Attachment 11 _ 2022 Ride Gwinnett TAM Plan.pdf

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

ATL SOLICITATION # 26-002

TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES

For ATLANTA-REGION TRANSIT LINK AUTHORITY and

GWINNETT COUNTY

ATTACHMENT 11

CONTENTS

Ride Gwinnett Transit Asset Management Plan

Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority

Group Transit Asset Management Plan FYs 2022-2026

September 29, 2022

Group Operators:

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan i

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1-1

Transit Asset Management Rule ............................................................................................ 1-1 Group TAM Plan Sponsor ...................................................................................................... 1-1 Operator Overviews ............................................................................................................... 1-2 TAM Plan Requirements ........................................................................................................ 1-3 TAM Plan Horizon .................................................................................................................. 1-5 Accountable Executives ......................................................................................................... 1-5

2.0 Asset Inventory .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Asset Categories .................................................................................................................... 2-1 Asset Base ............................................................................................................................. 2-1 Existing Asset Inventory ......................................................................................................... 2-2

3.0 Asset Condition Assessment ........................................................................................... 3-1 Assessment Methodology ...................................................................................................... 3-1 Useful Life Benchmarks ......................................................................................................... 3-1 Condition Assessment ............................................................................................................ 3-2

4.0 Annual Performance Target and Measures ..................................................................... 4-1 State of Good Repair Policy ................................................................................................... 4-1 SGR Performance Measures and Targets ............................................................................. 4-1

5.0 Decision Support Tools & Prioritization .......................................................................... 5-1 Decision Support .................................................................................................................... 5-1 State-of-Good Repair Analysis – 5-Year SGR Capital Needs ................................................ 5-1 Capital Funding Availability .................................................................................................... 5-2 Prioritization Process .............................................................................................................. 5-3 Prioritized List of Investments................................................................................................. 5-5

6.0 Recordkeeping and NTD Reporting ................................................................................. 6-1

Appendices

Appendix A: Accountable Executive Approval Appendix B: Asset Inventories Appendix C: Annual SGR Capital Need (Scenario 1: Unconstrained Funding) Appendix D: Prioritized Investments (Scenario 2: Funding Constrained) Appendix E: TAM Final Rule Definitions

List of Figures

Figure 2-1: 2022 Asset Base by Asset Class Value ($2022) ..................................................... 2-2 Figure 3-1: State of Good Repair by Asset Value, FY 2022 ...................................................... 3-2 Figure 3-2: Non-SGR Breakdown by Asset Class Value ........................................................... 3-3 Figure 5-1: 2022 Backlog and Annual Capital SGR Need (FYs 2023-2026) ............................. 5-2

List of Tables

Table 1-1: FTA TAM Compliance Checklist ............................................................................... 1-4 Table 1-2: TAM Accountable Executives by Operator ............................................................... 1-5 Table 2-1: 2022 Asset Base ....................................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-2: Summary of Rolling Stock Assets ............................................................................. 2-1

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan ii

Table 2-3: Summary of Equipment Assets ................................................................................ 2-1 Table 2-4: Summary of Facility Assets ...................................................................................... 2-2 Table 3-1: Useful Life Benchmarks ............................................................................................ 3-2 Table 3-2: Rolling Stock State of Good Repair, FY 2022 .......................................................... 3-3 Table 3-3: Equipment State of Good Repair, FY 2022 .............................................................. 3-4 Table 3-4: TERM Condition Assessment Scale ......................................................................... 3-4 Table 4-1: 2022 SGR Performance and 2023 Target ................................................................ 4-2 Table 5-1: Estimated Annual Maintenance and Rehabilitation Costs ........................................ 5-2 Table 5-2: Estimated Available Funds by Operator (FYs 2023-2026) ....................................... 5-3 Table 5-3: Estimated Budget Surplus/Deficit by Operator (FYs 2023-2026) ............................. 5-3 Table 5-4: Mobility Priority Score ............................................................................................... 5-4 Table 5-5: Weighted Prioritization Criteria ................................................................................. 5-5 Table 5-6: Prioritization Scores .................................................................................................. 5-5 Table 6-1:NTD Reporting Deadlines by Agency Fiscal Year ..................................................... 6-1

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 2022-2026 1-1

1.0 Introduction

This document serves as the Group Transit Asset Management (TAM) Plan for the Atlanta- Region Transit Link Authority (ATL), and covers the horizon period October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2026. This Group TAM Plan is a collaborative plan between seven Tier II operators. The seven operators that are sponsored by ATL within this Group TAM Plan are:

1. Cherokee Area Transportation System (CATS)

2. CobbLinc

3. Connect Douglas

4. Forsyth County

5. Gwinnett County Transit (GCT)

6. Henry County Transit

7. Paulding Transit

Transit Asset Management Rule On July 26, 2016, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published the Transit Asset Management Final Rule to help achieve and maintain a state of good repair (SGR) for the nation’s public transportation assets. The TAM Final Rule established minimum federal requirements for transit asset management applicable to all recipients of Chapter 53, U.S.C.

funds that own, operate, or manage public transportation capital assets. The seven transit operators sponsored in this Group TAM Plan by ATL are recipients of Chapter 53 funds and own, operate, and manage capital assets; therefore, they must prepare a TAM Plan by October 1, 2022, in compliance with FTA’s TAM Final Rule. Under the TAM Final Rule, affected transit agencies were required to submit an initial TAM Plan by October 1, 2018, and must update the TAM Plan every four years to review the previous process and apply lessons learned.

