FTA Bus Testing Program – MAP21 March 28, 2013

1. FTA Bus Testing Program – MAP21 March 28, 2013 Gregory Rymarz FTA Bus Testing Program Manager, Federal Transit Administration Steve Brady Technical Consultant to LTI Bus Research and Testing Center

2. Introductions • FTA Bus Test Program Manager: Gregory Rymarz Office Research, Demonstration, and Innovation • Bus Test Program Principal Investigator: Dave Klinikowski Penn State University • Bus Test Program Technical Advisor Stephen Brady Booz, Allen, & Hamilton

3. New Bus Testing Legislation • (e) ACQUIRING NEW BUS MODELS.— • (1) IN GENERAL.—Amounts appropriated or otherwise made available under this chapter may be obligated or expended to acquire a new bus model only if— • (A) a bus of that model has been tested at a facility authorized under subsection (a); and • (B) the bus tested under subparagraph (A) met— • (i) performance standards for maintainability, reliability, performance (including braking performance), structural integrity, fuel economy, emissions, and noise, as established by the Secretary by rule; and • (ii) the minimum safety performance standards established by the Secretary pursuant to section 5329(b).

4. New Bus Testing Legislation • (2) BUS TEST ‘PASS/FAIL’ STANDARD.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the Federal Public Transportation Act of 2012, the Secretary shall issue a final ruleunder subparagraph (B)(i). • The final rule issued under paragraph (B)(i) shall include a bus model scoring system that results in a weighted, aggregate score that uses the testing categories under subsection (a) and considers the relative importance of each such testing category.

5. New Bus Testing Legislation • The final rule issued under subparagraph (B)(i) shall establish a ‘pass/fail’ standard that uses the aggregate score described in the preceding sentence. • Amounts appropriated or otherwise made available under this chapter may be obligated or expended to acquire a new bus model only if the new bus model has received a passing aggregate test score. • The Secretary shall work with the bus testing facility, bus manufacturers, and transit agencies to develop the bus model scoring system under this paragraph.

6. Performance Standards • Intent to leverage current published performance standards from transit and automotive industry where applicable • Where no standards exist – formulate consensus performance standards based on industry input and demonstrated capability • We expect to develop minimum performance standards for each bus testing category: • Maintainability • Reliability • Structural Integrity and Durability • Shakedown • Distortion • Static Towing • Dynamic Towing • Jacking • Hoisting • Safety • Performance • Speed • Acceleration • Braking • Fuel Economy • Emissions • Noise

7. Minimum Safety Performance Standards (MAP-21 Section 5329) • (b) NATIONAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SAFETY PLAN.— • (2) CONTENTS OF PLAN.—The national public transportation safety plan under paragraph (1) shall include— • (C) minimum safety performance standards for public transportation vehicles used in revenue operations that— • (i) do not apply to rolling stock otherwise regulated by the Secretary or any other Federal agency; and • (ii) to the extent practicable, take into consideration— • (I) relevant recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board; and • (II) recommendations of, and best practices standards developed by, the public transportation industry • Separate rulemaking action apart from Bus Testing • May require introduction of “new” bus tests to determine compliance • TBD

8. BusModel Scoring System & Weighted Score

9. Aggregate Score and Pass/Fail • MAP-21 Section 5318 requires the establishment of a “Pass/Fail” standard based on the aggregate score • Some test results are inherently “go/no-go” (discrete) in nature where the test score is 100% or 0% • Example: Current “Safety” Test: Pass = Ability to negotiate lane change at 45 mph • Some test results are continuous in nature where the result could be graded from 0 to 100% based on a scale derived from existing bus testing results • Examples: Fuel Economy or Emissions Conceptually - what should a “passing” score represent? What should be the weighting of each test category?

10. Final Rule Development • Two years to publish a final rule (due before October 2014) • 2013 Path to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) • April – Development of follow-on webinars • May - Conduct multiple “focus group” webinars (tentative dates) 7th - Large bus manufacturers 9th - Mid-size bus manufacturers 14th- Small bus/van manufacturers 17th - Large transit agencies 21st - Small/rural transit agencies 23rd - State DOTs & Procurement officials • June - Begin drafting NPRM • July - Finalize NPRM • Aug - Publish NPRM

11. Question For Bus Buyers • Do you review the test reports prior to procuring vehicles? Why? • For those who do not, what kind of data would make the test reports more useful. • Are there additional categories of testing that would benefit you? • Are there other performance/acceptance test that are conducted by the bus buyer prior to final acceptance? • For those buyers who read the reports, have you come across report data that would render a bus unfit for public transit service? • Under MAP-21, FTA must establish new pass/fail criteria – what test data would render a bus unfit for public transit service? • Under MAP-21, FTA must also establish a weighted, aggregated scoring system for evaluating a vehicle. In reviewing the eight test categories, which one(s) should be the most heavily weighted?

