining 19%-20%)

Q Yes NA Yes Service cuts, and retired vehicles and reduced fleet size.

No

R No Additional training bus needs. occasional fleet defects and OEM Servicing

No No

S No Sub-fleets Staff levels for decommission NA

Yes Coach replacement in smaller batches allowing for smaller decommissioning batches. Hard work and close supervision to adequately manage small sub-fleet spares and assistance from division-to-division

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe resource sharing.

T Yes No No U Yes Yes We leased

vehicles to other agencies. - We will be using spares for new types of services such as the upcoming limited-stop routes (basically BRT).

No

V Yes Yes Annual bus purchases, a ten year contract with a single supplier that incorporates minimal specification changes from year to year to reduce training requirements and spare parts issues.

No

W Yes Yes Fleet/Service reductions

No

X Yes Yes Just reduce it and make it work. We fluctuate

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe between 17 and 20 %. Say no to some special requests or needs or defer to a better time.

Y Yes No No Z No Bus

technologies are more complex and maintenance intensive; Maintenance staffing and training; Average age of fleet and duty cycle

Yes When our Transit Development Plan reduced service, it increased our spare ratio, with less vehicles needed for revenue service. We developed and implemented an action plan to reduce the spare ratio back to 20%.

No

AA Yes Yes Improved Maintenance

No

BB No Advanced vehicle technology; technician to bus ratio too high; lack of funding

Yes Vehicles that are fully depreciated have been placed into a contingency fleet

No

CC Yes Yes Aging 30' & 40' Yes. Modified technicians shift structure.


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe buses have finally been replaced allowing for retirement program of old buses to be implemented

DD No Demands for special service, bus retrofits, advanced tech equipment installation; Accelerated structural problems due to bus design, use of freeze protection chemicals on streets; advanced technology equipment requires higher level of maintenance knowledge and added maintenance requirements.

No No

EE Yes Yes Spare Ratio lowered from 20% to 16%

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe based on a thorough analysis of our historical operating performance.

FF No Advanced Propulsion Technologies; Multiple fleet Mix to support service designs; Advanced Technologies, i.e. CAD, AVL, GPS, Customer Info Sign, etc.

No No

GG Yes Yes The significant reduction of the average age of our fleet allowed for a significant increase in reliability thus allowing us to lower our spare ratio from 23% to 17%.

No

HH Yes Yes 1. Improved vehicle reliability and availability 2. Decreased average fleet

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe age. 3. Commitment to leaner fleet.

II Yes No No JJ Yes No No

KK Yes Yes The overall action that we’ve taken to reduce our spare ratio is to allocate different ratios to different fleet types. Also, we increase or decrease assigned buses based on the number of buses undergoing a shop overhaul at each depot. Additional buses are assigned to depots that have more buses in the shop program, and buses are taken away from depots that have fewer

No


September 9, 2013



Agency




If so, How? Actions taken. Actions taken that didn’t work? Describe buses in the shop program. As stated in the response to question 8, the spare factors for each depot are revised quarterly so that each depot is assigned the appropriate number of buses.


September 9, 2013



TABLE D 18. Steps Taken and Solutions Implemented to Reduce Spare Ratios

Agency

Is a 20% Spare Ratio realistic for

your agency? If not, why not?

Any changes in practice policy and/or resources you’d like to see toward improving ability to reduce spare

ratio? A Yes I do not think it practical to reduce the ratio. B No With only 29 Buses and 19 Demand Response buses, that is

2.9 and 1.9 respectively; to keep up with required PMs and have spares, more buses are needed to achieve this goal.

Local sources of funding to assist with fleet replacement and expansion.

C No. We are too small and underfunded to get by with 20% Ability to replace vehicles at the end of their useful life as opposed to keeping vehicles until replacement funding is found.

D No Use of an annual conditional waiver. We have been tirelessly working to change the federal spare ratio requirements for the past 4 years. We have assembled an excellent working professional team and we have APTA approval. We have discussed all elements of the proposed recommendations with the FTA. We continue to wait for FTA acknowledgement and additional meetings to move our solid recommendations forward. This rule must change or continue to experience erosion and inefficiencies in public transit operations.

