Case 1:12-cv CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., in his official capacity as Attorney General, Case No. 1:12-cv-203 (CKK-BMK-JDB) Defendants, JAMES DUBOSE, et al., Defendant- Intervenors. SOUTH CAROLINA S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE 2011 SOUTH CAROLINA ANNUAL TRANSIT TRENDS REPORT Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201 ( Rule 201 ), Plaintiff, the State of South Carolina, respectfully requests that this Court take judicial notice of the facts in the 2011 South Carolina Annual Transit Trends Report ( Report ), a publicly available document authored by the South Carolina Department of Transportation s Office of Public Transit. The State also requests that it be permitted to designate the Report as an exhibit and to include the document in the State s Final Supplemental Appendix. Rule 201 permits federal courts to take judicial notice of facts that are not subject to reasonable dispute because they can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). Under Rule 201, courts may... take judicial notice of information posted on government websites. Defendant-Intervenors Request for Judicial Notice as to the County Elections and Voter Registration Offices Days and

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 2 of 5 Hours of Operations at 2 (Doc. 224) (citing Daniels-Hall v. Nat l Educ. Ass n., 629 F.3d 992, 998-99 (9th Cir. 2010) (taking judicial notice of information posted on government website, the accuracy of which was undisputed)). The Transit Report is publicly available on the South Carolina Department of Transportation s website. See The 2011 South Carolina Annual Transit Trends Report, Office of Public Transit, South Carolina Department of Transportation (Feb. 2012), available at http://www.dot.state.sc.us/getting/pdfs/public_transit/fy2011transittrendsannualreport.pdf (attached as Exhibit 1). And because it is prepared by the Office of Public Transit, it is a source[] whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). The Report details public transportation options in South Carolina. For that reason, Dr. Ruoff expressly relied on the Report when forming his written testimony and creating the maps that Intervenors introduced at the beginning of trial. See Affirmation of John C. Ruoff 3. Yet Dr. Ruoff s testimony and Intervenors maps omit important forms of public transit identified in the Report. See, e.g., id. (explaining that Dr. Ruoff included only fixed route public transit systems operating in different portions of the State ); D.I. Exhibit No. 418, JA-DI_03866 ( This map also excludes ad hoc or demand-response services. ). On-demand public transportation services are available in the counties where Intervenors have represented that little or no public transportation options will be available to minority voters of low socio-economic status. For instance, among the counties with 60% black voting age population and above: The Allendale Scooter ensures that general public transit service [is] available to residents of Allendale County. Report at 4. 2

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 3 of 5 The Bamberg County Office on Aging began operating as a general public transit provider in 2011, after assuming the operational duties of the HandiRide services in Bamberg County. Id. at 4-5. The Cross County Connection makes service available to residents of Calhoun and Orangeburg Counties. Id. at 4. The Williamsburg County Transit System make[s] regular commuter trips. Id. at 5. The Santee Wateree RTA provides a general public transit system in Lee County. Id. at 5. Further, the seven counties in South Carolina without any general public transit services are all majority-white counties according to Dr. Ruoff s analysis. See id. at 6 (identifying Abbeville, Cherokee, Greenwood, Lancaster, Laurens, Saluda, and Union Counties as the only counties lacking general public transit services); D.I. Exhibit No. 418, JA-DI_03866 (identifying the same seven counties as being 40% non-hispanic black voting age population or less). Thus, by excluding on-demand public transit options, Intervenors maps present an incomplete picture of the transportation options available to voters in South Carolina. In fact, they fail to convey that white voters in Abbeville, Cherokee, Greenwood, Lancaster, Laurens, Saluda, and Union Counties face a public transportation disadvantage compared to minority voters in counties with on-demand and fixed-route public transit systems. The State was not fully aware of how Intervenors would use Dr. Ruoff s incomplete transportation maps until those maps were introduced at trial. 1 Because Intervenors suggested at trial that the counties in which there is the highest percentage of African American population 1 Intervenors shared the maps with the Court and South Carolina on August 20, 2012 as Exhibit C to Defendant-Intervenors Response to Plaintiff s Motion to Exclude the Trial Testimony of Dr. John C. Ruoff (Doc. 204). 3

