National Academies Press: OpenBook

Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan (2014)

Chapter: Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan

« Previous: Chapter 1 - Introduction
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 7
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 8
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 11
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 12
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 13
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 14
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 15
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 16
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 22
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 23
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 24
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 25
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 2 - Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22306.
×
Page 29

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.

7 This chapter walks through the steps involved in development of a Transit Asset Management Plan (TAMP). It describes the way in which a tool [such as the Transit Asset Prioritization Tool (TAPT), described in Chapter 3] can be used by transit agencies to support this process. Upon completion, readers will understand the necessary steps and required data to develop a TAMP. The process of developing and finalizing a TAMP is divided into 5 steps, as illustrated in Figure 2.1. For transit agencies with larger asset inventories it will likely be necessary to use software tools to support the process outlined above. TAPT, detailed in the next chapter, is designed to support prioritization of transit asset rehabilitation and replacement, and can be used to support development of the TAMP. Also, the FTA Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM) Lite can be used in conjunction with TAPT or independently from TAPT to support analysis of investment scenarios. Further, many transit agencies have implemented asset management systems and decision support tools that can be used to support TAMP development. The process described in this chapter is applicable whether a transit agency uses TAPT, TERM Lite, and/or other tools. However, where TAPT is used, the text notes steps where the reader should refer to Chapter 3 for more information. Further, many of the examples in this chapter are drawn from the transit agency pilots performed using TAPT with data from King County Metro, the Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD), and the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA). Note the examples are used strictly for illustrative purposes, and do not reflect actual investments or plans. Step One: Inventory Assets and Data The process of evaluating and prioritizing rehabilitation and replacement work starts with collecting data on existing transit capital assets. Described at the very basic level: first you need to know what you have (i.e., capital assets), and then you need to understand what you know about what you have (i.e., data). Data are needed to describe the transit agency’s asset inventory, and establish the condition of the inventory as an initial step in determining what replacement actions will be needed and when. While the scope of this guidance does not include detailed inventory and data collection methods, additional resources in Chapter 5 can be used to develop a more detailed data collection process. Step 1 includes 5 sub-steps. Upon completion you will have: • A comprehensive list of your transit agency’s capital assets, organized by subsystem type to facilitate data collection C H A P T E R 2 Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Step 5 Step 4 Step 3 Step 2 Step 1 Figure 2.1. 5-Step TAMP development process.

8 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan • A list, by asset, of the data your transit agency currently collects related to its assets • An agency-approved definition of SGR • A selected list of performance measures • A plan or protocol for gathering, storing, and updating the necessary data Step 1.1 Establish the Capital Asset Inventory Creation of a TAMP starts with quantifying, describing, and categorizing a transit agency’s existing capital assets. MAP-21 defines a capital asset as follows: (1) CAPITAL ASSETS—The term ‘capital asset’ includes equipment, rolling stock, infrastructure, and facilities for use in public transportation and owned or leased by a recipient or sub recipient of Federal Financial assistance under this chapter. To create your capital asset inventory, you may choose to reference an existing asset classification system as a guide. TERM Lite, an FTA tool available to help transit agencies assess their SGR needs, provides a classification system for organizing an asset inventory. For more information on TERM Lite refer to Chapter 5. The high level classification from TERM Lite is provided in Table 2.1. This table also summarizes basic inventory data that should be collected for each asset to support development of the TAMP. Note that regarding collection of cost data, ideally you should be able to calculate the full cost of asset acquisition, replacement, etc., including “soft” or indirect costs such as administrative and design costs. However, what is most important Note: If utilizing the TAPT you should refer to Chapter 3 for specific instructions on how to use the tool to help complete Steps 1 through 4. Return to this chapter for Step 5 (Develop Transit Asset Management Plan). Asset Type Sub-Category/Classification Inventory Data Vehicles Revenue Vehicles Quantity (unit), year built, unit cost, acquisition cost, replacement cost, cost year, useful life Non-Revenue Vehicles Equipment/Parts Guideway Elements Guideway Trackwork Speed Structures Bus Guideway Stations Rail Motor Bus Ferry Facilities Buildings Storage Yard Equipment Major Shops Central Control Systems Train Control Roadway Traffic Signals Electrification Communications Security Revenue Collection Utilities ITS Table 2.1. TERM Lite inventory structure.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 9 regarding tracking of data on costs is that you track costs in a consistent manner, which argues for tracking indirect costs only if you can do this consistently. The guidelines for the NTD reporting also can serve as a foundation for these efforts, providing a de facto minimum set of standards for describing a transit asset inventory. NTD requirements are summarized in Table 2.2. Note that there are additional requirements pertaining to vehicles not summarized in the table, and different requirements for rural transit agencies. For more information on the NTD, refer to Chapter 5. If you are using TAPT, you will have the flexibility to define the set of assets in your inventory, and the tool will list the data items required for quantifying the inventory. Table 2.3 provides an example of an inventory of buses. In TAPT these are detailed at the subfleet level, with data items defined consistently with the NTD reporting requirements. When creating your asset groups, you may want to consider whether there are groups of assets that may fall within the same asset category (e.g., same model and age), but whose operational characteristics may impact asset management and condition (e.g., some buses may be run on suburban and rural routes while others are servicing urban areas, or the annual mileage varies significantly). In these cases it may be worth creating sub-asset groups for each type to ensure that the replacement and rehabilitation recommendations are as accurate as possible. Asset Type Sub-Category/Classification Inventory Data Revenue Vehicle Inventory Vehicles in Operation Vehicle type, ownership, funding source, year of manufacture, year of rebuild, manufacturer, model number, fuel type, vehicle length, seating capacity, standing capacity Transit Way Mileage At-grade Miles of track; crossings Elevated Miles of track Open-cut Subway Stations and Maintenance Facilities Passenger Stations (Single and Multimodal) Number of stations for fixed route or fixed guideway Maintenance Facilities Type, ownership, and size Table 2.2. NTD asset module structure. Type ID Description # Age (yrs) Avg. Accumulated Mileage Articulated Bus-Artic 1 2000 NABI 118 12 330,900 Mall Bus-Mall 1 2000 Mall Shuttle 18 12 138,904 Bus-Mall 2 2001 Mall Shuttle 15 11 141,193 Bus-Mall 3 2002 Mall Shuttle 3 10 130,023 Intercity Bus-IC 1 1998 MCI 67 14 1,024,371 Bus-IC 2 2001 Neoplan 85 11 493,701 Bus-IC 3 2009 Blue Bird 6 3 55,487 Bus-IC 4 2010 MCI 6 2 84,036 40’ Transit Bus-Transit 1 2000 Orion V 199 12 482,740 Bus-Transit 2 2005 Gillig Diesel 42 7 295,447 Bus-Transit 3 2006 Gillig Hybrid 4 6 171,153 Bus-Transit 4 2006 Gillig Diesel 7 6 249,523 Bus-Transit 5 2008 Gillig Diesel 6 4 170,629 Bus-Transit 6 2008 Gillig Hybrid 5 4 115,508 Table 2.3. Capital asset inventory example—buses.

