6. 3. Transit Smart Fare System. Attachment 1

Transcription

1

2 Transit Smart Fare System Recommendation: That the June 26, 2012, Transportation Services report 2012TS2876, be received for information. Report Summary This report provides an update on the Transit Electronic Fare business case for Edmonton Transit System (ETS). Previous Council/Committee Action At the March 14, 2012, City Council meeting, the following motion was passed: That Administration work to update the Transit Electronic Fare business case: 1. include an analysis of the emerging Open Payments standard for Electronic Fare Collection 2. consult with our regional transit partners in the context of the ongoing Regional Fare Strategy 3. provide a report to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in the 2 nd quarter of 2012 identifying the pros and cons of the various options and outline the next steps to implement a Smart Fare system. Report Open Payment The emergence of contactless credit and debit cards and high-speed cellular networks makes it possible for transit properties to accept open payment cards as an option for payment of transit fares. This requires an account-based system where fare transactions are conducted and stored in the back office rather than on the actual card that the customer uses. Comparisons The primary advantages of an accountbased system over the card-based system include: easier and less expensive to implement fare changes can accommodate many different types of cards because cards merely serve as a link to the back office account cards and field devices are less sophisticated, easier to maintain, and less expensive contactless credit and debit cards can be used there is greater protection for customers if cards are lost or stolen easier and less expensive to achieve interoperability between regional transit systems and flexible in terms of accommodating changes in governance models Further detailed pros and cons for the two systems are provided in. Cost Update The information shown in Attachment 2, factored in the growth in the size of the transit system since the original business case was prepared. The original business case, estimated capital costs in 2008 of $22.5 million, was to implement a card-based system. To implement the card-based system in 2012, the capital cost would be $25.9 million ROUTING Transportation and Infrastructure Committee DELEGATION R. Boutilier/C. Stolte WRITTEN BY P. Waisman/J. Davidson June 26, 2012 Transportation Services 2012TS2876 Page 1 of 2

3 Transit Smart Fare System To implement an account-based system, the capital costs are estimated to be $23.9 million in These costs do not include funds to upgrade Transit s fareboxes or to acquire additional readers for the rear doors on buses, which would be required to fully accommodate a distance based or time based fare policy. These additional costs are estimated to be approximately $5 million for fareboxes, depending on requirements, and $1.2 million for readers. Regional Fare Strategy The Regional Fare Strategy Review is being conducted by the Capital Region Board Transit Committee. Regional transit partners are supportive of a smart fare system and an integrated regional fare structure, with the potential use of Provincial GreenTrip funding to pay for this initiative. Next Steps Provide a detailed business case to Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and to City Council for approval of option and funding requirements (Fall). GreenTrip Application in partnership with Region (Fall) Generate RFP Select vendor identified in the City s Strategic Plan The Way Ahead : Shift Edmonton s transportation mode Increase transit ridership Ensure transit sustainability through appropriate cost recovery ratio Budget/Financial Implications The capital costs to implement an account based smart card system including basic electronic fareboxes and acceptance of open payments is approximately $30 million. This project is currently unfunded. Attachments 1. Summary of Pros and Cons 2. Features and Assumptions of Cardbased and Account-based System Others Reviewing this Report L. Rosen, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer D. H. Edey, General Manager, Corporate Services Policy Edmonton Transit System Fare Policy C451F Corporate Outcomes Implementation of a smart card fare collection system and fare policies follows the strategic and priority goals Page 2 of 2