There are advanced recommendations already proposed. Introduction and Purpose The Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Spare Ratio policy has been in place since approximately 1964, leaving this rule without a major review in over 45 years. During this time period, the technological and operational characteristics of public transit buses, on which this rule was originally developed, have evolved drastically. Over the past three years APTA has reviewed transit requirements and is proposing a change to the 20% Spare Ratio Rule given today’s advanced technological environment. Background Public transit has evolved substantially over the last 4 decades, particularly in terms of fuel types and propulsion systems, vehicle lengths, vehicle configurations, intelligent transportation systems and the advent of new customer amenities on board the bus. Taken together, these changes have produced a much more technologically complex transit bus which exponentially increases the requirements for maintenance, asset management and challenges workforce training and


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? development in order to meet daily operational requirements. Summary of Impacts The increased diversity in fleet mix has greatly impacted the ability of transit agencies to operate within the 20% limit and still provide outstanding (revenue) services to our customers. Today’s fleets range in size (30 foot to 60+ foot), in layouts (including single, dual and triple doors), branding options such as BRT and even Double Decker buses. Each style of bus requires modifications to our maintenance and operational programs and thus more training to our workforce. The different buses are usually not interchangeable on the various routes operated by our systems, therefore requiring changes to asset management plans. The introduction of new fuel/energy technologies also impacts the ability to operate within the 20% (maximum) ratio policy. These technologies require longer repair and preventative maintenance downtimes, longer lead times for specialized parts and more experienced training for technicians in addition to changes in service schedules. Maintenance practices for advanced technology systems demonstrate that vehicle service and repair procedures are extended due the nature of these highly complicated systems. They further require a much higher level of technical education, proficiency and expertise, particularly in the diagnostic procedures and electronic systems repair. Examples of these technologies are Compressed Natural Gas, Liquefied Natural Gas, Electric Hybrid Technologies, Hydrogen Fuel Cells and Electric Battery powered propulsion systems. These environmentally sensitive technologies are extremely complicated and require non-traditional repair parts and highly skilled labor forces to maintain and repair these vehicles. The implementation of advanced electronic technologies that improve our customer service performance greatly impacts the ability to operate within the 20% limit. These technologies may include on-board Wi-Fi, advanced


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? electronics in fare media, vehicle location technology (smart bus systems), special ADA equipment and even emission reduction control systems that continue to evolve in response to air quality mandates and changing service requirements. The service mixes and interchangeability limitations between sub-fleets impact transit systems in meeting daily pullout requirements. When the rule was written most transit properties operated the same type of transit bus. Now we have diverse mixed fleets, even buses that are branded differently from the regular services like BRT, shuttle services, downtown-circulators, etc., which greatly impacts the ability to ensure the right bus is available for the prescribed service all the while meeting customer and system requirements, including the 20% rule. The introduction of special Customer Service Transit Initiatives, such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service lines, creates a new specific set of operational demands that greatly exacerbates the spare ratio problem of the transit system. These buses are painted and branded differently from the standard bus fleet. BRT programs, effectively create a mini-sub-fleet within a transit property, creating a unique inventory with its own dedicated spare buses. This specialty fleet of buses can no longer be deployed into traditional transit service routes and are exclusively used for rapid transit service lines which greatly enhance customer ridership initiatives. Conclusion The evolution of these changes to the business of public transit have challenged maintenance programs to schedule and account for sufficient time to maintain, service, and fuel their fleets, and all sub-fleets within an eight (8) hour (system average) window to ensure daily revenue service is met. The specialized training and theory of our workforce is extensive and takes time and resources to develop and deliver. As our aging workforce is replaced, the hiring of new journey technicians that comprehend the different advanced technologies is extremely


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? difficult. Once hired and trained, we then face technician retention problems. Through our US industry survey and exhaustive study, we have concluded that a change in the spare ratio rule is necessary and will greatly relieve the pressures on transit systems to meet our service efficiencies and requirements. The ability to maintain the appropriate number of spare buses as determined and documented by each agency will give us the time to maintain and keep them in safe revenue service. It will provide the necessary time to employ and train our technicians and even transit bus operators. It will further provide us with the ability and opportunity to create an appropriate asset management plan and maintain our assets in a state of good repair. Following is the summary of recommendations. 1. Fewer Than 50 Buses a. No change to the current policy b. No established maximum spare ratio c. No spare bus reporting required 2. 50 To 250 Buses a. No established maximum spare ratio b. Annual Spare Bus Declaration Report c. No report required if the spare ratio is less than 25% d. 25% spare ratio 3. More Than 250 Buses a. 25% Spare ratio for transit vehicles 35-feet in length and longer b. If exceed 25%, will need to submit a Bus Fleet Management Plan c. Small bus and non-diesel powered will be exempted from a spare ratio concerning the number of buses to be included in the calculation of the spare ratio, other exemptions and recommendations include: Nine-month period for old/new transition review; Clarification of policy exemption for demand-response vehicles and trolley buses; Buses less than 35 feet in length would be excluded when calculating the spare ratio; Buses with non-diesel propulsion systems would be excluded when calculating the spare ratio; buses being replaced by newly-procured buses would be excluded for a defined period of time when calculating the spare bus ratio; demand-responsive fleets, regardless of equipment used or fleet size, would be excluded