10 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Step 1.2 Establish Available Data Resources Once you have established the capital asset inventory, it is important to identify available sources of inventory and condition data for use in developing the TAMP. Specifying which data sources are used for each asset type will allow for consistent, future updates to the inventory. The specification of which data are required for the TAMP would ideally be determined consid- ering both best practices and the story it is that you are trying to tell—i.e., which performance measures you are going to track, report, and use in your decision-making and prioritization processes. However, for a transit agency that has an established data collection process, it makes sense to utilize existing resources to determine the way your conditions will be described. In performing this step, first determine what existing systems and tools are used in the transit agency to collect and store asset data. These systems may include: • Enterprise asset management (EAM) systems with detailed data on the inventory and day-to-day maintenance work; • Asset-specific management systems, such as vehicle, facility, and bridge management systems; • Operations and service planning systems, which may detail relevant fleet operations data; • Financial management systems with information on capital expenditures; • Electronic and/or paper inspection reports; • Analysis tools, such as TERM Lite; • Other databases and spreadsheets with inventory and condition data; and/or • Transit agency reports with asset details, such as capital plans or asset-specific analyses. Note that a transit agency may have many systems that have valuable data for use in developing a TAMP outside of its asset management systems. For instance, in many cases systems used for sup- porting operations may have useful information on delays or slow orders attributed to asset main- tenance or failures that are highly valuable in developing a TAMP. As another example, financial management systems with records of capital expenditures can be used to establish an inventory of capital assets and details on asset costs. However, it is important to assess data quality and currency when using data from other systems, or repurposing data collected for other purposes. Once the set of data resources has been established, you will establish basic information on each resource, and the types of data stored in, listed in, and/or managed using the resource. Table 2.4 lists the information required on each data resource. Item Notes Resource name System or database name. Owner Should specify owner of the system if the system is licensed by the transit agency, as well as the transit agency business owner. Asset types included Should specify level of detail of the inventory. Are individual assets listed, or are assets grouped by subfleet, line, or using other approaches. Are complex assets such as structures and facilities specified by system or subsystem? Update approach Should detail major system uses, and how frequently the data in the system are updated and used. Inventory data items List of inventory items. These are typically entered upon purchase/construction of an asset Condition data items List of data items that are updated as the asset ages, such as mileage and/or physical condition. Cost-related data items May include purchase cost, replacement cost, cost of actual or planned maintenance or rehabilitation actions, energy consumption, transit agency soft costs, and/or other fields. Operations-related data items May include information on the service for which assets are used (e.g., ridership by vehicle), data on delays and asset failures. Table 2.4. Information required on data resources.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 11 As a result of this step you may find that you do not have sufficient data on all of your assets to complete a full prioritization analysis. If this is the case, you can focus on those assets for which you do have the data, and separately input budget data for other assets. For example, you may focus your TAMP development on your vehicle assets, and handle your facility assets separately (if you do not have complete data), or as an addition at the end. In future years, if you do have the data, you can add the additional asset types to the analysis. Step 1.3 Define SGR Nominally the goal of capital asset rehabilitation and replacement is to maintain a transit agency’s assets in, or return them to, SGR. However, it is important to define what SGR means to the transit agency, and how the definition relates to transit agency goals and objectives. The process of defining the term “state of good repair” for your transit agency will allow you to set appropriate targets, benchmark progress over time, and provide direction and guidance in the prioritization of capital improvements and maintenance. As discussed in Chapter 1, MAP-21 requires FTA to create a definition for SGR, and establish performance measures that will support this definition for use by transit agencies in their TAMPs. This document will be updated once FTA has established its definition of the term. However, even given FTA’s definition, a transit agency should relate the definition to its goals and objectives, and may find that in so doing, it needs to clarify or extend the definition of SGR. At the 2010 State of Good Repair Roundtable, FTA presented three possible approaches to defining SGR. Each one combines a mix of approaches from the following categories: • Management activities and processes, • Asset conditions (as defined by transit agency, owner’s manual, industry standards), • System performance (as defined by transit agency), • Safety conditions (as defined by transit agency), • Quality (as reported by customers). FTA’s example definitions include: Option 1 A transit system is in a SGR when: • The transit agency possesses and maintains a comprehensive list of its capital assets and rolling stock. • The transit agency possesses an asset management plan, which is integrated into the management processes and practices of the transit agency. • A set percentage of the transit agency’s assets are within their particular useful life and remaining assets are performing at their designed function. Option 2 A transit system is in a SGR when: • System components are properly maintained or replaced in accordance with: – The owner’s approved O&M procedures and schedules; or – The original equipment manufacturer’s recommended criteria when owner’s procedures do not exist; or – Industry standards when the above are not available. • The system satisfactorily performs its intended design function.