Additionally, it is an opportunity for agencies to incorporate any changes or updates to transit assets that have occurred in the past four years.

The 2022 Group TAM Plan will be the first update of the TAM Plan for all transit agencies that submitted one in 2018, as is required by the FTA1. Of the seven operators sponsored by ATL in this Group TAM plan, Connect Douglas, GCT, and Henry County Transit were sponsored by the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) in its 2018 Group TAM Plan; CATS, Forsyth County, and Paulding Transit were sponsored by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) in its 2018 Group TAM Plan; and CobbLinc completed its own TAM plan in 2018.

Group TAM Plan Sponsor The TAM Final Rule indicates that FTA-defined Tier II providers may join a group plan. Tier II transit providers do not operate rail fixed-guideway public transportation systems and have either 100 or fewer fixed-route or demand response revenue vehicles during peak regular service hours. ATL is the sponsor of a Tier II Group TAM plan on behalf of the seven operators previously listed. As the sponsor, ATL is responsible for coordinating the development of and submitting the 2022 Group TAM Plan. ATL will also be responsible for future TAM reporting on asset performance measures to the National Transit Database (NTD).

1 49 CFR Parts 625, §625.29c

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 1-2

Operator Overviews The following is a description of the operators included in this Group TAM Plan. All of which are located within the 13-county region of Atlanta.

Cherokee Area Transportation System (CATS) The Cherokee County Board of Commissioners provides public transportation for the residents of Cherokee County thorough the Cherokee Area Transportation System, known locally as CATS. CATS provides three services that cover the city of Canton and the unincorporated areas of Cherokee County.

Fixed-route services provide two bus routes through various parts of Canton. Paratransit services are also provided within a 0.75-mile area of the transit routes. Additionally, CATS provides demand response services across the entire county, providing access to residents in rural areas to a variety of destinations of interest, particularly in but not limited to Canton. All services are provided Monday through Friday, from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM.

CobbLinc The Cobb County Board of Commissioners, through the Cobb County Department of Transportation, provides public transportation for the residents of Cobb County through CobbLinc. CobbLinc provides various services that help connect residents in the urban and suburban communities of Cobb County, such as Kennesaw and Marietta. Transportation services provide commuters in Cobb County the opportunity to travel into the neighboring Fulton County and Atlanta. CobbLinc is the largest transit operator sponsored in this Group TAM plan, providing nine local fixed routes, two circulator routes, and three express bus routes. CobbLinc also operates demand response services in three FLEX zones in southwest Cobb County.

CobbLinc provides paratransit services within a 0.75-mile area of the fixed transit routes within Cobb County and in very limited areas in Fulton County. CobbLinc provides services daily except on six major holidays.

Connect Douglas The Douglas County Board of Commissioners, through the Douglas County Department of Transportation, provides Connect Douglas public transportation throughout Douglas County and into neighboring counties, including Cobb and Fulton. Connect Douglas operates three main services: fixed-route bus, ADA paratransit service, demand response services. Commuter vanpool service was formerly provided but has been suspended until further notice.

Four fixed routes were implemented in 2019 and cover the city of Douglasville and its surrounding areas. One of the routes provides riders with connections into Cobb County.

Connect Douglas also provides paratransit services that cover a one-mile area around the four transit routes. Demand response services are provided countywide for seniors and individuals with disabilities.

Forsyth County The Forsyth County Board of Commissioners provides “on call” Dial-a-Ride service that allows residents to schedule a ride anywhere within the county. There are no limitations to the trip purposes. The service operates a fleet of vans equipped to aid in transporting ADA qualified individuals.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 1-3

Gwinnett County Transit (GCT) The Gwinnett County Board of Commissioners provides commuter express bus, local fixed-route bus, and paratransit services.

Three commuter bus routes provide residents in Gwinnett County the opportunity to access the greater Atlanta region. Six fixed routes cover different parts of Gwinnett County; four connect various communities along the I-85 corridor, such as Norcross and Duluth, to MARTA (Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority) services into Atlanta. Two routes cover the city of Lawrenceville, which is closer to the center of Gwinnett County. GCT also provides paratransit service within 0.75-mile of its fixed-routes.

Henry County Transit The Henry County Board of Commissioners provides public transportation services through its Transit Department. While Henry County is interested in providing fixed-route services or alternative mobility services, most notably through the release of its December 2021 Transit Master Plan, currently only demand response service is provided to residents by advanced request. The service provides countywide coverage and operates Monday through Friday.

Paulding County The Paulding County Board of Commissioners provides public transportation through Paulding Transit, offering countywide demand response service at no charge to county residents.

Individuals that request service are picked up and transported to a variety of destinations such as the Department of Family and Children Services, the Health Department, various senior centers, and other local amenities for the purpose of shopping, groceries, and employment access.

TAM Plan Requirements This Group TAM Plan addresses the four elements required by the FTA for Tier II providers.

Table 1-1 provides a checklist to demonstrate ATL’s compliance with the required TAM Plan elements and where in the document each is found.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 1-4

Table 1-1: FTA TAM Compliance Checklist

Required Elements Status/Plan Section

1. Do I have a TAM Plan that covers a four-year period? This Group TAM Plan includes a

FY 2022-FY 2026 horizon.