4 Summary of Pros and Cons Introduction In 2008 Edmonton Transit prepared a business case for implementing a smart card fare collection system modeled on a card-based smart card system. This was the standard operating concept in the industry at the time. Since then, technological developments have made account-based smart card systems feasible. An account based system architecture makes it possible for transit properties to accept contactless credit and debit cards for fare payment. Currently there has been limited deployment of account based systems, most RFPs for new smart card systems are based on this model and transit systems with a card-based system are planning to migrate to an account-based system. This document describes the history of smart card deployments in the transit industry and explains the differences between a card based system and an account based system. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of each is provided followed by a brief discussion on issues that need to be considered in developing a procurement strategy. The History of Smart Card Deployments in North America In 1998 Gatineau, Quebec became the first North American transit system to implement a smart card fare collection system. Since then many other transit systems have implemented smart card technology. Early adopters were mostly large systems in the United States who wanted to provide their customers with seamless regional travel. These early implementations were closed-loop card based systems based on proprietary equipment and software because industry standards were still evolving. Consequently these systems were relatively expensive compared to modern day deployments. The development of high speed mobile data networks and the commercialization of GPS technology in the mid 2000s enabled transit systems to implement account based systems where the actual fare calculation could be done in a back office. At the same time, common industry standards emerged helping to reduce the cost of cards and reading devices. The adoption of contactless card technology and transaction fee structures for micropayments within the financial industry also made it possible for accepting open payment credit and debit cards for transit fare payment. To date there has been limited deployments involving open payments in the transit industry, but most RFPs for new smart card systems now include such a requirement. Many of the existing smart card systems are also working towards incorporating open payments (i.e. Presto in metro Toronto). An Overview of Card-Based Smart Card Systems In a card-based system the stored value customers use to pay for their transit ride is maintained on the smartcard. The fare payment transactions take place offline, between the smartcard and the card reader. The rules for calculating the fare reside in the card reader and the smartcard contains all the data inputs necessary for the reader to calculate the fare and remaining stored value balance. The card has the ability to be written to. The type of data inputs on the card and the fare payment rules residing in the card reader 1

5 will be dependent on the fare policy of the transit system. The rules and data inputs will be different for distance based fare policies vs time based fare policies vs flat fare policies. If a transit system changes their fare policy all cards need to be replaced and new rules loaded into the card reading devices.; a logistical and expensive undertaking. In a card based system, the back office uses transactions generated by the devices to maintain a mirrored record of card activity for security, reporting, and if necessary settlement of funds. Since the field devices on transit vehicles operate in an offline environment the record maintained in the back office can only be updated when the vehicles return to the garages at the end of the day and any updates to field device software can only be done at that time. In a card based system where the stored value resides on the card, the customer may be at risk of losing the entire balance remaining on the card until the card can be identified and included in a hotlist of stolen and lost cards stored in every card reader in the system. Since the card readers on the transit vehicles in a card based system operate in an offline environment, the updating of hotlists occurs when the buses return to the garage at the end of the day; hence lost or stolen cards can be used by anyone during this interval. An Overview of Account-Based Smart Card Systems In an account-based system the stored value is maintained in a back office account rather than on the smartcard. The back office contains all the data inputs and fare calculation rules to conduct the fare payment transaction and the smartcard merely serves to identify the back office account to which it is linked. High speed mobile data communication access is a critical requirement for operating this system. Smartcards used do not have to be as sophisticated or expensive as those used in a card based system. An account based back office architecture is a prerequisite for accepting contactless credit and debit cards as the back office acts as a payment gateway into the financial services industry for authenticating, authorizing, and settling credit card and debit card transactions. The back office does the fare calculations since financial contactless credit and debit cards do not store the data inputs required in a traditional card based system. An account based system provides greatest convenience in types of cards and products that can be used and how they are used on the system. Customer lost or stolen cards can quickly be delinked from the back office account, immediately putting a card out of service, retaining the customer s balance. It is easier and less expensive to implement fare policy changes where it only requires software updates in the back office and the customer s smartcards do not have to be replaced in an account based system. 2