12 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Option 3 A transit system is in a SGR if it exhibits the following characteristics: • Safety: Transit infrastructure and vehicles are well maintained and replaced before their condition deteriorates to the point of presenting a safety risk. • Quality Transit: Infrastructure and vehicles meet customer expectations for comfort and reliability. Source: Presentation by A. James at 2nd State of Good Repair Roundtable, 2010: “Addressing the Challenge: Formulating a Definition of SGR for a Federal Program.” Table 2.5 provides examples of SGR definitions used by six transit agencies. As reflected in the FTA approaches, the definitions in this set range from those based on a condition or performance assessment, to those based on maintenance or replacement activities. Once your transit agency has defined SGR, it is important to link it to your transit agency’s mission and goals. Table 2.6 shows how the MBTA has linked its mission and goals to SGR. The SGR program is specifically mentioned under the infrastructure goal. Also, certain SGR-related activities may relate to the service and financial goals. The ISO 55000 and IIMM asset management guidance documents cited in the Chapter 5 emphasize a top-down approach whereby desired service levels drive asset condition goals and objectives. Step 1.4 Select Performance Measures and Targets for Asset Management The performance measures and targets that you select for your TAMP will provide you with the baseline asset conditions, help you track your progress across program areas, predict how conditions are likely to change in the future, and provide a level to which you are striving. The measures should be quantifiable using the data that your transit agency is collecting (identified in Step 1.2) and help describe and track the state of the repair of your transit agency’s assets, as well Table 2.5. Example SGR definitions. Transit Agency Definition Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) Illinois CTA defines SGR primarily in terms of standards: Rail lines should be free of slow zones and have reliable signals. Buses should be rehabbed at 6 years and replaced at 12 years. Rail cars should be rehabbed at quarter- and half-life intervals and replaced at 25 years. Maintenance facilities should be replaced at 40 years (70 years if rehabbed). Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) Ohio State of good repair projects are those needed to bring the system to a consistent, high quality condition system-wide Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Massachusetts A state of good repair standard [is where] all capital assets are functioning at their ideal capacity within their design life. New Jersey Transit (NJT) New Jersey “State of Good Repair” is achieved when the infrastructure components are replaced on a schedule consistent with their life expectancy. New York City Transit (NYCT) New York Investments that address deteriorated conditions and make up for past disinvestment. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Pennsylvania An asset or system is in a state of good repair when no backlog of needs exists and no component is beyond its useful life. State of good repair projects correct past deferred maintenance, or replace capital assets that have exceeded their useful life. Source: Transit State of Good Repair: Beginning the Dialogue. FTA, 2008.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 13 as the impacts and implications of operating at a given state of repair. Most (if not all) of the measures you will use for your TAMP are likely among those that your transit agency is already collecting. FTA is currently developing guidance on performance measures and targets for transit asset management. Once adopted, these measures will be used by all transit agencies in their TAMP. However, transit agencies may choose to report additional measures beyond the minimum set required by FTA. This document provides some general guidance on the selection of measures, and offers suggestions for other resources that may be useful. Appendix A of FTA’s Asset Management Guide provides guidance on performance metrics by asset type. TCRP Report 88: A Guidebook for Developing a Transit Performance-Measurement System provides background information on the use of performance measures by transit agencies across all areas. It includes a list of possible measures, including detail about data requirements, appropriate use, and other related information. The NTD Annual Reporting Manual provides addi- tional guidance. Though many of the metrics required for NTD reporting are not performance measures, it does include a few relevant measures (e.g., total miles on active vehicles during period). These resources are discussed further in Chapter 5. Mission: Committed to excellence, the MBTA strives to provide safe, accessible, dependable, clean, and affordable transportation to our valued customers through the dedication of our diverse and talented workforce. Goals: Service To provide clean, safe, and reliable public transportation, accessible to everyone, and a clean and safe environment for employees. Infrastructure To modernize the system through an aggressive SGR program while investing in cost-effective expansion projects to increase our customer base. Financial Condition To provide affordable transit for the public toward reducing the burden to taxpayers through efficient operations, innovative fare policies, and the generation of non-fare revenues, while simultaneously supporting a balanced capital program of modernization and expansion through strong project and grant management. Employee Development To recruit, train, and retain a highly professional, diverse, and committed workforce capable of improving the system in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Communication To develop direct, effective communication techniques that inform our customers, obtain valuable feedback, and develop goodwill for the organization. Source: The MBTA FY2009 Budget. MBTA, 2008. Table 2.6. MBTA mission. Selecting Performance Measures for Asset Management Performance measurement is a complex topic, and extends beyond the area of capital asset rehabilitation and replacement that is the focus of this report. Important considerations in identi- fying performance measures for supporting transit asset rehabilitation and replacement decisions adapted from NCHRP Report 551 are as follows: • Feasibility: a performance measure is useful only if the transit agency can capture the data needed to support its calculation. In considering whether to use a given measure, the transit agency must consider the cost of quantifying the measure, and weigh this against the marginal value of having the information that the measure would provide. • Policy sensitivity: performance measures used to support resource allocation decisions should ideally relate to transit agency policy objectives, and should provide a measure of whether

14 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Your TAMP should include a core set of measures, which together will capture the condition of your agency’s assets. This set in Table 2.7 includes the minimum recommended set of measures, the data for which should be readily available at any transit agency. For those transit agencies interested in moving beyond the minimum recommended measures, Table 2.8 provides additional measures recommended for comprehensive reporting of asset management. Combined with the core measures, this set should offer your transit agency a complete picture of the state of your assets, and effectively support your prioritization and decision-making processes. Once you have selected your measures, you will select targets corresponding to each one. These should be realistically achievable, and related to the transit agency’s definition of SGR. After you Table 2.7. Core TAMP measures. Measure Use for How to Measure Notes Backlog of investment needs All assets Sum of costs for unmet needs for achieving SGR Calculate using TERM Lite, TAPT, or an alternative, documented approach Average asset age Guideway, stations, facilities, systems Year of manufacture for vehicles; year of construction or installation for other assets. Weight by asset value when combining assets. Use age of initial construction or last major rehabilitation when reporting for stations and facilities. May report age by station/facility, or group by type. Mean distance between failures (MDBF) Vehicles Vehicle-miles traveled/number of road calls or failures Should include major mechanical failures reported to NTD at a minimum Average accumulated mileage Vehicles Total lifetime mileage averaged among all vehicles in the subfleet Measure by subfleet the expected outcomes of policy objectives are occurring. This tends to emphasize measures correlated with transit service from the transit customer’s viewpoint. For instance, on-time performance is more meaningful for a typical passenger than a condition score. • Long-term view: to support rehabilitation and replacement decisions it is important to leverage information on trends in performance and predictions of future performance given a set of budget assumptions. Also, it should be possible to predict performance of the selected mea- sures over the entire lifecycle of an asset. If a measure cannot be predicted in the future, then it may be of value for reporting or tracking purposes, but it will not be an effective measure for supporting asset replacement decisions. • Useful for decision support: the ideal measure would provide information on when rehabili- tation or replacement is needed, would be impacted as a result of rehabilitation/replacement actions, would not be unduly impacted by factors outside of the transit agency’s control, and would be useful for testing different budget scenarios. Asset age, remaining service life, and condition ratings are commonly-used measures that meet these criteria for many assets. • Useful across the transit agency: ideally the performance measures adopted for supporting asset management decisions are measures that are used broadly across the transit agency, such as for reporting across modes or units and to the public.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 15 have completed Step 2.1 (calculation of your agency’s current conditions and performance), you may need to revisit your targets to ensure that they are appropriate. Step 1.5 Define Data Collection Protocols and Reporting Schedule A successful TAMP is dependent upon accurate, consistent data to support the monitoring and performance measurement activities. Therefore, having the methods used to collect the data are as critical as what data you are collecting and what you are measuring. Once your performance measures and targets have been selected, it is important to con- duct an analysis of the data you have to support them. Depending upon the measures that you have selected, or the frequency with which you plan to report, the following actions may be necessary: • Aggregation of data for calculating measures (e.g., vehicle level to subfleet or fleet); • Integration of data for analysis; • Update of data collection schedule; and • Establishment of new data sharing pathways within a transit agency. Since some data collection can be time and resource intensive, this analysis may raise legitimate questions regarding the value of the measures compared with the resources needed to report them. Therefore, this may be an iterative process, requiring the shifting of how you are calculat- ing your measures, as you match up your data and reporting techniques with your performance measurement reporting. Table 2.9 recommends the level of aggregation, performance measures, and calculation frequency organized by TERM asset type. Once you have established your measures, targets, and data collection practices, you may find value in using them to communicate progress and trends outside of the TAMP. Figure 2.2 provides an example of a monthly scorecard established for performance reporting. Measure Use For How to Measure Notes Percent of assets in good/fair/poor condition Guideway, stations, facilities, systems Measure using TERM condition ratings (or a documented alternative rating) with a rating of 5 or 4 as good, 3 as fair, and 2 or 1 as poor. Weight by asset value when combining assets. A good/fair/poor classification is recommended for combining different rating scales used (e.g., 5-point TERM ratings and 10-point National Bridge Inventory ratings used for structures). Asset availability Elevators and escalators Percent of total operating time that elevator or escalator is available. Ideally repair time should be included as down time even when scheduled Hours of delay Vehicles, guideway Passenger hours of delay caused by mechanical failures of vehicles or fixed assets Typically requires assumptions concerning variables such as passenger loads. An alternative for guideways is to report extent of slow orders. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Vehicles Tons of CO2 emitted by the vehicle fleet per year May also report per vehicle mile, extent to include emissions from vehicle manufacture and/or report for fixed assets. Table 2.8. Comprehensive TAMP measures.

