System-Specific Spare Bus Ratios Update (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

SYSTEM-SPECIFIC SPARE BUS RATIO UPDATE Since 1995, when TCRP Synthesis 11: System-Specific Spare Bus Ratios was published, signifi- cant changes have occurred in the transit industry. The purpose of this synthesis is to update the findings of TCRP Synthesis 11, providing guidance to transit agencies on how various factors may affect optimal fleet size. It describes efforts agencies have employed to achieve the optimal fleet size and effective spare ratios and document successful practices in the United States and Canada. To develop this synthesis, the authors conducted an extensive TRIS literature search and document review, supported by readily available Internet search engines; a survey of selected transit agencies; and follow-up interviews with four case example agencies to gather infor- mation on the state of practice related to spare bus fleet ratios and optimal bus fleet sizing, including challenges, lessons learned, and gaps in information. FTA’s policy on bus spare ratios is found in FTA Circular 9030.1C, Urbanized Area Formula Program: Grant Application Instructions, chapter V, paragraph 9.a.5. It states that the “number of spare buses in the active fleet for grantees operating 50 or more revenue vehicles should not exceed 20 percent of the number of vehicles operated in maximum service.” FTA’s policy also states that “the basis for determining a reasonable spare bus ratio takes local circumstances into account,” a further indication of some flexibility with regard to the maximum number of spare buses allowed by FTA. Owing to the possibility that extra buses may exist on property tempo- rarily as new buses enter the fleet piecemeal and older buses are not yet retired, the Circular also states that “spare ratios will be taken into account in the review of projects proposed to replace, rebuild, or add vehicles.” The synthesis found that FTA does grant some degree of latitude and considers local conditions when evaluating bus spares, particularly in their consideration of action plans required of grantees that have exceeded the 20% threshold. In such plans, grantees provide FTA with the approach they intend to take over a period of time to bring their spare ratio back to an acceptable level. In 2010, APTA, on behalf of its member transit agencies, approached the FTA requesting consideration of changes to the FTA’s recommended spare bus ratio guidelines. This initiated an on-going dialogue between APTA and the FTA, and though no changes to FTA guide- lines have been made so far, this exchange reflects the critical importance of the spare ratio issue to both the transit industry and the federal government. Nevertheless, the TRIS search underscored how little research the topic has generated over the last 25 years—a period that has experienced rapid change in the operation and maintenance of transit bus fleets and the vehicles themselves—producing only eight documents published between 1988 and 2012. In general, the literature recognizes the desirability of limiting the number of spare buses in a fleet to the “proper” number that adequately balances and supports both the agency’s peak transit service needs and its bus maintenance requirements. The literature also recog- nizes the high cost of carrying more spare buses in the fleet than necessary, and points out that a larger than necessary spare ratio may be symptomatic of other issues, including fleet and service characteristics, insufficient maintenance training and staffing, and external operating and service factors. SUMMARY

2 A survey questionnaire was developed for this synthesis focusing on the various attributes that drive spare bus needs and fleet spare ratios. It also gathered information on actions that agencies have implemented in their attempts to reduce fleet spare ratios, and their results. A core sample of 48 U.S. and Canadian agencies representing a broad cross section of transit systems operating buses was developed, and the goal of 38 completed surveys (a 79% response rate) was achieved. The core sample was based on (1) geographic/climatic distribu- tion; (2) bus fleet size; (3) past participation in the 1995’s TCRP Synthesis 11: System-Specific Spare Bus Ratios; and (4) known prior interest in the topic. After analyzing the surveys, consulting with the topic panel, and assessing the results of the literature review, the authors interviewed representatives from four case example agen- cies for more in-depth information and insights. Interviews were conducted by telephone with representatives of: • Chicago Transit Authority • Denver Regional Transit District • Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority • City of Winnipeg (Manitoba) Transit Department. Challenges in managing bus fleets and spare ratios were identified in both the survey and case examples—many, though not all, rooted in an agency’s financial constraints. Those who identified such challenges listed reduced capital dollars for needed bus replacement; reduced maintenance staffing; and transit service reductions (resulting in unused vehicles) as major impacts. Among suggestions for addressing such challenges were sustainable funding for the timely replacement, rehabilitation, and overhaul of aging, high-mileage buses; improved vehi- cle performance and reliability; increased staffing and training resources; and facility upgrades.