Partnerships Between Transit Agencies and Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) (2019)

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.

89 1. Microtransit services are distinct from TNCs, though some companies that provide TNC service also oper- ate microtransit services. Microtransit is defined by the FTA as “IT-enabled, private multi-passenger trans- portation services that serve passengers using dynamically generated routes, and may expect passengers to make their way to and from common pick-up or drop-off points.” Microtransit typically uses larger vehicles than TNCs, ranging from large SUVs to vans to shuttle buses. This report does not include consideration of partnerships between transit agencies and microtransit services. TCRP Research Report 196: Private Transit: Existing Services and Emerging Directions covers these partnerships. 2. Microtransit services are distinct from TNCs, though some companies who provide TNC service also operate microtransit services. Microtransit is defined by TCRP Research Report 196 as “private services that operate passenger vans or small cutaways and develop routes and stops in response to customer input and demand, generally with tech-enabled booking and payment.” This report does not include consider- ation of partnerships between transit agencies and microtransit services. TCRP Research Report 196 covers these partnerships. 3. FTA, “Shared Mobility FAQs: Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Requirements,” available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs-controlled-substance-and- alcohol-testing-requirements. 4. FTA, “Shared Mobility FAQs: Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Requirements,” available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs-controlled-substance-and- alcohol-testing-requirements. 5. FTA, “Shared Mobility FAQs: Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Requirements,” available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs-controlled-substance-and- alcohol-testing-requirements. 6. FTA, “Shared Mobility FAQs: Controlled Substance and Alcohol Testing Requirements,” available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs-controlled-substance-and- alcohol-testing-requirements. 7. TRB, “TCRP J-11/Task 26: Collaborations and Partnerships Between Public Transportation and Transportation Network Companies (TNCs),” available online at http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp? ProjectID=4297. 8. TCRP Research Report 196 notes that not all microtransit is necessarily IT-enabled. Some privately operated jitneys, small shuttles operated by employers, and commercial/residential shuttles may be considered micro- transit without adopting smartphone-based dispatch or fare payment. TCRP Research Report 196 offers the broader definition of microtransit as the following: “At its most broad, almost any flexible service in the space between taxis/TNCs and fixed-route transit, regardless of the mix of public or private ownership or operation.” However, the report states, “as with the on-demand pooled [TNC] services, most microtransit services require a credit card for payment and a smartphone for a arranging a ride.” 9. California Public Utilities Commission, “Transportation Network Companies,” available at http://www. cpuc.ca.gov/General.aspx?id=787. 10. https://usdot.uservoice.com/forums/569902-shared-mobility-online-dialogue-forum-is-now-clos/filters/top 11. Third-party providers in this context refer to a nontransit agency or TNC partner also engaged in the pilot. Common examples are taxi companies or other mobility service providers that accept cash, dial-in trip requests, and have accommodations for wheelchair accessibility. 12. https://www.metro.net/projects/mod/ 13. Waite, Jocelyn. “Legal Considerations in Relationships Between Transit Agencies and Ridesourcing Service Providers.” p. 30. Available online at https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25109/legal-considerations-in- relationships-between-transit-agencies-and-ridesourcing-service-providers. Endnotes

