FTA’s Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM)

John D. GiorgisFederal Transit Administration

Director, Office of Strategic Planning

2

Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM)

• TERM assesses the current physical condition of the nation’s transit assets and long-terminvestment needs to achieve different targets

– FTA’s national-level capital needs analysis tool

• Designed for analysis of:– State of Good Repair (SGR) backlog

– Average asset conditions

– 20-year reinvestment & expansion needs

– Impact of different funding levels

– Impact of Cost/Benefit criteria

– Asset life expectancy

3

How Does TERM Lite Work?

• Asset conditions and quantities

• Cost to replace

Asset Inventory

• When to rehab & replace

• Funding• Priorities

Investment Policy • SGR backlog

• Asset conditions• Reinvestment needs• Prioritized plan

SGR Forecast

What do I own & what condition is it in?

What would I like to do, how much funding do I have, what are my priorities?

What are my potential backlog, condition and performance outcomes?

4

TERM Asset Database Includes All Asset Types

VehicleFleets

Equipment / Furnishings

Systems

TransportationNetworks

Transit Asset Database

Stations / Facilities

- Guideway- Track- Dedicated

Lanes

- Electrification

- Communications

- Control Systems

- Administration

- Maintenance- Passenger

- Maintenance Equip.

- Computers- Elevators /

Escalators

- Rail- Buses /

Vans /- Non-

Revenue

New Technologies

- AVL / CAD / APC- Real Time

Info

NTD data

5

Decay Curves: Asset Condition vs. Age

Condition from onsite inspections plotted against age

Rating criteria defined for more than 40 bus components

Use condition 2.5 as the definition for end of useful life

6

Expected Life using Condition 2.5 Threshold

SGR Backlog

7

Capital Reinvestment Needs Forecast - SGR Backlog

SGR Back-log

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029$0

$10,000,000,000

$20,000,000,000

$30,000,000,000

$40,000,000,000

$50,000,000,000

$60,000,000,000

$70,000,000,000

$80,000,000,000

$90,000,000,000 SGR Backlog and 20 Year Needs: US Transit

Other

Bus

Rail

SGR Back-log $77.7B

Avg. Annual Investment to Maintain SGR After Backlog

is Eliminated is $14.4B

Evaluate reinvestment backlog and

out-year replacement

needs

$77.7 B backlog$14.4 B average

= 5.4 years behind

8

TERMLite

• TERM for local or regional transit agencies

• Well-documented and user friendly, training is available

• For local long-term capital planning analysis

• MS Access application

• Free through FTA

• Comparable to HERS-St

TERM vs. TERM Lite

Capability TERM TERM-Lite

Level of Analysis

National Local / Regional

Intended User Group

FTA Local operators

Life Cycle Driver

Condition (estimated)

Age

Prioritization Benefit-cost analysis

User defined criteria

Output Format

Access Tables Excel

Output (current and forecast)

SGR backlogAsset conditions20-yr reinvestment needs

9

TERM Lite: Support for Capital Planning

TERM Lite CapabilitiesFunction Question Addressed TERM OutputSGR Monitoring Where are we

today?Current SGR backlogAsset conditions

SGR Management (“What if” Analysis)

Where can I be tomorrow?

Is backlog increasing / decreasing?What level of investment to attain SGR in 10

years? 20 years?How will change in backlog impact service

reliability? O&M Costs?Long-Term Capital Plan Support

How should I prioritize limited investment dollars?

Multi-criteria prioritization rankingsLong term SGR plan

10

Excel Export: Performance Forecast

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

In-S

ervi

ce Fa

ilure

s Rel

ative

to 2

010

Revenue Vehicle Service Failures (2010 = 100%)

Maintain Current Spending

Maintain Current Backlog

10 Years to SGR

Financially Unconstrained

85%

90%

95%

100%

105%

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Flee

t Mai

nten

ance

Cos

tsRe

lativ

e to

201

0

Fleet Maintenance Costs (2010 = 100%)

Maintain Current Spending

Maintain Current Backlog

10 Years to SGR

Financially Unconstrained

Metrics provide performance

implications of alternative prioritizations

and expenditure levels

11

Questions?

John D. GiorgisFederal Transit AdministrationDirector, Office of Strategic Planningjohn.giorgis@dot.gov