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 4 of 5 in South Carolina... are the counties where there is virtually no public transportation, the State thinks it is important that the Court consider the full source underlying Intervenors maps. Aug. 27, 2012 Afternoon Trial Tr. at 179:20-23. Thus, to ensure a complete record on this issue, South Carolina respectfully requests that the Court take judicial notice of the facts contained in the Report and permit the State to designate the document as an exhibit to be included in the State s Final Supplemental Appendix. Respectfully submitted, Hon. Alan Wilson ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA Rembert Dennis Building, Room 519 1000 Assembly Street Columbia, SC 29201 (803) 734-3970 Karl S. Bowers, Jr. (admitted pro hac vice) WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE 1727 Hampton Street Columbia, SC 29201 (803) 454-6504 Dated: August 30, 2012 s/h. Christopher Bartolomucci Paul D. Clement (DC Bar No. 433215) H. Christopher Bartolomucci (DC Bar No. 53423) Stephen V. Potenza (admitted pro hac vice) Jeffrey M. Harris (admitted pro hac vice) Brian J. Field (DC Bar No. 985577) D. Zachary Hudson (admitted pro hac vice) Michael H. McGinley (DC Bar No. 1006943) BANCROFT PLLC 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 470 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 234-0090 H. Christopher Coates (admitted pro hac vice) LAW OFFICE OF H. CHRISTOPHER COATES 934 Compass Point Charleston, SC 29412 (843) 609-7080 Counsel for the State of South Carolina 4

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258 Filed 08/30/12 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on August 30, 2012, I filed the foregoing brief with the Court s electronic filing system, which will provide notice to all counsel of record. s/h. Christopher Bartolomucci H. Christopher Bartolomucci (D.C. Bar No. 453423) 5

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 1 of 106 EXHIBIT 1

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 2 of 106 THE 2011 SOUTH CAROLINA ANNUAL TRANSIT TRENDS REPORT FY 2010-2011 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE REPORT February 2012 Office of Public Transit South Carolina Department of Transportation

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 3 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND Information regarding paper copies and accessible formats of this document may be obtained by contacting the South Carolina Department of Transportation s Office of Public Transit: South Carolina Department of Transportation Office of Public Transit 955 Park Street Post Office Box 191 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Phone: (803) 737-0831

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 4 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND Introduction 1 Appalachian Planning Region 3 Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Planning Region 3 Catawba Planning Region.. 3 Central Midlands Planning Region 3 Lowcountry Planning Region 4 Lower Savannah Planning Region. 4 Pee Dee Planning Region...5 Santee Lynches Planning Region...5 Upper Savannah Planning Region. 5 Waccamaw Regional Planning Region.. 5 Statewide Issues. 6 Transit Operators... 7 Statewide Trends 8 Transit Trends Report Layout and Agency Abbreviations... 9 STATEWIDE SUMMARY Total Fleet Size.. 11 Annual Passenger Trips. 12 Annual Vehicle Miles 13 Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles. 14 Annual Vehicle Hours 15 Annual Vehicle Revenue Hours...16 Annual Operating Revenues.. 17 Annual Operating Expenses... 18 STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE MEASURES Cost Per Passenger Trip. 19 Cost Per Vehicle Mile 20 Cost Per Vehicle Revenue Mile. 21 Cost Per Vehicle Hour... 22 Cost Per Vehicle Revenue Hour... 23 Passenger Trips Per Vehicle Revenue Mile... 24 Passenger Trips Per Vehicle Revenue Hour.. 25 Farebox Recovery Ratio 26 i

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 5 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND STATEWIDE TRANSIT PERFORMANCE TREND DATA Total Fleet Size. 27 Passenger Trips.. 27 Vehicle Miles... 28 Vehicle Revenue Miles 28 Vehicle Hours...... 29 Vehicle Revenue Hours..... 29 Operating Revenue.....30 Operating Expenses... 30 Cost Per Passenger Trip. 31 Cost Per Vehicle Mile 31 Cost Per Vehicle Revenue Mile. 32 Cost Per Vehicle Hour... 32 Cost Per Vehicle Revenue Hour. 32 Passenger Trips Per Vehicle Revenue Mile... 33 Passenger Trips Per Vehicle Revenue Hour.. 34 Farebox Recovery Ratio 34 TRANSIT PROVIDER SUMMARIES Aiken Area Council On Aging.. 35 Bamberg County Office on Aging 37 Best Friend Express/Lower Savannah RTMA.. 39 Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority... 41 Charleston Area Regional Transit Authority. 43 City of Anderson Transit System.. 45 City of Clemson Transit System 47 City of Rock Hill Transit... 49 City of Seneca Transit/CAT 51 City of Spartanburg/SPARTA... 53 Coast/Waccamaw Regional Transportation Authority.. 55 Cross County Connection/Lower Savannah RTMA..57 Edgefield County Senior Citizens Council 59 Fairfield County Transit System 61 Generations Unlimited... 63 Greenlink/Greenville Transit Authority. 65 McCormick County Senior Center 67 Newberry County Council of Aging.. 69 Palmetto Breeze/Lowcountry Regional Transportation Authority 71 Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority.. 73 Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority.. 75 Santee Wateree RTA at Lower Richland... 77 Senior Services of Chester County 79 ii