90 Partnerships Between Transit Agencies and Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) 14. See Prevention of Alcohol Misuse and Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations: Final Rule, 66 Fed. Reg. 41,996, 41,999, Aug. 9, 2001, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2001-08-09/pdf/01-19234.pdf, which states, “FTA policy continues to recognize the practical difficulty of administering a drug and alcohol testing program to taxi companies that only incidentally provide transit service. Therefore, the drug and alcohol testing rules apply when the transit provider enters into a contract with one or more entities to provide taxi service. The rules do not apply when the patron (using subsidized vouchers) selects the taxi company that provides the transit service.” 15. The data shared by each partner is provided in LAVTA RFP No. 2017-15, Consulting Services to Evaluate Go Dublin Program. Available online at http://www.wheelsbus.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/RFQ-RFP- for-Go-Dublin-Consulting-Work-w-HB-edits.pdf. 16. http://get.lyft.com/mbta/ and https://www.uber.com/info/mbta/ 17. Repository & Open Space Access Portal. “MOD Sandbox Demonstrations Independent Evaluation (IE) Pierce Transit Limited Access Connections Evaluation Plan.” Available online at https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/ view/dot/36386 18. Decision 13-09-045 or “Decision Adopting Rules and Regulations to Protect Safety While Allowing New Entrants to the Transportation Industry” is also known as the “TNC Decision” and refers to the annual reporting requirements for TNCs established by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in September 2013. In its “Petition to Modify” D. 13-09-045, Uber (doing business as “Raiser”) asks the CPUC in particular to “vacate data production request (j), which requests detailed, individual trip and zip-code level information, and strike the language in data production request (k), which asks TNCs to produce information about drivers’ insurance compensation. More information is available from the CPUC here: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/ PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M143/K956/143956944.PDF 19. These state and local laws may also be referred to as “FOIA laws,” although FOIA—the Freedom of Information Act—is originally a federal law applying to agencies of the federal government. FOIA gives the public the right to request access to certain records held by federal agencies. The federal government requires open meetings as well for certain government agencies to increase agency accountability through the government in the Sunshine Act. 20. California Streets and Highways Code, Division 17: Toll Facilities and Related Matters, Chapter 8. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=SHC&division=17.&title= &part=&chapter=8.&article= 21. Available online at https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01376 22. TCRP Legal Research Digest 52: Legal Considerations in Evaluating Relationships Between Transit Agencies and Ridesourcing Service Providers, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, June 2018, p. 24. 23. See the GRTC case study. This is a novel solution. After reading the FTA’s guidance issued in December 2016, GRTC was so focused on meeting ADA as well as Title VI requirements for its pilot supplementing ADA para- transit that its RFP required a call center and transportation providers with accessible vehicles. The RFP fur- ther required respondents to meet ADA paratransit requirements even though the pilot service is a premium service and does not have to meet the same requirements as ADA paratransit. The transit agency negotiated contracts with two Reservation Network Companies (RNCs) that have arrangements with a network of transportation providers, including providers with accessible vehicles. Eligible customers can book trips via telephone, website, or smartphone app for a same-day trip as well as an advance reservation trip. The issue of meeting equivalent response time is mitigated by the fact that trips must be requested at least two hours in advance. The providers must also offer origin-to-destination service, an ADA paratransit requirement, which means that drivers must assist customers to and from the vehicle when that level of assistance is needed. 24. TCRP Legal Research Digest 53: Legal Considerations in Relationships Between Transit Agencies and Ridesourcing Service Providers, p. 29 25. Ibid., p. 29 26. FTA Shared Mobility FAQs, “Does the taxicab exception apply to ridesourcing companies?” Accessed November 27, 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs- controlled-substance-and-alcohol-testing-requirements#Alcohol_6 27. https://www.lyft.com/safety 28. https://www.uber.com/legal/policies/zero-tolerance-policy/en/ 29. https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012925687-Driver-requirements 30. Ibid., p. 65 31. https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012925687 32. https://help.uber.com/h/6970e704-95ac-4ed3-9355-e779a86db366 33. https://www.uber.com/blog/new-york-city/tlc-license/ 34. National Council of Insurance Legislators. 2018. “Commercial Ride-Sharing.” https://www.naic.org/cipr_ topics/topic_commercial_ride_sharing.htm 35. TCRP Legal Research Digest 53: Legal Considerations in Relationships Between Transit Agencies and Ridesourcing Service Providers, p. 56. 36. The Center for Insurance Policy and Research, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, “Commercial Ride-Sharing,” 3/5/18 37. For example, see “Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility.” March 2013. Available at https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01376.