16 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Asset Type Aggregation Level for Calculations Performance Measure Measure Category Calculation Frequency Guideway At a minimum, aggregate by line. Ideally, calculations should be performed for track, other guideway elements, and major systems using the TERM asset hierarchy or equivalent Backlog of investment needs Core Annual Average age Core Annual Percent of assets in good/fair/ poor condition Comprehensive Annual Hours of delay Comprehensive Monthly Facilities At a minimum aggregate by facility. Ideally calculations should be performed by building and major system (e.g., roof, electrical, HVAC). Backlog of investment needs Core Annual Average age Core Annual Percent of assets in good/fair/poor condition Comprehensive Quarterly Systems Aggregate by system using TERM asset hierarchy. Note this category excludes systems within stations and facilities. Backlog of investment needs Core Annual Percent of assets in good/fair/poor condition Comprehensive Quarterly Stations At a minimum aggregate by mode or line. Ideally calculations should be performed by station and major system. Backlog of investment needs Core Annual Average age Core Annual Percent of assets in good/fair/poor condition Comprehensive Quarterly Asset availability (for escalators and elevators) Comprehensive Monthly Vehicles Aggregate by subfleet. Backlog of investment needs Core Annual Mean distance between failure Core Monthly Average accumulated mileage Core Monthly Hours of delay Comprehensive Monthly Percent of assets in good/fair/poor condition Comprehensive Quarterly Average tons of C02 (per vehicle/fleet/ per mile Comprehensive Quarterly Table 2.9. Recommended aggregation level, performance measures, and reporting frequency by asset types.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 17 The MBTA has established a one-page scorecard for use in reporting asset conditions. The scorecard includes summary measures of: ridership; mean distance between failures (MDBF), service reliability; minutes of speed restrictions; elevator and escalator uptime; safety adherence to budget; and on-time performance. The scorecard is accompanied by additional details by mode, and is updated on the MBTA web site on a monthly basis. Source: MBTA Figure 2.2. MBTA scorecard.

18 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Step Two: Analyze Asset Conditions and Performance With data, performance measures, and targets in order, you are ready to put that information to work. In this step you will first determine where you are today, and establish the assump- tions needed to determine where you are headed. This will provide the foundation required to understand the implications of your prioritization and funding decisions that will be the meat of your TAMP. Step 2 is completed in 4 sub-steps. Upon completion you will have: • A snapshot of where your transit agency stands today, with respect to your chosen performance measures for asset management • The point in time at which each of your asset types will need replacement, as described by your deterioration model • A lifecycle policy, for each asset type, which will guide your investment scenarios and inform your prioritization decisions Step 2.1 Calculate Current Asset Conditions and Performance In this step, you will establish your baseline conditions. You will use this snapshot as you compare (and finally select) your alternatives (in Step 4), as well as in your ongoing performance monitoring to track your actual progress. The basis for your current conditions assessment should be your performance measures (selected in Step 1.4), and it should include all of your transit agency’s measures. If your agency has historical data on these measures, you may decide to present the trends leading to today’s conditions. Table 2.10 illustrates an example of data for the example buses listed previously in Table 2.3. Table 2.10 shows the recommended measures of backlog, accumulated miles, failures, MDBF, and CO2 emissions for each of four types of buses, as well as additional cost data. In this example, intercity buses are shown as being at the end of their useful life as a result of their high mileage, though they are highly reliable compared to other bus types in the fleet. Step 2.2 Develop Asset Deterioration Models A deterioration model predicts how the condition of an asset will change over time. Deterioration models are needed to help predict the impacts on costs and performance as Note: If utilizing TAPT you should refer to Chapter 3 for specific instructions on how to use the tool to help complete Step 1 through Step 4. Return to this chapter for Step 5 (Develop Transit Asset Management Plan). Measure Value by Bus Type Artic Mall Intercity 40 foot Backlog of Needs ($ 000) 0 0 37,654 76,416 Average Accumulated Mileage (000) 331 135 679 428 Mechanical Failures (roadcalls) 88 65 87 317 MDBF (miles) 35,649 20,407 33,033 39,791 CO2 Emissions (tons) 10,843 1,778 18,454 28,942 Table 2.10. Current asset conditions and performance pilot example—buses.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 19 an asset ages and help determine when to rehabilitate or replace an asset. Asset deterioration models can be established through analysis of historic data, using models from TERM Lite or other systems, through expert judgment, based on industry standards, or using a variety of other approaches. Establish Useful Life. The most straightforward way to model deterioration is to establish a useful life for the asset and determine the remaining useful life of the asset based on the asset age. This approach will support calculating an investment backlog. However, for complex assets such as maintenance facilities or guideway, a single asset age may not provide a reliable indicator of when rehabilitation or replacement is required. Also, this approach provides little indication of what the impacts may be of allowing the asset to continue to deteriorate once it has reached its assumed useful life. Vehicles. For vehicles, tracking MDBF as the vehicles ages provides a better indication of asset deterioration than age alone. Although it can be difficult to compare MDBF between different fleets and systems, for a given fleet one would expect this measure to decrease as the fleet ages. Also, MDBF is well correlated with both the maintenance cost incurred by the transit agency, and mechanical failure–induced delays experienced by passengers. Figure 2.3 shows an example of MDBF predicted by TAPT for the example bus fleet described in Table 2.3. When analyzing historic MDBF data to predict future performance, it is important to use data where failures have been reported in a consistent manner over time. Also, it is important to note that a transit agency can impact MDBF through increased or decreased preventive maintenance. Non-vehicle Assets. For assets besides vehicles, a common approach to characterizing conditions is to use the TERM condition ratings, which range from 5 (excellent) to 1 (poor). TERM Lite includes default deterioration curves for all asset types that predict the change in condition over time, and these are incorporated in TAPT. Figure 2.4 shows an example TERM deterioration curve, in this case for stations. Figure 2.3. Example asset deterioration curve—MDBF versus age.