2. Was the TAM plan updated within the last four years?

Former TAM Plans were completed in 2018 for all participating operators

3. Do I have a TAM Plan that includes all required elements:

a. An asset inventory for all assets used in the provision of public transportation, including those owned by third parties? Section 2

b. A condition assessment of all assets in my asset inventory for which I have direct capital responsibility? Section 3

c. An investment prioritization that:

Section 5

• Ranks projects to improve or manage the state of good repair over the horizon period

• Includes all capital assets for which I have direct capital responsibility,

• Is at the asset class level?

d. Did I document the analytical processes and decision-support tools used in developing my TAM Plan?

4. Do I have documentation that I calculated performance for:

Section 4 (Infrastructure asset category not applicable for participating operators)

Equipment (non-revenue service vehicles, support-service, and maintenance vehicles equipment) – percentage of vehicles that have either met or exceeded their Useful Life Benchmark (ULB) for all assets for which I have direct capital responsibility.

Rolling Stock – percentage of revenue vehicles by vehicle type that have either met or exceeded their ULB for all assets for which I have direct capital responsibility.

Infrastructure (rail fixed-guideway, track, signals, and systems) – percentage of track segments with performance restrictions for all assets for which I have direct capital responsibility.

Facilities – percentage of facilities within an asset group rated below condition 3 on the (Transit Economic Requirements Model) TERM scale for all assets for which I have direct capital responsibility.

5. Do I have documentation that I set annual performance targets to project the following fiscal year for:

Section 4 • Equipment

• Rolling Stock

• Facilities

6. Did I make my TAM Plan, any supporting records or documents, performance targets, investment strategies, and the annual condition assessment report available to the State and/or MPO that provides my funding?

Group TAM Plan delivered to GDOT and ARC upon completion

7. Did I create a group plan for participants that meets the associated requirements?

Enclosed group plan meets associated requirements per FTA

Source: Federal Transit Administration, https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/regulations-and-guidance/asset-management/55371/compliance-checklist-2019.pdf

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 1-5

TAM Plan Horizon ATL is required to complete its Group TAM Plan update by October 1, 2022. This update will outline the transit asset management plan for a horizon period of four years for the seven operators listed under ATL’s sponsorship. The Group TAM Plan horizon follows the federal fiscal year; therefore, it covers October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2026.

Accountable Executives Per TAM Final Rule, each transit operator receiving FTA funding must designate an “Accountable Executive” to implement the Group TAM Plan. Table 1-2 lists the Accountable Executive representing the seven operators sponsored in this Group TAM Plan. The signature page for the Accountable Executive’s approval can be found in Appendix A.

Table 1-2: TAM Accountable Executives by Operator

Operator Accountable Executive Title

CATS Greg Powell Director

CobbLinc Thomas Pearson

Asset Manager

Connect Douglas Ron Roberts Director Forsyth County Roy Rickert Director

GCT China Thomas Director

Henry County Transit Taleim Salters Director

Paulding Transit Betty Roach Director

The Accountable Executives are responsible for:

• Ensuring the development and implementation of the TAM Plan, in accordance with 49 CFR §625.25 (Transit Asset Management Plan Requirements).

• Ensuring that the reporting requirements, in accordance with both 49 CFR §625.53 (Recordkeeping for Transit Asset Management) and §625.55 (Annual Reporting for Transit Asset Management), are completed.

• Approving the annual asset performance targets and TAM Plan document. These required approvals will be self-certified by the Accountable Executives via the annual FTA Certifications and Assurances forms in FTA’s Transit Award Management System (TrAMS).

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 2-1

2.0 Asset Inventory

Asset Categories 49 CFR §625.25 defines four asset categories to be considered in the Group TAM Plan:

• Rolling Stock – revenue vehicles used to provide transit service

• Equipment – non-revenue service vehicles and equipment with an acquisition value of

$50,000 or more.

• Infrastructure – structures (e.g., bridges, tunnels, elevated structures) or fixed-guideway infrastructure (e.g., track, exclusive bus right-of-way).

• Facilities – maintenance or administrative facilities, passenger facilities, or parking facilities (e.g., parking garages or park-and-ride lots).

The inventory of the ATL Group TAM Plan includes all assets owned, operated, and maintained by each plan participant. The Group TAM Plan inventory is comprised of the following asset categories:

• Rolling Stock

• Equipment

• Facilities

None of the operators own any exclusive infrastructure assets; therefore, this category is not included in the Group TAM Plan.