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? when calculating the spare bus ratio; trolley bus fleets (powered by overhead electric catenary system) would be excluded when calculating the spare bus ratio; seasonal fleets would be excluded when calculating the spare bus ratio. Specific fixed-route subfleets would be excluded when calculating the fleet-wide spare ratio, such as experimental vehicles being tested in revenue service; fleets designated as having manufacturer fleet defects would be excluded when calculating the spare bus ratio; buses operating in revenue service that have reached the end of their federally-defined minimum useful life would be excluded when calculating the spare ratio; buses not needed as a result of service cuts (for financial reasons) would be excluded when calculating the spare ratio, if those vehicles would be necessary to restore service when financial conditions improve. The Annual Spare Bus Declaration Report would consist of a current and projected inventory of buses in the agency fleet, by sub-fleet, and a high-level description of the service and maintenance demands of each fleet/subfleet. The Bus Fleet Management Plan would be a more extensive document intended to document and justify the fleet’s peak and spare vehicle levels, to be evaluated by the FTA for compliance, reasonableness of application, and operational efficiencies. The 25% spare ratio change would be a reasonable level to recommend with potential flexibility beyond this percentage as evaluated. The service profiles and interchangeability considerations would be important elements to include in the annual report by documenting the spare ratio requirements with basis. There may be a need for more flexibility in spare ratios to meet unique operational needs and local conditions.

E Yes We will soon be receiving new 40-foot buses that will allow us to retire the older buses that break down more often.

F Yes With a fleet this small the 20% is a very good ratio.


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? G No New Exhaust tech. now requires more time and routine

service, new bus replacements funding is not able provide replacements so we are operating old buses longer and with us the oldest buses are still operating 60% of our scheduled daily work.

More employees to perform maintenance, improved and sustained funding to provide replacement buses within the 12 year cycle.

H No. With added vehicle support system such as security, vehicle location systems, radio system, passenger counting systems, fare collection systems, etc, make it difficult to maintain and operate within the 20% spare ratio.

I don't think that additional resources would improve the spare ratio. I believe with specialized use fleets and all the new emissions and technologies it will create the opposite in needing an increase of spare ratios.

I Yes Parts availability and mechanical know-how J No Reduced fleet size, more mile generated, lack of qualified

technicians, corrosion problems, need for vehicle repairs by smaller garages, these all represent more vehicles for bigger repairs.

The definition for small properties (50 or <) should be expanded to mid-sized properties serving non-UZA properties. In addition, todays fleet technology must be taken into consideration.

K No Cannot get sufficient funding to support the spare ratio Improved training for maintenace staff and resources to do so. L No. Need to improve reliability of gasoline hbyrid fleet

(although mfg is bankrupt), need redundant support for CNG, and need to increase manpower (operating costs).

Stabilize alt fuels, advanced technologies (gasoline hybrids) and flat / predictable bus replacement strategy. Increased commonality in buses, bus technologies and minimize uncommonality between sites. Maintain all staffing positions as "filled", Mechanic, Supervisors, etc. Minimize need of continuous practice of having a contingency fleet.

M No Too often we struggle to make pullout due to technology issues; having an extra 3% spares would help keep us from missing pull on occasion.

FTA policy to limit at 20% should change to 23%.

N No Difficult to maintain maintenance requirements. Keeping buses no longer than 12 years/500,000 miles O Yes Proactive maintenance P No We run a Trolley system. If the system goes down or we

have to take it down for construction 20% will not cover it. NR


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? Q Yes We are able to meet the 20% spare ratio and operate with a

slightly smaller spare ratio. Vehicle reliability is the key factor to maintain buses in service therefore minimize the need for a larger spare ratio. Since Samtrans does not have specialty vehicles for specific routes, there is no urgency to meet pull-out due to limited buses. Our operating principle is to have as much interchangeability to allow flexibility in order to meet service demands.

R No Each service type has its own unique operating characteristics, maintenance demands, and, in many case, specialized vehicle and accessory requirements. Consequently, to fully meet the needs of the range of service types offered by the RTC, the spare ratio must be sufficient within the subfleet(s) of vehicles that support each service type. All buses in the entire fleet are not necessarily interchangeable in their ability to support all service types.