20 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Asset Deterioration. To develop a TAMP with predictions of future conditions it is necessary to make some assumption about asset deterioration. The most straightforward way to accomplish this step is to either: a) use a tool such as TAPT or TERM Lite with default deterioration curves; or b) model deterioration using asset age or MDBF based on transit agency experience. For transit agencies with large inventories and sufficient data, the recommended approach is to develop deterioration curves specific to the deterioration of the transit agency’s assets using historic data and existing TAPT and TERM Lite models as a starting point. Chapter 3 has additional information on how to model deterioration using TAPT. Step 2.3 Project Replacement Impacts In this step you will consider your current assets and model the impacts of replacement. In other words, how (and how much) will things improve if you replace your assets, and what will replacement cost? How will a new asset perform, and what will that do to the overall performance level of all of your assets? Performing this step amounts to predicting the lifecycle costs resulting from replacing an asset, and the performance that will result from asset replacement in terms of each of the performance measures established in Step 1. Generally speaking this step is performed manually only for very straightforward cases with minimal measures to predict. TAPT and other tools simplify this step and combine it with Step 2.4 to determine when to replace an asset to maximize performance and minimize lifecycle costs. Step 2.4 Develop an Asset Lifecycle Policy Your transit agency’s asset lifecycle policy will guide you in determining how to structure your asset management plan. The policy specifies what maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and/or replacement actions should be performed on each asset over the asset’s lifecycle, viewing each asset type separately. For the purpose of developing the TAMP, the most critical aspect of the lifecycle policy is that it specifies at what point an asset should be rehabilitated or replaced consistent Figure 2.4. Example asset deterioration curve—TERM condition rating versus age.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 21 with transit agency goals, absent specific budget, or other constraints. The policy is developed using the results of Steps 2.3 and 2.4 to determine the point at which different actions should be performed to yield the best performance of the agency’s service and lowest overall lifecycle cost. Tools such as TAPT automate the specification of the lifecycle policy. In the case of TAPT, the tool attempts to quantify the full set of agency and user costs that change as an asset deteriorates, and recommend an “optimal policy” with the objective of minimizing lifecycle costs. However, as discussed in Chapter 1, a transit agency may consider additional objectives that are difficult to monetize in forming its lifecycle policy. The end result of this step is a specification of when different actions should be performed, at a minimum including capital asset rehabilitation and replacement actions. This can be specified in terms of the asset age, mileage, condition, impact on the quality and level of the agency’s services, or other measures. Table 2.11 shows an example of a policy for the example set of buses listed in Table 2.3. In this example the policy specifies when to replace different types of buses considering the lifecycle costs of asset maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement, fuel, emissions, and road calls. Step Three: Define Asset Investment Scenarios Now that you have catalogued your asset inventory and conditions and have established an approach for predicting replacement needs, it is time to look into the future. In this step, you will define a number of possible asset funding scenarios and get a view of how those look with respect to your performance measures. Each scenario will “tell a story” about what will happen to the transit agency’s assets, its level and quality of services, and to your system as a whole based on your funding and prioritization decisions. Comparing alternative scenarios is a powerful tool for supporting investment decisions, particularly when a decision maker must contend with significant uncertainty and investment objectives that are difficult to weigh against each other. The process of evaluating asset investment scenarios requires developing funding and prioritization assumptions, defining the scenarios, and simulating future conditions. The description focuses on asset replacement scenarios, but in practice the approach can be extended to compare these investments to other transit agency investments, such as investments in new capacity. Step 3 is completed in 4 sub-steps. Upon completion you will have: • A prioritization approach and some basic funding assumptions to guide you in project selection • Three or more defined investment scenarios that provide an accurate picture of how key funding and policy decisions will impact your transit agency’s operations on the ground Note: If utilizing the TAPT you should refer to Chapter 3 for specific instructions on how to complete Step 1 through Step 4. Return to this chapter for Step 5 (Develop Transit Asset Management Plan). Vehicle Type Optimal Replacement Mileage (000) Optimal Replacement Age (years) Average Annual Cost (000) Bus Artic 569 16 191 Mall 219 15 128 Intercity 1,085 18 177 40-ft 665 15 142 Table 2.11. Example asset replacement policy—buses.