6 Cards Field Devices Communication Infrastructure Card Based Systems Holds the primary record of stored value so card security is paramount. High-end microprocessor cards required which are relatively expensive Cards must be replaced if there are significant changes to the fare policy. Only cards issued, owned, or controlled by the transit agency can be used. (i.e. credit and debit cards cannot be used.) Card management and distribution remains a critical functional requirement for the transit operator. Every reader in the system must hold the business rules software for fare calculation and loading of value. All field devices must be updated not only if there are significant changes to fare policy but also when prices change. Because field devices on transit vehicles operate offline, they are updated at the end of the day. This means there is a 24 hour window when fares may be at risk. Updating all field devices in a timely fashion can be a logistical challenge for large transit operators. Designed for offline operations although some devices located in permanent facilities (eg. LRT stations) can be hardwired. Garages Account Based Systems Links to a back office account. Requires only low-end inexpensive cards. Offers opportunities for customers to use any contactless card that complies to the same common standard. Contactless credit and debit cards can be used to make direct payments in lieu of cash or link to an account. Account Management rather than card management and distribution becomes a critical functional requirement. Primary purpose is to transmit the card ID to the back office for processing. Card readers do not have to be updated with new software with changes to fare policy or prices. In order to accept credit and debit cards the readers must be PCI compliant. This means that if the financial industry standards change, transit (like any other merchant) would be required to replace/ update their readers. On the other hand, these readers are less expensive to purchase and maintain because they are in wide use. A high speed mobile data communication network is a prerequisite to operate an account based system. Cellular access fees are an 3

7 Back Office Risk need extra equipment (eg. local wi-fi network) to enable updates to devices on transit vehicles. Mirrors the transactions generated by the field devices to maintain a historical record of card activity for security and reporting. Back office is passive and only updated with the days transactions when vehicles return to the garages. The amount of risk in a card based system is closely tied to the card itself. This is similar for more traditional mag-stripe or paper based fare collection systems. Smartcards however, have much greater security which was one of the main drivers for early deployments. Failure of a card or a reader, since both have to be functional for the fare payment transaction to occur, means that the financial risk is limited to card or device specific events. Device and card level failures will be more frequent than in an account based system but the amount at risk for each event will be small. The amount of risk in a card based system is tied to card and reader failures and the fact that there is a 24-hour window before hotlists or additional operating expense. The back office is live and includes the business rules to apply fare policies before passing charges on to a payment processor. The back office enables changes to fare policy and pricing to be implemented easily and quickly. Customers are also able to use the internet to view their accounts online, change account parameters, or add value. The amount of risk in an account based system is closely tied to the communications architecture. Failure of the communications network means that system wide fare payments are at risk. Such a failure is highly improbable but the magnitude of the financial loss could be huge. There is not much that a transit property can do on its own to mitigate this risk. The risk mitigation strategies rest with the cellular network providers who have much to lose if their network goes down. Like any other merchant, Transit properties must accept this risk as part of doing business. 4

8 Interagency Interoperability Deployments any other software updates can be downloaded to readers on the vehicles. To mitigate these type of losses, the transit system needs to have resources and procedures in place to change out defective equipment quickly. They also need to implement strong card management practices. Requires coordination and compromises of fare policies among agencies. Can require complex regional organization to plan and operate the system. A governance model and business rules for revenue sharing need to be established in advance. All agencies need to deploy at the same time and it is difficult to add other agencies to the system after deployment since new cards would have to be issued. This often results in long lead times for deployment. Most smartcard systems deployed to date are card based systems because the high speed mobile data communication networks were not available to enable account based systems at the time. Most card based systems involve proprietary equipment and software to some degree because industry standards were evolving. Card based systems, are considered field proven. Interoperability can be achieved automatically through the acceptance of contactless bank cards. Easier to add other agencies and allows flexibility in coordinating deployments between agencies. Deployment of an account based system can be achieved relatively quickly compared to a card based system. Allows more flexibility and time to evolve a governance model. It also makes it easier to accommodate changes in the governance model. Transit systems with card based systems are moving to account based systems. New deployments are generally account based systems. Transit systems are being motivated to deploy account based systems to enable participation in the open payments market. Many view the trend toward open payments as an opportunity to fundamentally change their business model by focusing less on transactions and more 5