Asset Base To define the ATL group inventory and calculate the current value of its asset base, the assets included in the rolling stock, equipment, and facilities asset categories are further broken down by asset class. Table 2-1 shows the asset classes used throughout the Group TAM Plan for all three asset categories, the number of assets under each asset class, and the associated 2022 value and distribution. As further detailed in Figure 2-1, facilities make up about 66% of the group’s total inventory value at a little over $218 million, with park & ride and passenger facilities making up a large portion of the facilities category value. Rolling stock, valued at nearly $108 million, makes up about 33%, largely buses and over-the-road coaches. At $3 million, equipment assets make up just below 1% of the entire inventory value.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 2-2

Table 2-1: 2022 Asset Base

Asset Category Asset Class Number of Assets

Total Value ($2022)

Distribution of Value

Facilities

Administration 4 $6,087,110 1.9% Maintenance 2 $5,821,993 1.8% Park & Ride 9 $63,332,765 19.3% Passenger 4 $142,863,989 43.5%

Facilities Subtotal 19 218,105,857 66.4%

Equipment Non-Revenue Vehicles 11 $518,315 0.2% Other Equipment 2 $2,509,829 0.8%

Equipment Subtotal 13 $3,028,144 0.9%

Rolling Stock

Bus 100 $56,474,927 17.2% Over-the-Road Coach 65 $38,942,531 11.9% Cutaways 117 $10,248,761 3.1% Minivan 51 $1,805,947 0.5%

Rolling Stock Subtotal 333 107,472,167 32.7% Total 365 $328,606,169

Figure 2-1: 2022 Asset Base by Asset Class Value ($2022)

Existing Asset Inventory This section discusses the rolling stock, equipment, and facility capital assets that the group owns, operates, and has direct capital responsibility for and, are therefore, included in the Group TAM Plan asset inventory. Detailed inventories are in Appendix B.

Facilities, 66%

Revenue Vehicles, 33%

Equipment, 1%

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 2-1

Rolling Stock The rolling stock asset category includes revenue service vehicles operated and owned by any of the seven operators with the primary purpose of transporting passengers. Operators maintain their assets in an Excel-based inventory and report it to ATL annually. The following data fields are maintained for each rolling stock asset:

Asset Class Expansion Height Asset ID Year Built Year Collected NTD ID Unit Cost Source Address Soft Cost Asset Condition Rating Mode Cost Year Owner Description Useful Life Mileage Asset Class Priority Asset Type Quantity Delayed Replacement Age Make/Model Unit Length

The group rolling stock inventory consists of 333 vehicles, including 100 buses, 65 over-the-road coaches, 117 cutaway vans, and 51 minivans. The Group TAM Plan asset inventory details are summarized in Table 2-2 for all rolling stock asset classes.

Table 2-2: Summary of Rolling Stock Assets

Asset Class Total Average Age

Average Value ($2022)

Bus 100 6 $564,749 Over-the-Road Coach 65 12 $599,116 Cutaways 117 6 $87,596 Minivan 51 5 $35,411 All Assets 333 7 $321,718

Equipment Per FTA requirements, equipment evaluated in this Group TAM Plan includes all non-revenue service vehicles (regardless of value) and any relevant equipment with an acquisition cost of $50,000 or more. This includes equipment that supports providing public transportation services, such as bus washes or lifts, or that is used primarily to support maintenance and repair work for a public transportation system, supervisory work, or for the delivery of materials, equipment, or tools. The Group TAM Plan equipment asset inventory details are summarized in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3: Summary of Equipment Assets

Asset Class Total Average Age

Average Value ($2022)

Non-Revenue Vehicles 11 8 $47,120 Other Equipment 2 32 $1,254,914 All Assets 13 20 $651,017

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 2-2

Non-Revenue Vehicles The ATL group equipment inventory consists of 11 non-revenue service vehicles for use in daily operations: 7 are owned by CobbLinc, 2 by Connect Douglas, and 2 by Henry County Transit.

As with rolling stock, operators maintain their non-revenue vehicle assets in an Excel-based inventory and report it to ATL annually. The following data fields are maintained for each asset:

Asset Class Expansion Height Asset ID Year Built Year Collected NTD ID Unit Cost Source Address Soft Cost Asset Condition Rating Mode Cost Year Owner Description Useful Life Mileage Asset Class Priority Asset Type Quantity Delayed Replacement Age Make/Model Unit Length

Other Equipment The group equipment inventory consists of two non-vehicle equipment assets owned by CobbLinc for use in its daily operations: a bus washer and a fuel island. FTA requires reporting on all equipment assets with an acquisition value of $50,000 or more; both items meet this threshold.

Facilities Facilities are any structure used in providing public transportation that are owned by any of the seven operators and for which they have a direct capital responsibility. Table 2-4 summarizes details on the administrative, maintenance, park & ride, and passenger facilities included in this Group TAM Plan. It should be noted that TERM Lite default costs were used for some facilities where the costs were unknown. These costs will be updated in future Group TAM Plans as more exact estimates are established. TERM Lite is discussed in more detail in Section 5.

Table 2-4: Summary of Facility Assets

Asset Class Total Average Age Average Value ($2022)

Administrative Facilities 4 17 $1,521,778 Maintenance Facilities 2 18 $5,821,993 Park & Rides 9 20 $7,036,974 Passenger Facilities 4 20 $35,715,997 All Assets 19 19 $12,524,186

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 3-1

3.0 Asset Condition Assessment

The physical condition of an asset is a direct reflection of its ability to perform its intended function. This section describes the methodology used for measuring asset state of good repair (SGR) and reports the current conditions of the group inventory of rolling stock, equipment, and facility assets. FTA defines SGR as “…the condition in which a capital asset is able to operate at a full level of performance.”2 As part of the Group TAM Plan, each asset meeting FTA TAM criteria must have a condition assessment conducted on an annual basis.

Assessment Methodology The most common approaches to asset condition assessments are:

• Age-based – Assets older than their Useful Life Benchmark (ULB) are not in SGR and considered in poor condition.