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 6 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND Spartanburg County Transportation Service Bureau.. 81 TriCounty Link/Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester RTMA. 83 Williamsburg County Transit System 85 York County Access.. 87 APPENDIX A Aiken Area Council On Aging.. A-1 Bamberg County Office on Aging.. A-1 Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester RTMA/TriCounty Link. A-1 City of Clemson Transit System A-2 City of Seneca Transit/CAT A-2 Coast/Waccamaw Regional Transportation Authority.. A-2 Edgefield County Senior Citizens Council A-3 Fairfield County Transit System A-3 Generations Unlimited... A-3 Lower Savannah RTMA/Cross County Connection... A-4 Lowcountry Regional Transportation Authority/Palmetto Breeze A-4 McCormick County Senior Center A-4 Newberry County Council of Aging.. A-5 Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority.. A-5 Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority.. A-5 Santee Wateree RTA at Lower Richland... A-6 Senior Services of Chester County A-6 Spartanburg County Transportation Service Bureau.. A-6 Williamsburg County Transit System A-7 York County Access.. A-7 iii

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 7 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND Public transit service meets a variety of needs in South Carolina, including those of commuting workers, students, shoppers and medical patients. At least one transit agency operates in each of the ten planning regions in the state. Commuter transit service has been used in some communities to address high unemployment and the lack of local job opportunities. The rural characteristics of many South Carolina communities make the provision of transit service more of a challenge as compared to urban communities where there are generally higher population densities. Transit services have been implemented in some communities through existing human service agencies that have agreed to provide general public transportation service in addition to their human service transportation activities. The map below identifies current transit systems in South Carolina by the county of location and by planning region. There are 27 transit service operations operated by 25 separate transit agencies. Santee Wateree RTA provides general public transit services for two distinct service areas, and reports the two activities as separate entities. They also provide a contract service in two other counties in another planning region. The following map provides the locations of the transit agencies within their respective Council of Governments (COG) planning regions of the state. 1

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 8 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND ID Mass Transit Authority Operation Type Service Area 1 Aiken Area COA, Inc./Pony Express Non-Urbanized Rural Aiken County 2 Bamberg County Office on Aging/Handy Ride Non-Urbanized Bamberg County 3 Best Friend Express/Lower Savannah RTMA Urbanized Augusta-Aiken 4 Central Midlands RTA Urbanized Columbia-Richland 5 Charleston Area Regional Transit Authority Urbanized Charleston 6 City of Anderson/Electric City Transit Urbanized City of Anderson 7 City of Clemson Transit/ Clemson Area Transit Non-Urbanized Pickens County 8 City of Rock Hill Urbanized Rock Hill 9 City of Seneca Transit Non-Urbanized City of Seneca 10 City of Spartanburg/SPARTA Urbanized City of Spartanburg 11 Coast/Waccamaw RTA Urbanized & Non- Urbanized Horry and Georgetown Counties 12 Lower Savannah RTMA/Cross County Connector Non-Urbanized Orangeburg and Calhoun Counties 13 Edgefield County Senior Citizens Council/ECSCC Non-Urbanized Edgefield County 14 Fairfield County Transit System Non-Urbanized Fairfield County 15 Generations Unlimited/Local Motion Non-Urbanized Barnwell County 16 Greenlink/GTA Urbanized Greenville 17 McCormick County Transit Non-Urbanized McCormick County 18 Newberry County COA/Newberry Express Non-Urbanized Newberry County 19 Palmetto Breeze/Lowcountry RTA Non-Urbanized Allendale, Beaufort, Colleton, Hampton, Jasper Counties 20 Pee Dee RTA Urbanized & Non- Urbanized Chesterfield, Darlington, Dillon, Florence, Marlboro and Marion Counties 21 Santee Wateree RTA Urbanized & Non- Urbanized Sumter, Kershaw, Lee, Clarendon Counties 22 Santee Wateree at Lower Richland Non-Urbanized Lower Richland Area 23 Senior Services of Chester Co./ Chester Connector Non-Urbanized Chester County 24 Spartanburg County Trans Service Bureau Urbanized & Non- Urbanized Spartanburg County and City 25 Tri-County Link/Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Non-Urbanized Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester Counties 26 Williamsburg County Transit System Non-Urbanized Williamsburg County 27 York County Access Non-Urbanized Rural York County 2

