T3 Webinar:

Contactless Fare Payment Systems: CFMS Standards and the Future of Fare Collection

December 11, 2007

Text version of Webinar presentation:

"Contactless Fare Payment Systems: CFMS Standards and the Future of Fare Collection"

Description of image or images on a slide contained in brackets.

Back to Webinar Files

Slide 1: Contactless Fare Payment Systems.

CFMS Standards and the Future of Fare Collection

Talking Technology and Transportation (T3)
December 11, 2007

Slide 2: Tim Weisenberger

Transportation Analyst
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center)

(617) 494.3301
weisenberg@volpe.dot.gov

Slide 3: Webinar Ground Rules

We want this to be dialogue, not a monologue, but...

Please be patient—we have a large audience today

We don’t have all the answers!
Please answer the poll questions as we pose them

Slide 4: Introduction—What Will We Cover Today?

Understanding your business needs and how payment system options fit them
Advancements in contactless fare payment
How the CFMS Standard fits into the current fare system marketplace
Upcoming standards development projects
Your questions

Slide 5: Tomas Oliva

Director, Fare Revenue
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet)

(503) 661-8133
olivet@trimet.org

Slide 6: AFC Not Just for Major Metropolitan Markets

Smart Card Alliance and APTA

SCA lists over vendor 40 products for use within transit
APTA COMPS lists 30 products under fare collection hardware vendors

Peripherals to existing hardware

Certified/Proprietary

California Transit Association

AFC Pilot Giveaway

Slide 7: What is Contactless?

ISO 14443 communication protocol
ISO 7816 commands

[Image of a Contactless Smart Card, divided into two layers for the purpose of the position of the Antenna and IC Chip between the two layers.]

Slide 8: Technology Should Follow, Not Lead

Transit agency manager: We’re going to be implementing a smart card fare payment system.
Taxpayer: Very cool, but why?
Transit agency manager: What do you mean?

Slide 9: Fare Collection System

TRB Definition
All procedures and devices used to collect fares and to accumulate and account for fares paid.

TriMet Definition
TriMet’s Fare Collection System comprises:

Customers, TriMet personnel, contractors, business partners and other stakeholders,
Legislation, regulations and applicable standards,
Policies, procedures and processes, and
Equipment, software and other supporting technologies.

Slide 10: Purpose of Fare Collection

Not as straightforward as it may seem.
Few agencies appear to have prepared a formal purpose statement.
Should support the overall agency strategic goals.
Expect that reaching consensus will be difficult.
Keep it short and to the point.

Slide 11: Implementing Contactless

Initiation
Planning
Analysis
System Requirements Development
Implementation

Slide 12: Analysis and System Requirements Development

Understanding your business: Your requirements drive your solution
Numerous technology options, some more established than others

Slide 13: Analysis and System Requirements Development

Opportunities for reducing cost and increasing revenue
Improving customer service
Options for funding payment system investments
Understanding the basics of new technologies and approaches to fare payment

Slide 14: Analysis and System Requirements Development

Understanding the complexities of system design and integration
Business needs evaluation and assessment
Lessons learned from other agencies both nationally and internationally
New projects and technologies always under development

Slide 15: Technology Should Follow, Not Lead…Revisited

Resist the temptation to cut short laying the groundwork for making a technology decision. Time saved early will cost dearly during the implementation.
Risk tolerance and in–house capabilities are important considerations
Leading edge, not bleeding edge

Slide 16: Mike Meringer

US Transportation Sales Manager
Giesecke & Devrient

(925) 628-2053
mike.meringer@gdai.com

Slide 17: Technology Options

Traditional fare payment systems
Traditional payment card industry systems
Enhanced payment card industry systems
Basic combined systems
Enhanced combined systems

Slide 18: Traditional Fare Payment Systems

Boston – MBTA (Proprietary)
Philadelphia – PATCO only (CFMS)
New York – PATH, NY MTA (CFMS, Financial)
Washington DC – WMATA (Proprietary, Financial)
Chicago – CTA (Proprietary)
Atlanta – MARTA (Proprietary)
Los Angeles – LAMetro (Proprietary)
San Francisco – TRANSLINK (Proprietary)

Slide 19: Traditional Payment Card Industry Systems

Agencies large and small accept credit and debit cards for the purchase of fare products.
Contactless cards now available.
Card payments continue to make up an ever increasing share of all payments.

Slide 20: Enhanced Payment Card Industry Systems

NY MTA

Citi issued PayPass cards and key fobs
Readers support ISO 14443 and are certified by payment networks
Cards pass track I & II magnetic stripe data
Transactions well under 300 m/s transaction time

UTA Pilot

Moving into Phase II
ERG to provide Phase II backend settlement and system integration services
Rollout to include bus and rail

Slide 21: Basic Combined Systems

BarclayCard
UTA exploring placing transit application on FIPS compliant DoD Common Access Card
Taipei

Slide 22: Enhanced Combined Systems

Not implemented, largely conceptual or under development
Example 1: Combines traditional fare payment system and enhanced payment card industry system.
Example 2: Traditional fare payment system and a mobile telephone account based system.

Slide 23: Contactless Fare Media Form Factors

Traditional full featured smart cards.
Key fobs, watches, etc.
Limited use cards
Mobile phones (Near Field Communications)

Slide 24: Limited Use Ticketing

MARTA — Consuming 110K per week

75% open
Cobb County
Parking
1.2MM Mifare 1K cards issued
MARTA owns Smart Card Specification Document

Slide 25: On The Fence

Systems are not incompatible

Hardware/infrastructure consistent
Technology evolves
Migration path
Card, reader, network, servers

Slide 26: Tom Parker

Group Manager, AFC Capital Program
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)

(510) 287-4919
tparker@bart.gov

Slide 27: What is NFC?

Near Field Communications
Operates at the same frequency as smart cards
Secure
ISO 14443 and ISO 18092
Operating distance is ~4 cm
Can emulate a smart card
Can serve as communication between two devices
Can serve as a card reader/writer

Slide 28: Applications of NFC

[Slide is titled "Applications of NFC (Near Field Communications)". Shows the relationship between Smartcard applications (Transportation, Entertainment, Customer loyalty and bonus programs, and Payments) and NFC applications (Share and transfer content, Synchronize calendars, Easy network setup and configuration, and Generating non-traditional revenue).]

Slide 29: NFC System Architecture

[Diagram that shows NFC System Architecture.]

Slide 30: International NFC Transportation Pilots

O2 Wallet w/Trans for London, Transys, Barclaycard; Visa Europe, Nokia & AEG

This launch is UK's first large scale pilot of NFC (Near Field Communications) technology on mobile phones
Allows mobile phones to pay for purchases, access events or even be used as Oyster cards for travel around London, simply by touching the phone to a reader

Project TreiZEN Mobile NFC Ticketing w/OTA ticket top-up

This was a mobile NFC ticketing trial that allowed you to reload and pay for your transport ticket with your mobile phone
All the transactions were available Over-The-Air without a need to visit a ticket counter or vending machine

Slide 31: TreiZEN Trial Findings

Positive
Commuters like to use their phones for ticketing
No consumer education needed for validation
User interface on mobile

Negative
Mobile phone settings for data connectivity
Consumers not sure if they have a data plan
Payment registration too long
Physical receipts required for employer reimbursement

[Slide shows pie chart titled "Reason to call customer hot–line." Pie chart reveals that 44% call for purpose of Payment Registration; 15% for Ticket Validation; 26% for Mobile Data Connectivity During Top–Up; 11% for Overall Process, and; 4% Driver.]

Slide 32: Tim Weisenberger