• Usage-based – Analogous to age-based condition measurements, the condition determining factor is asset usage (e.g., measured in miles run).

• Condition-based – Asset condition rating is developed by assessing the condition of the asset, usually through physical assessments during routine inspections or maintenance work or a separate condition assessment effort.

For the purposes of the Group TAM Plan, the rolling stock and equipment assets in the group inventory were assessed using the age-based approach. Transit facilities were assessed using the 1‐5 rating on the FTA Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM) Scale. Condition assessments were conducted in accordance with FTA’s TAM Facility Performance Measure Reporting Guidebook.

Useful Life Benchmarks FTA defines ULBs as “… the expected lifecycle or the acceptable period of use in service for a capital asset, as determined by a transit provider, or the default benchmark provided by the

FTA.”

When developing ULBs, the seven operators in this Group TAM Plan consider the local operating environment of their assets within the service area, historical maintenance records, manufacturer guidelines for preventative maintenance (PM), and the default asset ULB derived from FTA. In most cases, if an asset exceeds its ULB, then it is a strong indicator that it may not be in a “state of good repair.” Transit agencies can adjust their ULBs with approval from FTA. In some cases, the operators in this Group TAM Plan have adjusted their ULBs.

Table 3-1 displays the various ULBs that are either FTA default or operator-derived ULBs compared to the asset class’ minimum useful life as stated in FTA’s Award Management Requirements Circular 5010.1E. Equipment assets, including non-revenue service vehicles and other bus equipment, do not have an FTA-derived minimum useful life.

2 49 CFR Part 625, §625.5

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 3-2

Table 3-1: Useful Life Benchmarks

Category Asset Class/Type Average ULB (Years)

Minimum Useful Life

(Years)*

Rolling Stock

Bus 13 12 Over-the-Road Coach 14 12 Cutaways 7 5-7 Minivan 4 4

Equipment

Light-Duty Non-Revenue Vehicle (Vans, SUV’s, Automobiles) 8 N/A

Fuel Island 40 N/A Bus Washer 40 N/A

*FTA Award Management Requirements Circular 5010.1E (2018)

Condition Assessment The group asset base inventory was assessed for its condition based on the age of the assets for the rolling stock and equipment, compared to the ULB value assigned to each asset (Table 3-1) by each operator. Facilities underwent a condition assessment to determine SGR. Figure 3- 1 shows that 8% of the assets in the group inventory, in terms of total dollar value, are currently not in SGR.

Figure 3-1: State of Good Repair by Asset Value, FY 2022

SGR, 92%

Non-

SGR,

8%

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 3-3

The asset base is 92% in a state of good repair, generally because facilities account for 66% of the total asset value, and all 19 facility assets are in states of good repair. However, 99% of all assets that are not in SGR are rolling stock assets, primarily over-the-road coaches. The remaining 1% of assets that are not in SGR are non-revenue vehicles. Figure 3-2 breaks down the SGR status by asset class relative to the total asset base value. The SGR analysis is also broken down by asset category below.

Figure 3-2: Non-SGR Breakdown by Asset Class Value

Rolling Stock The condition assessment methodology for rolling stock is based on ULB and age of the asset.

The percentages of rolling stock not in SGR by asset value are shown in Table 3-2. In terms of total asset value, approximately 24% of the overall rolling stock assets are currently not in SGR.

Table 3-2: Rolling Stock State of Good Repair, FY 2022

Asset Class Total Assets

Total Value

(2022$)

# of Non-

SGR

Assets

% of Non-

SGR

Assets

Non-SGR Assets by

Value (2022$)

% Non-

SGR

Assets by Value

Bus 100 $56M 6 6% $3M 6% Over-the-Road Coach 65 $39M 34 52% $17M 44% Cutaways 117 $10M 54 46% $4M 43% Minivan 51 $2M 57 82% $2M 83% Total 333 $107M 141 42% $26M 24%

Equipment The condition assessment methodology for equipment is based on ULB and age of the asset.

The percentage of equipment assets not in SGR by asset value is shown in Table 3-3. In terms of value, 6% of all equipment assets are not in a state of good repair.

Facilities

Rolling Stock

Equipment Total Asset Value SGR Non-SGR

Facilities 66% 100% Rolling Stock 33% 75% Equipment 1% 94%

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 3-4

Table 3-3: Equipment State of Good Repair, FY 2022

Asset Class Total Assets

Total Value

(2022$)

# of Non-

SGR

Assets

% of Non-

SGR

Assets

Non-SGR Assets by Value (2022$)

% Non-

SGR

Assets by Value

Non-Revenue Vehicle 11 $518K 5 45% $178K 34% Other Equipment 2 $3M 0 0% $0 0% Total 13 $3M 5 38% $178K 6%

Facilities Agencies are required to report the overall condition of all facilities for which they have direct or shared capital responsibility. To meet this requirement, all seven operators have performed a visual inspection of the various facilities and reported their evaluations to ATL to be included in the Group TAM Plan.

Assets in this category are rated using FTA’s TERM scale between 1 and 5, indicating assessed conditions between poor and excellent, respectively, for components such as structure, systems, and site, among others (Table 3-4).

Table 3-4: TERM Condition Assessment Scale

State of Good

Repair?