12. Question For Transit Vehicle Manufacturers • What test outcomes would render a bus unfit for public transportation service? • What would constitute an “inherent defect?” • What other tests or performance measures do buyers employ before taking final acceptance of a vehicle? • If a bus is designed for a special purpose and cannot perform the full battery of tests but is capable of meeting its designed purposes, should that bus be eligible for FTA funding?

13. Question For All • Under MAP-21, FTA must establish safety performance standards for transit vehicles, are the current FMVSS standards adequate to establish safety standards for public transportation vehicles? • What FMCSA requirements for motor coaches should also be applied transit? • What other state or local standards are being used to supplement gaps in Federal standards? • How urgently must FTA adopt a new set of public transit vehicle safety standards? • How extensive must a cost-benefit analysis be before FTA can adopt new safety standards?

14. Structural Integrity and Durability • Shakedown – No permanent deflection greater than 0.05 inches • Distortion – All doors, emergency exits must remain operational • Towing – No deformation or failure of towing structure at less than 1.2 times curb weight • Dynamic Towing – Can be towed with a standard wrecker • Jacking – Can be lifted with the jack • Hoisting – Bus was stable when supported on jack stands • Durability – No uncorrected class I failures subject to review No uncorrected class II failures • Cumulative Maintenance Time – Graded result and a maximum limit

15. Reliability • No uncorrected Class I failures • No more than two uncorrected Class II failures • MTBF ? • Other metrics

16. Maintainability • Primary metric: Hours to remove and replace all key components • Inability to remove a key component = Failure?

17. Fuel Economy • Fuel Economy Vs. Fuel Consumption ? • Average results across the Manhattan, Orange County, and UDDS emissions duty cycles • Express all results in a common metric (units energy per mile)? • Bus Test Weight (curb, SLW, GVW, or…)? • Fuel Consumption per unit passenger? • Minimum & Maximum Score

18. Fuel Economy Buses Tested 2010-2012

19. Emissions • Separate results into GHGs and Criteria Pollutants? • Relative weighting between pollutants? • Group results for all Fuel Type together? • Normalize results by GVW or passenger capacity? • List emissions types • Best Score/Worst score

20. Emissions CO2 Buses Tested 2010-2012

21. Emissions CO Buses Tested 2010-2012

22. Emissions THC Buses Tested 2010-2012

23. Emissions NMHC Buses Tested 2010-2012

24. Emissions NOX Buses Tested 2010-2012

25. Emissions PM Buses Tested 2010-2012

26. Safety • Double lane change maneuver – 45 mph maintain stability • GVW < all max load ratings (GVWR, GAWR, wheel, tires) • FMVSS – must meet all applicable • Seating Configuration – test bus must be a suitable transit bus configuration • NFPA 52 as applicable? • Other value added standards?

27. Braking • Braking distance – high friction 45-0 mph (0.3g, 194 ft) • Stay within a 12 foot lane during split coefficient test • Parking brake – hold on 20% upslope/downslope for 5 min

28. Braking Distance Buses Tested 2010-2012

29. Acceleration, Gradeability, Top Speed • Acceleration: 0-30 mph in 18 seconds • Gradeability: - Maintain 40 mph on 2.5% - achieve and maintain 15 mph on 10% • Top Speed: Measured top speed

30. Noise • Stationary internal: < 80dB • Acceleration from standstill : < 80dB • Interior Vibration: Not Unacceptable • Cruise to acceleration (exterior): <83dB • Accelerating from Standstill exterior: <83dB • Stationary Low Idle: <65 dB • Stationary High Idle:< 83dB • Stationary Full Throttle: <83dB

31. Thank You Gregory Rymarz Office of Mobility Innovation Federal Transit Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue S.E., Room E43-302 Washington, DC 20590 202-366-6410 gregory.rymarz@dot.gov