22 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Step 3.1 Specify Prioritization Approach The prioritization approach, informed by the lifecycle policy (Step 2.4) and project replacement impacts (Step 2.3), provides a methodology for designating the order (and timing) that assets will be replaced. While this step does not include funding assumptions (that comes in Step 3.2), it is developed based on the assumption that there may not be sufficient funds to conduct all asset replacement activities at the optimal point in time. Most structured approaches to prioritizing capital projects assume investments should be prioritized based on an objective of minimizing lifecycle costs. However, many additional con- siderations may need to be factored into the prioritization process. A transit agency’s particular prioritization process is, to a degree, subjective; it should rely on measures and inputs that reflect the agency’s customers’ desires and expectations. The prioritization approach can be structured to consider a wide range of factors, depending on your transit agency’s goals and objectives. Example factors include: • Agency lifecycle costs • User benefits, including travel time and reliability • Risk of service interruption • Accessibility • Environmental impacts • Projected ridership • Impact on disadvantaged communities Safety is not listed above, as operating transit service safely is a fundamental requirement of a transit agency and not a factor which may be varied at different funding levels. Rather than operate in an unsafe manner, it is generally assumed that a transit agency will remove assets from service, or operate them in a manner that provides the required level of safety. For instance, when a section of track is badly deteriorated, a transit agency will place a slow order on the section, increas- ing delay, rather than operating with a reduced margin of safety. The above factors, including travel time, reliability, and risk of service interruption, quantify impacts caused by reducing the level of service as a result to maintain safe operations. There are different quantitative approaches for combining the various factors a transit agency may wish to consider when prioritizing. There is no one right approach; the best approach is one that results in a set of priorities that best reflects a transit agency’s goals and objectives. Following are three basic approaches for prioritizing projects: 1. Monetize the different prioritization factors, and then use this information to select projects based on incremental benefits (cost savings) of performing a recommended rehabilitation or replacement action relative to deferring the action. This is the approach used by TAPT. 2. Develop a priority rating or score combining different prioritization factors using a set of weights established through an elicitation process. Various software tools have been developed to assist in this process. 3. Develop a basic strategy for prioritizing that reflects agency goals and objectives. For instance, for a transit agency with a limited number of asset types and different funding sources for vehicles and facilities, the prioritization approach may be to use grant funds for vehicle replace- ments, prioritizing these based on vehicle accumulated mileage. Other transit agency funds are used for facility rehabilitation/replacement, prioritizing these based on remaining service life. Regardless of the specific approach used for prioritizing, it is important that the approach for establishing initial priorities be documented and repeatable. In cases where a transit agency has a large number of asset types, this implies the use of a software tool to support the prioritization process.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 23 Table 2.12 shows an example of the results of a project prioritization exercise. In this case the priorities generated by TAPT are shown using pilot data, with a project ID, description, prioritization index (PI), and rank indicated. Here projects are ranked according to PI, which represents the cost savings resulting from performing the project (relative to deferring it) divided by the project cost. Thus, a PI greater than 0 represents a project that, if performed, is expected to reduce lifecycle costs. Step 3.2 Develop Funding Assumptions for Asset Investments In order to apply your prioritization approach to a set of actual projects and generate a number of investment scenarios, you must have a working assumption about available funding. At this ID Description Cost ($ 000) Rank 2014 2023 Guideway-XC 1 Guideway–Grade Crossings–Central 306 1 1 Guideway-Embedded 1 Guideway–Embedded–Central 37,797 2 2 Guideway-Embedded 2 Guideway–Embedded–SW 2,700 3 3 Track-XC Int 1 Track–Grade Crossing–Intensive Use–Central 160 4 6 Track-Embedded Int 1 Track–Embedded–Intensive Use–Central 631 5 7 Track-Special Int 1 Track–Special Trackwork–Intensive Use–Central 5,928 6 9 Guideway-XC 2 Guideway–Grade Crossing–CPV 600 7 4 Guideway-Embedded 3 Guideway–Embedded–CPV 5,267 8 5 Track-Curved Ballasted Int 1 Track–Curved Ballasted–Intensive Use–Central 6,656 9 10 Bus-IC 1 1998 MCI 37,654 10 12 Track-Embedded 1 Track–Embedded–Central 19,104 11 16 Guideway-Embedded 4 Guideway–Embedded–SE 2,371 N/A 8 Bus-Mall 2 2001 Mall Shuttle 5,760 N/A 11 Bus-Transit 1 2000 ORION V 76,416 N/A 13 Bus-Mall 1 2000 Mall Shuttle 6,912 N/A 14 Bus-Mall 3 2002 Mall Shuttle 1,152 N/A 15 Bus-Artic 1 2000 NABI 74,812 N/A 17 Track-Tangent Ballasted Int 1 Track–Ballasted–Intensive Use–Central 990 N/A 18 Bus-Transit 2 2005 Gillig Diesel 16,128 N/A 19 Track-Special 1 Track–Special Trackwork–Central 2,175 N/A 20 Bus-Transit 4 2006 Gillig Diesel 2,688 N/A 21 Track-Curved Ballasted 1 Track–Curved Ballasted–Central 7,176 N/A 22 Track-Embedded 2 Track–Embedded–SW 1,410 N/A 23 Track-Yard 1 Track–Yard–Central 1,097 N/A 24 Bus-IC 2 2001 Neoplan 47,770 N/A 25 Bus-Transit 3 2006 Gillig Hybrid 1,536 N/A 26 Bus-Transit 5 2008 Gillig 2,304 N/A 27 Track-XC 1 Track–Grade Crossing–Central 313 N/A 28 Track-Embedded 3 Track–Embedded–CPV 2,750 N/A 29 Fac-Stations 1 Boulder Transit 2,569 N/A 30 Fac-Stations 2 Civic Center 53,937 N/A 31 Track-Special 2 Track–Special Trackwork–SW 10,429 N/A 32 Bus-Transit 6 2008 Gillig Hybrid 1,920 N/A 33 Table 2.12. Example asset project prioritization.

