Laserfiche WebLink
Re: Response to the San Diego County Grand Jury Report: “Got A Ticket? A North County Transit <br />District Ticket To Ride Is Hard To Get” <br />August 31, 2017 <br />Page 2 of 10 <br />to include improving TVM functionality and advancing other options for fare payment, <br />including purchasing of fares via the fare revenue system’s website and a new mobile <br />application. <br />RESPONSE TO FINDINGS: <br />In accordance with California Penal Code §933(c), please find NCTD’s specific <br />responses to the May 31, 2017 San Diego County Grand Jury Report: “Got A Ticket? <br />A North County Transit District Ticket To Ride Is Hard To Get.” <br />Finding 01: The undisputed TVM performance results the Contractor provides are <br />different from that determined by analysis of the failure and repair data from NCTD. <br />Response: NCTD wholly disagrees with this finding. The Grand Jury concluded this <br />finding based on the following statements which NCTD disputes: “Analysis of NCTD- <br />provided SCRs from October 2014 through September 2016 reflects TVM functional <br />average up-time at 94.5 percent during train operating hours;” “The Contractor’s reports <br />to NCTD during the same period showed that the functional average up-time is 98.6 <br />percent during train operating hours;” “The Grand Jury found no evidence that NCTD <br />had disputed the TVM performance reports provided by the Contractor.” <br />NCTD believes that the Grand Jury’s intent was to determine when TVMs were <br />available for customer use. The data that the Grand Jury used to reach its conclusion <br />was derived from the Service Call Reports (SCRs) provided by Cubic Transportation <br />Systems (Cubic) that are meant to report all work completed under the Cubic hardware <br />maintenance contract, not “Customer Availability”. NCTD also believes that the Grand <br />Jury made assumptions about the factors that are used to generate the “uptime” <br />reported to NCTD by Cubic. NCTD believes these assumptions resulted in the Grand <br />Jury reaching an incorrect conclusion related to TVM availability from a customer’s <br />perspective. <br />First, the “minutes down” number used by the Grand Jury included all calculated “Call <br />Downtime (min)” from the Cubic provided SCRs. As a result, scheduled downtime for <br />preventive maintenance and other work that is specifically excluded when calculating <br />downtime performance goals for hardware maintenance was included in the Grand <br />Jury’s calculation. <br />Second, the Grand Jury’s calculation of uptime percentage was based on 55 devices. <br />NCTD has a total of 131 devices that need to be accounted for under the Cubic <br />maintenance contract. Devices include not only TVMs, but also Rail-Side Validators <br />(RSV/PCID) and Ticket Office Terminals (TOT). <br />Third, the Grand Jury’s calculation of uptime percentage was based on the devices <br />being available during a 16.8-hour day. The time period used for uptime calculation on <br />the Cubic hardware maintenance contract prior to July 2017 was from 6:00am to <br />6:00pm, a span of 12 hours. <br />When using a 12-hour day, 131 devices, and excluding the allotted time for preventive <br />maintenance, the resulting uptime is 98.02% which validates the accuracy of the report <br />provided by Cubic.