Score Condition Description

Yes

5 Excellent No visible defects, new or near new condition

4 Good Good condition, but no longer new; may have some slightly defective or deteriorated components but overall functional

3 Adequate Moderately deteriorated or defective components; has not exceeded ULB

No 2 Marginal Defective or deteriorated components; has not exceeded ULB 1 Poor Critically damaged components or in need of immediate repair; well past ULB

Based on results of the most recent facility condition assessments, 0 of the 19 facility assets under the administrative, maintenance, park & rides, or passenger facility asset classes fall below a rating of 3; therefore, all facility assets are in SGR.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 4-1

4.0 Annual Performance Target and Measures

State of Good Repair Policy

The SGR policy states that a capital asset is in SGR when the following objective standards are met:

1. If the asset is in a condition sufficient to operate at a full level of performance; an individual capital asset may operate at a full level of performance regardless of whether other capital assets within a public transportation system are in SGR.

2. The asset can perform its manufactured design function.

3. The use of the asset in its current condition does not pose an identified unacceptable safety risk and/or deny accessibility.

4. The asset’s life-cycle investment needs have been met or recovered, including all scheduled maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacements.

The Group TAM Plan allows the operators to predict the impact of its polices and investment justification decisions on the condition of its assets throughout the asset’s life cycle and enhances the ability to maintain SGR by proactively investing in an asset before the asset’s condition deteriorates to an unacceptable level. The goal of these policies is to allow the operators to determine and predict the cost to improve asset condition(s) at various stages of the asset life cycle while balancing prioritization of capital, operating, and expansion needs. The two foundational criteria of SGR performance measures are ULB and condition assessment.

SGR Performance Measures and Targets SGR performance measures combine the ULB and physical condition to create performance measures from which asset performance targets can be derived annually. These performance measures are directly related to asset life cycle (ULB and condition) and maintenance needs.

By the time an asset meets or exceeds its assigned ULB, it should have reached its prescribed mileage, maintenance, and condition requirements. FTA-defined SGR performance measures include the following:

• Rolling Stock (Age) – Percentage of revenue vehicles (fixed-route and paratransit) within a particular asset class that have either met or exceeded their

ULB.

• Equipment (Non-Revenue Service Vehicles) (Age) – Applies only to non-revenue service vehicles and does not include “other” equipment assets; the SGR performance measure for non-revenue, support-service, and maintenance vehicle equipment is the percentage of vehicles that have either met or exceeded their ULB.

• Facilities (Condition) – Percentage of facilities with an asset class rating below 3 on the FTA TERM Scale.

Table 4-1 shows the percentage of assets (by count) that have met or exceeded their ULB for each asset class in 2022 and their performance targets for 2023. As discussed further in

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 4-2

Section 5, the 2023 targets are based on each operator’s current capital funding availability.

Performance targets will be reported to the NTD annually, as discussed in Section 6. It should be noted that non-revenue vehicles are the only equipment assets reported to NTD.

Table 4-1: 2022 SGR Performance and 2023 Target

Asset Class

Performance (% Non-SGR)

2023 Target

Rolling Stock Bus 6% 7% Over-the-Road Coach 52% 43% Cutaway 46% 46% Minivan 86% 80% Equipment Non-Revenue Vehicle 45% 91% Facilities Administration 0% 0% Maintenance 0% 0% Park & Ride 0% 0% Passenger 0% 0%

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 5-1

5.0 Decision Support Tools & Prioritization

Decision Support It is likely current funding levels of the participating operators will not be sufficient to replace all assets not in SGR each year. Therefore, operators will need to allocate available investment dollars to high priority assets.

Per the FTA TAM Final Rule, the TAM Plan must include “a description of any analytical processes or decision-support tool used to estimate capital investment needs over time and to develop the investment prioritization.”

FTA’s TERM Lite model was used to estimate the operators’ capital investment needs over the four-year Group TAM Plan horizon. TERM Lite is a Microsoft Access-based analysis tool provided by the FTA that relies on asset inventory data. As such, the TERM Lite outputs are dependent on the quality and completeness of the inventory input data. This asset inventory data documents the asset type, date built, expected useful life, replacement value, and lifecycle investment requirements of assets owned and operated by the participating operators. Based on these assumptions, the tool first assesses which assets have delayed reinvestment (e.g., which assets are in service past their useful life and what level of investment is required to replace those assets). This assessment provides a measure of the size of the SGR backlog (i.e., the level of investment required to attain a complete state of good repair). Next, the tool simulates the ongoing aging of these assets over the upcoming four-year period (FY 2023-FY 2026) to determine the level of investment required to replace assets that will reach the end of their useful life.

The assets’ historic acquisition costs were escalated to FY 2022 values using TERM industry indices; between FY 2022 and FY 2026, an annual inflation rate of 3% was applied to any asset replacement cost. The 3% annual inflation rate was determined by calculating the average inflation rate for the last 5 years.3

Investment Scenarios TERM Lite was used to create two asset investment scenarios based on funding assumptions.

The first scenario assumes the level of future funding will be completely unlimited (i.e., funding is “unconstrained”). This scenario output provides the annual investment needed to keep the operators’ asset base in SGR each year. This is referred to as the “SGR capital need.” The full list of assets to be replaced each year can be found in Appendix C. It should be noted that TERM Lite assumes that assets included in the 2022 backlog are replaced in 2023.