24 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan stage in the process this number need not be final, but it should be realistic given constraints. This funding level will likely be key in distinguishing the investment scenarios you define in Step 3.3. Therefore, it is typical to identify the following: • Current annual funding amount; and • An amount that represents a realistic, but meaningful, increase in funding. You will revisit this funding level in Step 4.2 once you have worked through the investment scenarios. Step 3.3 Develop Asset Investment Scenarios The next step is to determine the exact scenarios that will be evaluated as well as the timeframe for analysis. This can result in an iterative process based on the results of the initial set of scenarios. At least four scenarios are recommended for analysis: • Current Funding Levels: this scenario assumes that your funding levels will stay the same as they are (on a constant dollar basis), indefinitely. As the needs and costs continue to rise and assets con- tinue to deteriorate, this will most likely mean that your conditions and performance will decline. • Maintaining Current Asset Conditions and Performance: this scenario describes the funding required to maintain the status quo. As most transit agencies have a backlog of investment needs, maintaining current asset conditions is generally a less ambitious goal than achieving a state of good repair. However, if the system is new, the status quo may actually be better than the long- term condition would project if maintained in state of good repair. In such cases, assets should be assumed to be replaced according to transit agency policy rather than kept in new condition. • Projected Future Funding for Assets: this scenario is where you will test your funding assumptions established in Step 3.2. It will allow you to illustrate the outcomes based on your selected preferred funding level. Typically this amount will lead to conditions and performance that fall above current conditions, and below SGR (although that may not be the case). • Achieving a SGR: this scenario involves those replacement actions consistent with your transit agency’s policy to achieve a SGR. This scenario is most meaningful if your asset lifecycle policy has been established to minimize lifecycle costs. In this case, you will be able to show that over time, costs will be minimized if a state of good repair is achieved. Additional scenarios may be defined to support relevant key factors, such as asset deterioration, ridership, or external events that may impact the system. Scenarios should extend at least 10 years and preferably 20 years into the future. Step 3.4 Describe Future Decisions, Conditions, and Performance for Each Investment Scenario In this step, you will use the funding and prioritization assumptions as inputs into an analysis of the investment scenarios that you have selected. This will require the identification of actual projects, and the inclusion or exclusion of each within each of your chosen scenarios. You will then look at how your projects perform within each of the investment scenarios. The analysis for this step should be performed using the same basic approach as that in Step 2.1 (Calculate Current Asset Conditions and Performance), but with the analysis repeated for each year of the analysis period. From one year to the next the approaches used for calculating deterioration (Step 2.2) should be applied to determine how conditions and performance will vary, and the impacts of replacement (Step 2.3) should be considered for any projects assumed to occur given projected funding. The results of this step will be a set of predicted conditions and costs that will enable you to compare the scenarios against the current environment.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 25 Table 2.13 shows example results from this step, in this case the results projected for three scenarios for the transit agency pilots using TAPT. These scenarios include: 1) do nothing, 2) invest $25 million annually, and 3) unconstrained (achieve SGR). Step Four: Finalize Asset Investment Scenarios With projected results for your chosen investment scenarios, you now have the opportunity to review the results, and revise them to arrive at the best possible final scenario considering avail- able funding. In this step you will revisit your asset lifecycle policy, prioritization approach, and funding assumptions; and select a preferred scenario. Your preferred scenario will be the one that you will take to your decision makers, and, if approved, will be the version that is reflected in your TAMP. Step 4 is completed in 2 sub-steps. Upon completion you will have: • A final (and perhaps revised) asset lifecycle policy • A final (and perhaps revised) asset prioritization approach • A preferred asset investment scenario Note: If utilizing the TAPT you should refer to Chapter 3 for specific instructions on how to complete Step 1 through Step 4. Return to this chapter for Step 5 (Develop Transit Asset Management Plan). Table 2.13. Example scenario summary. Scenario Initial Value (2014) Value in 2023 1-Do Nothing 2-$25M Annually 3-Unconstrained Unmet Needs ($ 000) 116,803 439,419 233,004 0 Cumulative Spent ($ 000) N/A 0 209,415 439,419 MDBF (miles) 35,649 20,407 33,033 39,791 Average TERM Condition (non-vehicle assets) 4.68 4.39 4.54 4.62 Passenger Delay (hrs) 113,682 170,399 150,781 146,801 CO2 Emissions (tons) 248,160 294,722 278,009 271,134 Other Agency Costs ($ 000) 196,292 278,332 219,534 197,762 Total Agency and User and External Costs ($ 000) 207,750 293,654 233,504 211,374 Step 4.1 Revisit and Revise Asset Lifecycle Policy, Funding, and Prioritization Assumptions Now that you have your scenarios developed, it is time to revisit some of the assumptions that you had to make initially to get to this point. Upon looking at the outputs, you may decide that your asset lifecycle policy is too aggressive for some asset types, or not aggressive enough for others. You may realize that your funding or prioritization assumptions are leading to outcomes within one or more scenarios that are not feasible, or leading you far from the targets you have established. Or, you may realize that replacement of some assets is dependent upon replacement of others (e.g., new low floor vehicles may require station upgrades which received a lower priority). This relationship should be noted in the lifecycle policy to ensure that your final plan does not present a set of investments that do not functionally support each other.

26 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan The following questions may assist you in this analysis: • Are the investment priorities consistent with the scenarios defined previously? That is, if the priorities are used to select what work to perform, is the predicted distribution of funds consistent with that modeled in the scenarios? If not, then the scenario evaluation or priori- tization approach should be revised so that its results better match. • Do the resulting priorities match decision makers’ expectations concerning how funds should be allocated across modes, asset types, types of investments, etc.? • Do the conditions and performance predicted, given the expected budget allocation (or a range of possible budgets), meet transit agency performance measure targets? If they do not, this may suggest that changes to the prioritization approach are warranted. Alternatively, the transit agency may need to reconsider its goals or performance measure targets if available funds are insufficient for achieving them. • Are there groups of investments with essentially identical priorities? This is a common outcome when an objective function is used to capture a number of different objectives. Where this occurs may suggest the need to fine-tune how projects are prioritized to better distinguish between projects, or establish a separate funding category for handling like projects. • Are certain assets or activities systematically given low priority? Though some investments are clearly more vital than others, one would expect that as an asset nears the end of its useful life the benefits of replacing the asset would be manifest. Consistently low priorities may suggest the need for revising the prioritization approach, or may suggest that the lifecycle policy is overly conservative, generating recommendations for replacement before an asset is truly at the end of its useful life. If this issue occurs but cannot be easily addressed then a separate funding category or minimum funding level can be established for the affected assets or activities. • Where are assets within the “window of opportunity” with respect to rehabilitation solutions? Generally, rehabilitation investments can be maximized when they are applied nearer the threshold of when replacement is required. This is an iterative process, and may take you back through Steps 3.1 and 3.2. Step 4.2 Finalize and Select the Preferred Scenario Once you have completed Step 4.1 you will have a revised set of scenario results to review. The next step is to select a scenario that is preferred considering transit agency goals and objectives, as well as available funding. Ideally you will have one scenario that offers an acceptable set of future conditions, and that depends upon a level of funding that is reasonable and attainable. If not, it may be sensible to consolidate or develop a compromised version of two or more scenarios to arrive at the one that will be the best fit. Your final preferred scenario should include a pro- jection of future values for all of the performance measures selected in Step 1.4 for a period of 10 to 20 years. Also, it should include details on the funding assumptions and work assumed to be performed given the projected funding. The scenario should be presented to the transit agency’s executives for approval for inclusion in the TAMP. If it is helpful, you may want to include an overview of the other investment scenarios in presenting the preferred scenario for contextual purposes and to illustrate the impacts of different funding levels. Step Five: Develop the Asset Management Plan The final step will result in the development of your TAMP. If you are using a tool (e.g., TAPT), this is the step where you integrate those outputs into a plan that your transit agency can implement. In Step Five you will make all final adjustments and decisions, and prepare your TAMP for official adoption by your agency.