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 9 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND APPALACHIAN PLANNING REGION The Appalachian Planning Region consists of Anderson, Cherokee, Greenville, Oconee, Pickens and Spartanburg counties. The region has six transit operations that provide general public transit services. They are the City of Anderson Transit System, the Greenlink transit service operating in the urbanized area of Greenville, the City of Seneca Transit System, Clemson Area Transit, the City of Spartanburg Transit System and Spartanburg County Transit System. Greenville County has the largest population of any county in the state and the industrial development in and around the Greenville Urbanized Area could represent opportunities for commuter transit development. A unique operation in the Appalachian planning region is the Spartanburg County Government transit system, operated by the Spartanburg Regional Hospital System that provides demand response transit service in the urbanized area and general public service for the rural parts of the County as well. BERKELEY-CHARLESTON-DORCHESTER PLANNING REGION The Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Planning Region contains the counties that identify its name (Berkeley, Charleston and Dorchester counties). There are two general public transit systems that operate in the B-C-D region, Charleston Area Transportation Authority (CARTA) and the Tri-County Link (formerly known as the Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester RTMA). CARTA operates in the urbanized areas of Charleston County, while the Tri-County Link provides services to the rural communities within the three-county region. CATAWBA PLANNING REGION The Catawba Planning region is made up of the counties of Chester, Lancaster, Union and York counties. The Catawba planning region abuts the North Carolina border on its northeast section and is impacted in terms of commuter traffic into the Charlotte metropolitan area. There are three general public transit systems operating in the region; the City of Rock Hill transit service, the Senior Services Incorporated of Chester County, which operates a new public transit service called the Chester County Connector and the York County Government transportation services. CENTRAL MIDLANDS PLANNING REGION The Central Midlands planning region consists of Fairfield, Lexington, Newberry, and Richland counties. This region includes the city of Columbia, the state capital; and Richland County which is the second largest county in terms of population with 384,504 residents (2010 U.S. Census). Three general public transit systems operate in the Central Midlands regions: the Central Midlands RTA operates in Columbia area; the Fairfield County Transit System in Winnsboro and the Newberry County Council on Aging. 3

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 10 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND LOWCOUNTRY PLANNING REGION The Lowcountry Planning Region is made up of Beaufort, Colleton, Hampton and Jasper counties. The Palmetto Breeze (Lowcountry Regional Transit Authority) is the only general public transit entity operating in the region. Having proximity to the popular Hilton Head tourist destination, the Palmetto Breeze provides work-related commuter trips from rural communities in the region to employment destinations at Hilton Head Island, as well as demand response and contract transit services. Except for Beaufort County, the counties of the Lowcountry planning region are primarily rural. LOWER SAVANNAH PLANNING REGION The Lower Savannah planning region contains Aiken, Allendale, Bamberg, Barnwell, Calhoun and Orangeburg counties. Most of the general public transit entities in this region are managed by the Lower Savannah Regional Transit Management Association (Lower Savannah RTMA). The Lower Savannah RTMA functions as a transportation management organization for the entire Lower Savannah planning region. Through its transportation management functions, the Lower Savannah RTMA also manages demand response and fixed route services provided by other transit agencies in Allendale, Bamberg, Barnwell (Generations Unlimited); and Calhoun and Orangeburg Counties (Santee-Wateree RTA). The following general public service activities are found in the Lower Savannah region: GENERAL PUBLIC SERVICES IN THE LOWER SAVANNAH PLANNING REGION SERVICE NAME TYPE SERVICE MANAGING AGENCY SERVICE PROVIDER SERVICE AREA Aiken Area COA Demand Response Aiken Area COA Aiken Area COA Rural Aiken County Best Friend Express Fixed Route & DR LS RTMA Aiken Area COA Urban Aiken County Allendale Scooter Demand Response LS RTMA Palmetto Breeze Allendale County Bamberg HandiRide Demand Response Bamberg County Office on Aging Local Motion LS RTMA Demand Response Cross County Connection Source: SCDOT Office of Public Transit Bamberg County Office on Aging Generations Unlimited Fixed Route & DR LS RTMA Santee-Wateree RTA Bamberg County Barnwell County Calhoun County Orangeburg County Four of the services listed in the table show the Lower Savannah RTMA as the managing agency. The service agreement Lower Savannah RTMA established with Palmetto Breeze has made general public transit service available to residents of Allendale County. The agreement established with Santee-Wateree RTA makes service available to residents of Calhoun and Orangeburg Counties and an agreement with Generations Unlimited makes general public service available to residents of Barnwell County. The Lower Savannah RTMA also manages the urban Aiken County service through the Aiken Area Council on Aging. The Bamberg 4

