Bus Part Rebuilds: More Planning Needed to Ensure Effectiveness

CSC can demonstrate examples of how its expertise results in substantial cost savings. However, data reliability issues, the shortcomings in King County Transit’s Rebuild Cost Estimating policy, and CSC’s lack of adherence to the policy raise questions about whether CSC is rebuilding parts that would be less costly to procure elsewhere, or buying new parts that would be less costly to rebuild. This is of particular concern with respect to the potential to buy externally-rebuilt parts, because little effort is made to compare the cost of internal rebuilds to external rebuilds. CSC’s full potential is not being realized because of labor provisions and a lack of planning. With labor negotiations taking place in 2016 and a significant shift in its workforce over the next five years, Transit has a unique opportunity to plan, collaborate, and resolve issues with inefficiencies. Doing so in a thoughtful way can ensure that CSC is better prepared for future needs, and that its activities generate the most value to the county.

We recommend that Transit improve and enforce policies related to the make vs. buy decision, improve the reliability of performance data, conduct planning aimed at improving how CSC resources are allocated, and work with labor to improve flexibility over resource allocation.

Transit’s Component Supply Center (CSC) performs specialized maintenance activities and, by rebuilding parts, has the potential to save money. However, a 2014 peer review by the American Public Transportation Association raised concerns about how decisions are made at the CSC and suggested that its resources could be better utilized. This audit assessed how Transit decides to make or buy bus and trolley parts, and the extent to which it has the structure in place to ensure that the most cost-effective decisions are being made.