The second scenario uses existing funding amounts to estimate the capital funding available over the four-year period to purchase capital replacements (i.e., “financially constrained”). This scenario output demonstrates that there is insufficient funding to address all needs and required the use of a prioritization tool. This process is further discussed below.

State-of-Good Repair Analysis – 5-Year SGR Capital Needs Every year, certain assets reach their ULB and are no longer in SGR. As previously noted, the annual SGR capital need is the dollar value of assets that need to be replaced in a particular year. As shown in Figure 5-1, predicted SGR capital need fluctuates by year for the group

3 https://inflationdata.com/

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 5-2 inventory, from $27 million to $702,000 between FY 2022 and FY 2026, for a total of $53 million ($10.6 million annually). This fluctuation is partly because age is a primary determinant of SGR needs, and multiple assets are often acquired in a single year.

Figure 5-1: 2022 Backlog and Annual Capital SGR Need (FYs 2023-2026)

In addition to the annual replacement need, estimated preventative maintenance and rehabilitation costs provided by five of the participating operators can be found in Table 5-1.

Although these costs are not required to include in the Group TAM Plan, it is important to keep them in mind as maintenance and rehabilitation activities help to keep assets in SGR.

Depending on the size of the agency, annual maintenance costs can vary significantly.

Table 5-1: Estimated Annual Maintenance and Rehabilitation Costs

Operator Estimated Annual Costs

CATS $70,000

CobbLinc $6,000,000 Connect Douglas $200,000 Henry County $45,000 Paulding County $12,000

Capital Funding Availability The SGR analysis establishes a budget for addressing SGR needs by applying current funding levels over the next four years. The funding prediction applies the sources of capital funds available to the operators through current formula funding programs and county revenue sources. Table 5-2 shows the estimated available funding by year for each operator.

$178K $228K $126K

$27M

$1M

$21M

$702K $3M $K

$5M

$10M

$15M

$20M

$25M

$30M

2022 Backlog 2023 2024 2025 2026

Facilities Equipment Revenue Vehicles

$27M

$2M

$21M

$702k $3M

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 5-3

Table 5-2: Estimated Available Funds by Operator (FYs 2023-2026)

Operator 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total

CATS $623,000 $89,584 $244,654 $251,993 $1,209,231

CobbLinc $0 $12,678,789 $0 $0 $12,678,789 Connect Douglas $352,636 $352,636 $352,636 $352,636 $1,410,546 Forsyth County $67,500 $67,500 $67,500 $67,500 $270,000

GCT $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 $1,904,000

Henry County Transit $660,283 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $1,035,283

Paulding County $0 $284,321 $0 $75,409 $359,730 Total $2,179,419 $14,073,830 $1,265,790 $1,348,538 $18,867,577

Based on funding estimates provided by the operators, the total SGR funding level estimated for FYs 2023-2026 is almost $19 million, or approximately $4.7 million annually. For the Group TAM Plan, it is assumed that the available capital funding can be applied to any SGR asset.

CobbLinc and Paulding County reflect a budget of $0 for some years as they have plans to invest in specific assets during specific years with the funding they have available.

Earlier, the operators’ SGR capital need were shown to total $53 million, including the FY 2022 SGR backlog plus the SGR need for each year between FYs 2023 and 2026. However, estimated funding levels amounts to approximately $19 million, revealing a $35 million funding gap. Table 5-3 shows the annual budget surplus or deficit by operator given the estimated fiscal constraints.

Table 5-3: Estimated Budget Surplus/Deficit by Operator (FYs 2023-2026)

Operator 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total

CATS $246,454 ($68,970) $115,500 ($63,256) $229,728

CobbLinc ($6,356,371) ($7,588,893) $0 ($2,379,250) ($16,324,514) Connect Douglas ($2,459,276) ($113,406) $352,636 $352,636 ($1,867,410) Forsyth County $67,500 ($78,166) ($388,461) ($4,729) ($403,856)

GCT ($17,375,983) $476,000 $476,000 $476,000 ($15,947,983)

Henry County Transit ($1,038,548) $66,308 $8,103 $125,000 ($839,137)

Paulding County $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total ($27,438,265) ($7,307,127) $563,778 ($1,493,599) ($35,153,172)

Prioritization Process This Group TAM Plan uses a two-phased approach for the project prioritization process.

Investment projects are first selected using a set of criteria, then the selected projects are assigned scores to prioritize each for funding. The prioritization process is described in more detail in this section.

Phase 1: Project Selection Project selection is based on the condition of the asset. For vehicles, the age of the asset is the determining factor when evaluating asset condition in the prioritization process. For facilities, the TERM rating is used. TERM Lite identifies assets up for replacement each year based on the

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 5-4 age of the asset and its ULB (rolling stock and equipment) or if it is rated below a 3 on the TERM scale (facilities).

Phase 2: Project Prioritization The project prioritization methodology includes two criteria: mobility and reliability.

Mobility Two measures are used to assess mobility: the proportion of annual trips by mode for each operator and the average annual mileage of each vehicle. Totals were then averaged by asset class, and a score of 1 through 5 applied to each class. Once a score is assigned to both measures for each asset class, the average priority score is assessed and rounded up to the next integer to yield a final mobility score. Table 5-4 summarizes the assigned mobility scores by asset class, with more detail on each criterion discussed below.