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 11 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND County Office on Aging began operating as a general public transit provider in 2011, after assuming the operational duties of the HandiRide services in Bamberg County. PEE DEE PLANNING REGION The Pee Dee planning region is comprised of Chesterfield, Darlington, Dillon, Florence, Marion and Marlboro counties. The Pee Dee RTA is the only general public transit provider in the region and provides general public service to all six counties. The counties of the Pee Dee planning region reflect a collection of some of the highest unemployment rates in the state. The Pee Dee RTA currently provides commuter trips to the Myrtle Beach area for residents who are employed or seeking employment in the Grand Strand region. SANTEE LYNCHES PLANNING REGION The Santee Lynches planning region has Clarendon, Kershaw, Lee and Sumter counties. The Santee Wateree RTA is the only general public transit system in the planning region. The Santee Lynches planning region includes the Shaw Air Force Base military installation and the City of Sumter. According to recent Census data, Sumter County is predominantly urban, while the other three counties in the region are predominantly rural. Lee and Sumter counties had unemployment rates that were both higher than the state annual average for 2010 (SC Department of Employment and Workforce). Offering an option for employment outside of the region, the Santee Wateree RTA has regular commuter trips to the Myrtle Beach area. UPPER SAVANNAH PLANNING REGION The Upper Savannah planning region contains the counties of Abbeville, Edgefield, Greenwood, Laurens, McCormick and Saluda. Currently operating general public transit services in the Upper Savannah region are the Edgefield County Senior Citizen Council (ECSCC) and the McCormick County Senior Center. Both of these agencies are primarily human service entities, offering programmatic services to senior citizen clients. Transportation is generally a key component with the successful operation of many human service agencies. The provision of general public transit service is open to all residents in the respective service areas of both the ECSCC and the McCormick County Senior Center. WACCAMAW REGIONAL PLANNING REGION The Waccamaw Regional planning region has Georgetown, Horry and Williamsburg counties, with two general public transit providers operating in the region (the Coast RTA and the Williamsburg County Transit System). This planning region includes the tourist and service employment centers of the Grand Strand and Myrtle Beach area. Including Coast RTA, the Pee Dee RTA, Santee Wateree RTA and the Williamsburg County Transit System make regular commuter trips into the Grand Strand area of the Waccamaw Regional planning region. With tourism and development expected to continue to grow in this region, the need for additional 5

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 12 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND service-related employment would also increase the need for transporting more workers to the region. STATEWIDE ISSUES Most of the 46 counties in South Carolina have some level of general public transit services available to their residents. The following seven counties have been identified as not having public transit service supported by any of the funding programs administered by the South Carolina Department of Transportation: Abbeville, Greenwood, Laurens and Saluda counties, which are all situated in the Upper Savannah Council of Government s planning region; Cherokee County in the Appalachian COG planning region; Lancaster and Union counties of the Catawba COG planning region. These seven counties are included in the following table, along with selected community factors associated with public transportation demand. COUNTIES WITHOUT GENERAL PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS COUNTY 2010 Population Over 65 (2010 Census) % Rural 1 % In Poverty 1 Abbeville 25,417 16.5% 76.6% 20.7% 13.3% 2 Cherokee 55,342 13.4% 61.3% 19.5% 14.7% 3 Greenwood 69,661 15.1% 43.2% 17.6% 12.1% 4 Lancaster 76,652 15.3% 61.4% 20.4% 16.3% 5 Laurens 66,537 15.0% 65.7% 19.2% 11.5% 6 Saluda 19,875 16.1% 81.3% 15.1% 9.3% 7 Union 28,961 16.5% 64.3% 20.1% 18.6% South Carolina 4,625,364 13.7% 39.5% 16.4% 11.2% 6 Annualized 2010 Unemployment Source: SCDOT Office of Public Transit, 2010 U.S. Census data, South Carolina Department of Employment & Workforce. 1 Rural definition and percentage were taken from the 2000 Census. While the indicators given in the preceding table are not an exhaustive list of transit-related factors, they are often associated with the evaluation of transit needs. Using the state average as a benchmark of comparison, nearly all of the counties surpass the state level in population over 65 years of age, percent rural communities, percent of county population in poverty and annual average unemployment level. Except for Greenwood County, all of the counties identified as not having general public transit service have more than fifty percent of their population living in rural communities. Rural communities present a particular challenge to the planning of transit services because of the relatively lower population density as compared to typical urban areas and fewer facilities that can serve as ideal bus stops for rural passengers. Feasibility is a major factor in the consideration to implement transit services in a particular community. The identification of an existing agency partner, such as a human service agency, could help to make new general public transit start-ups more practical for communities that have demonstrated the need for such service. Recent new general public transit operations have typically been human services agencies (specifically senior-related human services agencies) that accepted general public transit service as an additional function.

