BILL:		AB 684

AUTHOR:	ASSEMBLY MEMBER JOHN DUTRA
		(D-FREMONT)

SUBJECT:	SMART CARD

STATUS:	ASSEMBLY TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE APRIL 21

ACTION:	SEEK AMENDMENTS AND WORK WITH AUTHOR

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends that the MTA Board of Directors adopt a seek amendments and work with author position on AB 684.

PROVISIONS

AB 684 would:

•	Require that all smart card systems placed into contract after 2004 be equipped with a specified device to create interoperability of differing smart card technology.
•	Require that all smart card systems placed into contract prior to 2004 be equipped with this device as the equipment is upgraded or repaired.
•	Require the establishment of a statewide task force to oversee the development of specifications and software to establish the technological requirements to establish interoperability of varying smart card technologies.

IMPACT ANALYSIS

Public transit agencies in California have sought to develop smart card technologies which would allow patrons to utilize one universal card with computerized information to travel the system.  This technology is evolving and being installed in transit fare collection systems in California most notably in regional programs in San Francisco and Los Angeles.  At this point a number of vendors manufacture this proprietary technology and issues have arisen related to the interoperability of the different systems.  Currently, the American Public Transit Association (APTA) has formally sponsored an initiative to adopt national smart card standards for use in the transit industry.

The MTA has begun the process of implementing the Universal Fare System (UFS) and will install bus and rail fare collection equipment in 2004.  The MTA’s effort is being undertaken with all of the Los Angeles County Municipal Operators and eleven have committed to purchasing equipment from the MTA contract.  If AB 684 were to pass, the MTA would not have to comply with the bill’s requirements until the equipment is repaired or upgraded.  The remaining municipal operators are not under contract and it is possible that these operators could be forced to adopt a different technological solution than the MTA’s.  It should be noted that the requirements of the bill to implement a specific technological solution would affect the repair of a machine and the word “repair” is not defined in the bill.  The cost to retrofit the MTA’s system is unknown.

AB 684 is sponsored by the Ventura County Transportation Commission who currently has smart card technology in their buses.  Their system is not immediately interoperable with other smart card systems, or with the equipment being purchased by the MTA.  The sponsors of the measure contend that the cost to the MTA to upgrade the equipment would be minimal.  It is not clear at this point if the sponsor’s assertions are accurate for the MTA system.  The requirement that a specific technological solution be implemented could result in significant costs for the MTA and could result in reduced functionality for the MTA system.  The impact of this legislation to the municipal operators requires further analysis to ensure that cost and functionality are not jeopardized.

The sponsors have offered to amend the bill to allow for other technological solutions to be implemented.  Staff is concerned that any requirement to implement a technical solution at this point could result in significant costs to the MTA and threaten the functionality of the MTA system.  Staff further suggests that additional work such as that proposed by a statewide committee should proceed, in tandem with the APTA initiative, before specific technical solutions are mandated.  Staff, therefore, recommends that the MTA Board of Directors adopt a seek amendments and work with author position on AB 684 and seek to remove the provisions requiring a specific technical solution.