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 27 Step 5 is completed in 3 sub-steps. Upon completion you will have: • A final version of your TAMP Step 5.1 Finalize Funding Levels and Constraints At this stage in the process, your executives will have provided you with a final set of funding assumptions for your use in the TAMP. Your plan should include planned asset investments by year for a period of at least 10 years. For transit agencies with a small number of capital projects, the plan may simply be the transit agency’s capital plan supplemented with additional information and analysis of its existing assets. For transit agencies with a large number of projects, the TAMP will likely stand as a companion document to the capital plan. The determination of overall funding level may be influenced by perceptions of the transit agency’s SGR needs, but in the short term the overall funding level is often a given based on available federal, state, and local funding, as well as projected farebox revenue. The distribution of assets between investment categories may also be a given, but as much as possible transit agency decision makers should rely on the analyses described in previous steps. This work enables them to consider funding levels based on an assessment of how well a given distribution of funds will achieve transit agency goals, perform, and meet the established targets. Also in this step, it is necessary to specify any funding and other constraints that may impact project selection. For instance: • Are certain funds specified for use for certain assets or actions (e.g., bus replacements)? • Are there certain investments that will need to be “pipelined” either because the transit agency committed to these projects in the previous plan, or because a decision on the project has been made externally? • What capacity constraints need to be considered, such as limits on the amount of work performed at once on a given line, or the number of projects that can be designed simultaneously? • Are there minimum amounts of funding that should be invested by asset, mode, or adminis- trative or geographic distribution, such as to best utilize existing staff and resources? • Where is coordination with other stakeholders required, such as state and local agencies or other transit agencies, which may impact project timing? • Do funding constraints systematically exclude certain types of work from consideration because they are ranked low on the list of priorities? • Are there other political or institutional factors such as legal or environmental mandates that are influencing the distribution of funds or the selection of projects? Step 5.2 Select Specific Projects Before the plan can be prepared, the projects to be included in the plan need to be fully defined. This includes characterizing the scope, timing, and budget of each of those projects, and verifying that they can be scheduled as assumed (e.g., all design, permitting, etc. is or will likely be in place as programmed). The detail to which the projects are specified should match your transit agency’s standards for capital plan development. Note: If utilizing TAPT, this is where you should start for guidance on putting together your TAMP once you have prioritized replacement needs in TAPT.

28 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Next, a set of decision makers entrusted with finalizing the investment plan must select the set of rehabilitation and replacement projects to include in the plan, considering the funding levels that have been established and any constraints on how those funds may be used. If there are few complicating constraints, the project prioritization approach is fully specified, and funding levels are generally adequate, then selecting the set of projects may be as simple as working through the list of alternative projects in decreasing order of rank and selecting projects until the budget is expended. In practice, though, it is likely that there will be complicating factors that need to be considered when selecting the final set of projects. For these reasons the decision makers who must finalize the investment plan generally have their work cut out for them as they balance competing objectives and constraints and attempt to find a plan that is both feasible and that best meets the transit agency’s goals and objectives. The priorities suggested through the previous steps and the results of any models used to recommend specific projects provide valuable input, but the final decision of what projects to include in the plan is made weighing this information with additional factors not captured in the prioritization formula and models. Step 5.3 Prepare the Plan Once the set of projects to include in the plan has been specified, the TAMP itself can be finalized. The plan documents the results of the analysis in terms of what specific actions are recommended or planned, as well as to detail why funds are needed for asset replacement, how available funds should be distributed, and what the planned investments will accomplish. It thus forms an action plan and serves as a tool to support needed investments. There are many ways to structure a plan that will accomplish these goals. Here is a suggested format. Sample Transit Asset Management Plan Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 2. Introduction and Background The introduction should include an overview of what is included in the report, a quick overview of the process (including who was involved, how the investment scenarios were vetted, etc.), the dates to which it applies, and how it will be implemented within the agency. 3. Transit Agency Context and Policies a. Asset Inventory The asset inventory can be done on a sub-class level (e.g., by fleet, not individual vehicle). (Step 1.1) b. Definition of State of Good Repair Beyond stating the transit agency’s adopted definition of SGR, this section may discuss any relationships or connections to the agency’s mission or goals. (Step 1.3) c. Performance Measures and Targets This section should clearly list the adopted performance measures and targets. It may also include details on reporting practices, data collection, etc. (Step 1.4) d. Asset Lifecycle Policy This section should describe the agency’s asset lifecycle policy, focusing on thresholds for performing rehabilitation and replacement actions included in the plan. It may also discuss how the deterioration model and other analysis impacted this policy. (Step 2.4) e. Prioritization Approach This section should describe the transit agency’s prioritization approach, including all factors that are considered and the way in which those factors are considered. (Step 3.1)

Steps in Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan 29 4. Current Conditions a. Asset Conditions and Performance (Step 2.1) This section should be a list of the existing assets and how they are doing with respect to the selected performance measures and targets. 5. Investment Scenario a. Funding (Step 5.1) This section should detail the finalized funding amounts, by funding category if applicable. b. Projects (Step 5.2) This section should include a high level description of the projects that were selected for inclu- sion in the preferred investment scenario. c. Projected Performance Measures and Targets (Step 3.4 and Step 4.2) This section will mirror section 4.1, but include the projected future performance measures and targets based on the preferred funding scenario. 6. Capital Investment Plan (Step 5.2) This final section can be a stand alone Capital Investment Plan (CIP) for your agency. It will include the standard CIP detail for all of the projects included in the selected investment scenario.

Next: Chapter 3 - Using the Transit Asset Prioritization Tool »
Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan Get This Book
×
 Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan
Buy Paperback | $25.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 172: Guidance for Developing a Transit Asset Management Plan provides tools and guidance to improve asset management. The Transit Asset Prioritization Tool, a spreadsheet that accompanies the report, may assist transit agencies in predicting the future conditions of their assets and prioritizing asset rehabilitation and replacement. The contractor’s final report summarizing the research and methodology of this project is also available online.

Software Disclaimer - This software is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences or the Transportation Research Board (collectively "TRB") be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operation of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!