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 13 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND Some of the counties that have comparatively high unemployment rates may benefit from employment-based commuter transit activities. The coordination of commuter services with other demonstrated transit needs, such as senior and human services transportation and local general public services, may represent a more feasible proposal for new transit services with the communities that currently have no service. TRANSIT OPERATORS As of June 30, 2010, South Carolina had 25 publicly-supported transit agencies operating in 27 areas of the State. Of these, 7 are exclusively urbanized, 16 are exclusively rural or nonurbanized, and 4 offer both urbanized and rural services. The state s public transit operations presented in this report are listed in the following table. URBANIZED NON-URBANIZED OPERATIONS URBANIZED & NON- TRANSIT OPERATION OPERATIONS URBANIZED 1 AIKEN AREA COA X BAMBERG COUNTY OFFICE ON AGING 2 X 3 BEST FRIEND EXPRESS X 4 CENTRAL MIDLANDS RTA X 5 CHARLESTON AREA RTA X 6 CITY OF ANDERSON X 7 CITY OF CLEMSON TRANSIT X 8 CITY OF ROCK HILL TRANSIT X 9 CITY OF SENECA TRANSIT X 10 CITY OF SPARTANBURG X 11 COAST RTA X 12 LOWER SAVANNAH RTMA (CROSS X COUNTY CONNECTION) 13 EDGEFIELD COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS COUNCIL X 14 FAIRFIELD COUNTY TRANSIT X 15 GENERATIONS UNLIMITED X 16 GREENLINK/GTA X MCCORMICK COUNTY SENIOR CENTER 17 X 18 NEWBERRY COUNTY COA X 19 PALMETTO BREEZE X 20 PEE DEE RTA X 21 SANTEE WATEREE RTA X SANTEE WATEREE AT LOWER 22 RICHLAND X 23 SENIOR SERVICES OF CHESTER COUNTY X SPARTANBURG COUNTY 24 TRANSPORTATION SERVICE BUREAU X 25 TRI-COUNTY LINK X 26 WILLIAMSBURG COUNTY X 27 YORK COUNTY ACCESS X 7

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 14 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND A common issue affecting transit service in the state is the rural nature of many of the communities in South Carolina. While rural community characteristics do not preclude the establishment of transit service, it can present a challenge for service effectiveness. Another common issue affecting transit service statewide is the exposure and perception of transit services in some communities. According the United States Census figures, less than 1.0% of the South Carolina workers use public transportation as a means of getting to and from their work sites. At the same time, 79.9% of the state s workers drive to work alone in some type of motor vehicle. Transit is obviously not viewed as a practical or personal option for many of the state s workers. However, there are some efforts that seek to counter this. Examples include the ongoing SmartRide commuter-focused transit services and the Sumter Vanpool in the greater Columbia area, the CARTA Express and Tri-County Link Commuter Solutions in the greater Charleston region, and the 82X Commuter Express services from Rock Hill into the Charlotte, North Carolina business district. There are multiple examples of rural express and vanpool options throughout the state, collectively increasing the number of modal choices for South Carolinians. Beginning with Fiscal Year 2007-2008, SCDOT developed and implemented a new transit data acquisition and analysis program called OPSTATS (Operating Statistics). The purpose of the OPSTATS program is to better assist SCDOT in gathering and analyzing data for assessing operating and capital needs, conducting annual trend analyses, monitoring performance, and ongoing reporting to local, state and federal entities. This report represents the results of OPSTATS initial data analyses based on submissions from transit operators statewide. STATEWIDE TRENDS From FY 2009 to the end of FY 2011, South Carolina saw an overall increase in transit ridership statewide from 11,653,374 to 11,874,494; or 1.9%. Transit ridership in the state s urbanized areas increased 2.9%, while transit ridership in the rural communities decreased by 0.7% over the same period. Reported revenues have demonstrated modest increases over the past three years, as depicted in the following table. STATEWIDE FISCAL YEAR FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 REVENUE $55,868,058 $56,491,396 $62,916,321 PERCENT CHANGE N/A 1.1% Increase 11.4% Increase The change in reported revenues from FY 2009 to 2010 was 1.1% increase. The comparison between revenues reported from FY 2010 and 2011 shows a relatively larger increase of 11.4 % among all reporting transit agencies. 8