Table 5-4: Mobility Priority Score

Asset Class Annual Trips Score

Annual Mileage Score

Total Mobility Score

Buses 5 5 5 Over-the-Road Coach 3 4 4

Cutaways 4 3 4 Minivans 2 2 2 Non-Revenue Vehicles 1 1 1

Annual Trips by Mode

For each service mode (Demand Response, Motor Bus, or Van Pool) provided by each operator, the annual trips reported to NTD are summed according to each of the five vehicle asset classes. Once sorted under each vehicle asset class, the number of respective trips is divided by the total trips, yielding the percentage of trips served by each vehicle asset class.

The higher the percentage, the higher the score assigned to each asset class.

Annual Vehicle Mileage

The mileage of each vehicle provided by the operators is divided by the vehicle age to estimate the annual mileage. The average annual mileage is then summed for each of the five vehicle asset classes. The higher the average annual mileage, the higher the score assigned.

Reliability The average age of a fleet is a major factor in the condition and reliability of services. The average age of the vehicles in each asset class is used to determine the vehicles’ level of reliability. The higher the average age of the asset class, the higher the priority score assigned to the asset class.

Scoring Details on the three criteria and the individual measures used to assess prioritization are detailed in Table 5-5. Asset condition is considered the most important factor in determining priority and is weighted at 60%. Mobility and reliability are weighted equally at 20%.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 5-5

Table 5-5: Weighted Prioritization Criteria

Asset Condition* Mobility Reliability Weight 60% 20% 20%

Measure(s) Age of the asset compared to the ULB

• Annual Trips by Mode

• Annual Vehicle Mileage

Average age by asset class relative to the average ULB

*Determined by TERM Lite

This methodology ensures that vehicles used for a large proportion of trips, vehicles with a high utilization, and older vehicles are prioritized for replacement first. The final priority scores and assigned level of priority by asset class are shown in Table 5-6. These scores and the associated weights were entered into TERM Lite by asset class.

Table 5-6: Prioritization Scores

Asset Class Mobility Reliability Priority Level

Buses 5 1 3.00 Over-the-Road Coach 4 3 3.75 Cutaways 4 4 3.50 Minivans 2 5 3.50 Non-Revenue Vehicles 1 2 1.50

Prioritized List of Investments After entering the funding constraints and priority scores into TERM Lite, an output was generated identifying a list of assets to be replaced each year. This list, found in Appendix D, is organized by replacement year, operator, asset class, number of assets, and total investment cost. This list was used to set the targets for FY 2023.

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan 6-1

6.0 Recordkeeping and NTD Reporting

As required by 49 CFR §625.53, each participating operator and sponsor must maintain all supporting Group TAM Plan records and documents. Group TAM Plan records must be made available to FTA and GDOT as the federal and state entities that provide funding to the operators, and to aid in the planning process.

Each operator shall report the following to the NTD annually:

• Inventory of assets

• Condition inspection assessments of capital assets

As the Group TAM Plan sponsor, ATL shall report the following to NTD annually:

• SGR performance targets for the next fiscal year

• Description of any change in the condition of the transit system or operations from the previous year and progress made during the reporting year to meet the performance targets set in the previous reporting year.

Per NTD requirements, annual TAM data reporting to NTD shall be completed by the sponsor/operators by the last business day of the month it is due for each calendar year. The schedule of reporting requirements for the Group TAM Plan horizon relative to each agency’s fiscal year is shown in Table 6-1. Operator responsibilities are in red text and Group TAM Plan sponsor responsibilities are in blue text.

Table 6-1:NTD Reporting Deadlines by Agency Fiscal Year

Reporting Requirements Agency Fiscal Year Jul-Jun Oct-Sept Jan-Dec

• Complete updated TAM Plan

• Share TAM Plan with planning partners October 2022

• Report FY22 Asset Inventory Module (AIM) data to NTD

• Submit targets for FY23 to NTD

• Submit narrative report to NTD

Oct 2022 Jan 2023 Apr 2023

• Report FY23 AIM data to NTD

• Submit targets for FY24 to NTD

• Submit narrative report to NTD

Oct 2023 Jan 2024 Apr 2024

• Report FY24 AIM data to NTD

• Submit targets for FY25 to NTD

• Submit narrative report to NTD

Oct 2025 Jan 2025 Apr 2025

• Report FY25 AIM data to NTD

• Submit targets for FY26 to NTD

• Submit narrative report to NTD

Oct 2026 Jan 2026 Apr 2026

• Complete Updated TAM Plan

• Share TAM Plan with planning partners October 2026

Source : https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/asset-management/getting-started https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/asset-management/getting-started

ATL | Group Transit Asset Management Plan

Appendix A: Accountable Executive Approval

As the Accountable Executive for the below-named participant in the enclosed Group Transit Asset Management (TAM) Plan sponsored by the Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority (ATL), I concur with the enclosed Group TAM Plan and approve the corresponding FY 2023 State of Good Repair Performance Targets on behalf of the participant transit provider organization.

Name of Participant Organization: _____________________________________________

Name of Transit Provider (if different from above): _________________________________

Name of Accountable Executive: ______________________________________________

Signature of Accountable Executive: ___________________________________________

Title: _________________________________ Date: ____________________________

As the Accountable Executive for the below-named participant in the enclosed Group Transit Asset Management {TAM) Plan sponsored by the Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority (ATL), I concur with the enclosed Group TAM Plan…