Spare ratio calculated by sub-fleet type.

S Yes NR T No If applied to sub-fleets, then yes. Apply spare ratio to sub-fleets U Is 20% SR

realistic for your agency?

If not, why not Changes in practice policy add resource you’d like to see toward improving ability to reduce spare ratio.

V No Issues with engine manufacturers, increased amount of time to maintain high tech systems, lower staffing levels

Raise the required 20% Spare Ratio, and increase Federal funding.

W Yes NR X Yes At the moment, I do not believe it possible to achieve

substantive reductions in the current spares ratio. On a daily basis, dispatch needs are being met with under five spare buses, on extremely cold days when the number of buses unavailable for service exceeds approximately 40 buses, up to five runs must be cancelled or dispatched late on well serviced routes.


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? Y No Training requirements increase with technology

advancement reducing workforce skill-set. Training vehicles to be excluded in active quantity.

Z Yes Reduce average age of fleet from 11 years to 8 years would go a long way.

AA Yes 1. Allow for spare ratios calculated at the sub fleet level defined by different vehicle configurations or applications; 2. Allow for spare ratio fluctuations due to changes in service delivery quantities and requirements during useful life of vehicles in fleet; 3. Allow for spare ratio realignment through vehicle replacement plans; and, 4. Respond to authority requests for spare ratio deviations.

BB No Bus technologies, increased requirements for new pm and repair procedures on an increasingly technical vehicle. Reduced maintenance staffing. Average age of fleet and duty cycle. Aged facilities not as accessible for our growing Articulated fleets.

Improved/upgraded facilities. Increased manpower. Technology training. The ability to get the fleet to a six year average age of fleet.

CC No More and more specific service types demanding specific types of buses.

NR

DD No Due to the amount of rail diversions resulting in shuttles the maintenance needs have increased.

Additional staffing would assist in reducing the OOS time.

EE No With low numbers of technicians, harsh winters and increasing maintenance challenges.

There need to be a balance between investing and replacing buses and in better fully staffed facilities

FF No Demands for special service, bus retrofits, advanced tech equipment installation; Accelerated structural problems due to bus design, use of freeze protection chemicals on streets; advanced technology equipment requires higher level of maintenance knowledge and added maintenance requirements.

Uniform fleet of buses. Added qualified mechanics to work on buses with advanced technologies.

GG No (should We believe 16% is a realistic spare ratio for our fleet based Workforce productivity, work planning, improved


September 9, 2013



Agency




ratio? be less) on our analysis. We monitor fleet availability on a daily

basis and will continue to monitor going forward. maintenance diagnostics, implementation of standard times, annual employee expectations, etc.

HH No Advanced Propulsion Technologies; Multiple fleet Mix to support service designs; Advanced Technologies, i.e. CAD, AVL, GPS, Customer Info Sign, etc.

Changes to reduce our current spare ratio can include the impacts of facility capacity, staff levels, overtime, comp time, internal job functions vs. external, staff productivity, inventory levels, inventory cycle counts, vehicle in service time, vehicle technical complexities, cleaning cycles, PM cycles and planned vs. unplanned maintenance etc.

II Yes As our average fleet age will start to rise again, our goal is to maintain the actual fleet spare ratio of 17%. Increasing the productivity of our staff and the efficiency of our operations and PM is currently the avenue taken.

JJ No. The 20% spare ratio is currently viewed as being too large. We believe in minimum spare ratio with which to cost affectively operate the fleet.

1. Steady state funding for timely bus replacement and overhaul. 2. Improved vehicle performance and reliability 3. Increased training resources.

KK Yes Currently using existing resources to complete a focused review of bus availability and reliability to investigate opportunities to improve fleet availability and reliability.

LL Yes Changes in the CBA that would provide for part time maintenance staff or swing shifts

MM No Specialty fleets operate with a 20% spare factor, but overall we operate with a baseline spare factor of 15%.

As stated above, the spare ratio already takes into account many factors. Any improvement in fleet reliability, increase in maintenance skill set resources, or change in duty cycle would allow NYCT to have a lower spare ratio. Also, increase in funding for new bus purchases would allow us to reduce our spare ratio since newer buses are more reliable than buses at the end of their useful life.


September 9, 2013



END OF APPENDIX D


September 9, 2013

tcrp project j-7, synthesis topic sa-32 system-specific...

Documents