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 15 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND The Cost Per Passenger Trip is a calculation of the overall expenditure level divided by the overall number of passenger trips delivered for the same period. Statewide cost per passenger trip rose from $4.77 per trip in 2009 to $5.01 in 2010. The data collected for Fiscal Year 2011 produced a cost per passenger trip calculation of $5.21, representing an increase of 9.2% in this performance factor from 2009 to 2011. REPORT LAYOUT AND AGENCY ABBREVIATIONS The report is divided into three sections: statewide summary, statewide performance, and provider summaries, inclusive of provider performance based on reported data. Beginning with this year s report, there is also an appendix on Section 5311 funding allocation data. It is important to note that the data presented herein is as provided by the state s public transit operators with review and validation, where appropriate, by SCDOT s Office of Public Transit. The following key is to be used as a reference to the Statewide Summary and Performance charts. AIKEN Aiken Area Council on Aging, Inc. BOA Bamberg County Office On Aging BFE Best Friend Express/Lower Savannah RTMA CMRTA Central Midlands Regional Transit Authority CARTA Charleston Area Regional Transit Authority AND City of Anderson Transit System CLEM Clemson Area Transit System RKHL City of Rock Hill Transit SENC City of Seneca Transit/CAT SPARTA City of Spartanburg/d.b.a. SPARTA COAST Waccamaw Regional Transportation Authority/d.b.a. COAST CROSS Cross County Connection/Lower Savannah RTMA ECSCC Edgefield County Senior Citizens Council FCTS Fairfield County Transit System GU Generations Unlimited GRNL Greenville Transit Authority/d.b.a. GreenLink MCRK McCormick County Senior Center NCOA Newberry County Council on Aging PLBZ Lowcountry Regional Transportation Authority/d.b.a. Palmetto Breeze PDRTA Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority SWRTA Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority SWLR Santee Wateree RTA at Lower Richland CHSTR Senior Services of Chester County SCGV Spartanburg County Transportation Service Bureau TCL Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester RTMA/d.b.a. Tri-County Link WCTS Williamsburg County Transit System YORK York County Access 9

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 16 of 106 PUBLIC BACKGROUND N/A indicates a reported data item or performance factor that is Not Applicable to a particular transit operation or that the required data was not provided by a transit agency. Farebox Recovery includes both fare revenues from transit patrons and contract revenues for transit services provided by a transit agency. 10

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 17 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE PUBLIC STATEWIDE SUMMARY

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 18 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE TOTAL FLEET SIZE Total Service Area: 862 Urbanized Service Area: 382 Non-Urbanized Service Area: 480 120 100 80 60 40 20 - FY 2011 TOTAL REVENUE VEHICLES TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA REVENUE VEHICLES 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 - FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA REVENUE VEHICLES TRANSIT OPERATION 11

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 19 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS Total Service Area: 11,874,494 Urbanized Service Area: 8,745,937 Non-Urban Service Area: 3,128,557 FY 2011 TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS 5,000.0 4,500.0 4,000.0 3,500.0 3,000.0 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION 5,000.0 4,500.0 4,000.0 3,500.0 3,000.0 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA PASSENGER TRIPS TRANSIT OPERATION 1,600.0 1,400.0 1,200.0 1,000.0 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 - FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA PASSENGER TRIPS TRANSIT OPERATION 12

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 20 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES Total Service Area: 25,712,037 Urban Service Area: 11,014,555 Non-Urban Service Area: 14,697,482 FY 2011 ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE MILES 4,000.0 3,500.0 3,000.0 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE MILES 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION 13

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 21 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE MILES Total Service Area: 22,634,932 Urbanized Service Area: 10,128,227 Non-Urbanized Area: 12,506,704 FY 2011 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE MILES 4,000.0 3,500.0 3,000.0 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE REVENUE MILES 4,000.0 3,500.0 3,000.0 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE REVENUE MILES 2,500.0 2,000.0 1,500.0 1,000.0 500.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION 14

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 22 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS Total Service Area: 1,453,386 Urbanized Service Area: 712,044 Non-Urbanized Service Area: 741,342 FY 2011 ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS 300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE HOURS 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 - TRANSIT OPERATION 15

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 23 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS Total Service Area: 1,299,427 Urbanized Service Area: 679,545 Non-Urbanized Service Area: 619,882 FY 2011 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 TRANSIT OPERATION 300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 - FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS TRANSIT OPERATION 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 - FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS TRANSIT OPERATION 16