9 Capital and Operating Expenses High-end smart cards and readers. Potential of having to reissue cards with change in fare policy. Loading devices required throughout the system. More equipment means higher annual maintenance and replacement costs. Capital costs are higher than for an account based system. on data to improve the core business of operating transit service. The business model for operating account based systems, and the acceptance of open payment media is inherently more flexible and provides more options. Some transit properties are deciding to go with account based systems but deferring the implementation of open payments; flexibility inherent to an account based system Low-end smart cards and readers. Cellular access fees and banking fees for processing transactions. Acceptance of third party cards reduces card production and distribution costs. Capital costs are lower, operating costs higher than for a card based system. 6

10 Attachment 2 Features and Assumptions of Card-Based and Account-Based Systems 2008 Card-Based Card-Based System (Closed) Fare calculations performed offline between card (data inputs) and reader (fare rules) Cards and Readers need to store transactions Garage WLAN s needed to download fare transactions at the end of the day and/or update reader software High-end microprocessor cards Reload terminals and vendor network write value to cards. Fare policy changes could require card reissuance 2008 ETS Operating Statistics Ridership = 66 million Revenue = $81 million Fleet = 903 Bus, 37 LRV, 98 DATS Transit Centres = 19 LRT Stations = 11 Budget Equipment $13,100,000 Engineering (15%) $1,950,000 Installation (10%) $1,300,000 Spares (5%) $650,000 Total Capital Costs $17,000,000 Documentation, Testing, Training, Project Management (15%) $2,600,000 Total Project Costs $19,600,000 Contingency (15%) $2,900,000 Gross Project Costs $22,500, Card-Based Card-Based System (Closed) - Reflects current unit costs and quantities for equipment to implement a card-based smart card system given the current operating statistics for ETS ETS Operating Statistics Ridership = 83 million Revenue = $107 million Fleet = 964 Bus, 74 LRV, 98 DATS Transit Centres = 25 LRT Stations = for NAIT line Budget Equipment $15,100,000 Engineering (15%) $2,250,000 Installation (10%) $1,500,000 Spares (5%) $750,000 Total Capital Costs $19,600,000 Documentation, Testing, Training, Project Management (15%) $2,900,000 Total Project Costs $22,500,000 Contingency (15%) $3,400,000 Gross Project Costs $25,900,000

11 Features and Assumptions of Card-Based and Account-Based Account-Based System (Open) Systems 2012 Account-Based Fare calculation performed entirely in back office High speed cellular network needed to communicate between buses and back office Value is added to customer account in the back office not to their card. Any contactless card can be used for account identification (e.g. student id s) Contactless credit and debit cards cards can also be used instead of paying a cash fare. Fare policy changes are easily implemented in back office (i.e. changes to cards and readers not required) Budget Equipment $13,900,000 Engineering (15%) $2,100,000 Installation (10%) $1,400,000 Spares (5%) $700,000 Total Capital Costs $18,100,000 Documentation, Testing, Training, Project Management (15%) $2,700,000 Total Project Costs $20,800,000 Contingency (15%) $3,100,000 Gross Project Costs $23,900,000 Other Capital Cost Considerations - Fare policy changes and Regional Governance Fares by distance require readers for rear doors (+$1,200,000) Fare box requirements affected by fare policy. New fare boxes: ($5,000 to +$15,000/vehicle) To accommodate distance based or time based cash fares To accommodate bills as we get closer to a $5 fare To issue receipts/transfers so buses become a proof of payment area. cash now $20M, ~19% of revenue with 15% the floor. Implications of no cash to provisions of complete fare box functionality can increase costs from $30m to $50m depending on system purchased. - TVM s purchased in 2004 are nearing their 3/4 design life; replace instead of updating (+$4,800,000) Deployment logistics on the LRT: existing TVM s need to remain operational so can t be upgraded until new system is in place. This means we will need additional TVM s in the interim. Can we lease or do we need to buy? One option may be to buy additional TVM s since they will eventually be need for the WEM to Mill Woods LRT line (+$224,000 per station: 4 readers and 2 TVM s) 2 additional Transit Customer Service Centres at WEM and Mill Wood's (incorporate into LRT capital construction?) Future - NFC technology including mobile payment considerations

12 Attachment 2