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 24 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE S Total Service Area: $62,916,321 Urbanized Service Area: $34,823,865 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $28,092,456 FY 2011 $14,000.0 $12,000.0 $10,000.0 $8,000.0 $6,000.0 $4,000.0 $2,000.0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA OPERATING REVENUE $14,000.0 $12,000.0 $10,000.0 $8,000.0 $6,000.0 $4,000.0 $2,000.0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA OPERATING REVENUE $5,000.0 $4,500.0 $4,000.0 $3,500.0 $3,000.0 $2,500.0 $2,000.0 $1,500.0 $1,000.0 $500.0 TRANSIT OPERATION 17

IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS IN THOUSANDS Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 25 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE Total Service Area: $61,845,834 Urbanized Service Area: $35,323,802 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $26,522,032 FY 2011 $14,000.0 $12,000.0 $10,000.0 $8,000.0 $6,000.0 $4,000.0 $2,000.0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 URBANIZED SERVICE AREA OPERATING EXPENSES $14,000.0 $12,000.0 $10,000.0 $8,000.0 $6,000.0 $4,000.0 $2,000.0 TRANSIT OPERATION FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED SERVICE AREA OPERATING EXPENSES $5,000.0 $4,500.0 $4,000.0 $3,500.0 $3,000.0 $2,500.0 $2,000.0 $1,500.0 $1,000.0 $500.0 TRANSIT OPERATION 18

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 26 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 27 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE COST PER PASSENGER TRIP (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: $5.21 Urbanized Service Area: $4.04 Non-urbanized Service Area: $8.48 $35.00 $30.00 $25.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $5.00 FY 2011 TOTAL COST PER PASSENGER TRIP (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $16.00 $14.00 $12.00 $10.00 $8.00 $6.00 $4.00 $2.00 FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER PASSENGER TRIP (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER PASSENGER TRIP (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $35.00 $30.00 $25.00 $20.00 $15.00 $10.00 $5.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS 19

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 28 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE COST PER VEHICLE MILE (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: $2.41 Urbanized Service Area: $3.21 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $1.80 FY 2011 TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 $3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 TRANSIT OPERATIONS 20

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 29 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: $2.73 Urbanized Service Area: $3.49 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $2.12 FY 2011 TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS 21

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 30 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE COST PER VEHICLE HOUR (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: $42.55 Urbanized Service Area: $49.61 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $35.78 FY 2011 TOTAL COST PER HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $90.00 $80.00 $70.00 $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $90.00 $80.00 $70.00 $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2010 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $70.00 $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS 22

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 31 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: $47.59 Urbanized Service Area: $51.98 Non-Urbanized Service Area: $42.79 FY 2011 TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $90.00 $80.00 $70.00 $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS $100.00 $80.00 $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) $90.00 $80.00 $70.00 $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS 23

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 32 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: 0.52 Urbanized Service Area: 0.86 Non-Urbanized Service Area: 0.25 FY 2011 TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS 24

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 33 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: 9.14 Urbanized Service Area: 12.87 Non-Urbanized Service Area: 5.05 FY 2011 TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 - TRANSIT OPERATIONS 25

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 34 of 106 PUBLIC STATEWIDE PERFORMANCE FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO (STATEWIDE AVERAGES) Total Service Area: 32.9% Urbanized Service Area: 23.8% Non-Urbanized Service Area: 45.1% FY 2011 TOTAL FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 URBANIZED TOTAL FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% TRANSIT OPERATIONS FY 2011 NON-URBANIZED TOTAL FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO (STATE AVG REPRESENTED BY HORIZONTAL LINE) 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% TRANSIT OPERATIONS 26

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 35 of 106 STATEWIDE TRANSIT PERFORMANCE TREND DATA

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 36 of 106 TOTAL FLEET SIZE SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 814 852 862 Urbanized: 361 379 382 Non-Urbanized: 453 473 480 TOTAL FLEET SIZE 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 11,653,374 11,628,150 11,874,494 Urbanized: 8,501,885 8,619,649 8,745,937 Non-Urbanized: 3,151,489 3,008,501 3,128,557 TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 27

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 37 of 106 ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 201 Statewide: 23,756,936 22,997,090 25,712,037 Urbanized: 10,644,491 7,759,489 11,014,555 Non-Urbanized: 13,112,445 15,237,601 14,697,482 ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES 30,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE MILES SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 22,649,685 21,942,532 22,634,932 Urbanized: 9,968,455 10,047,896 10,128,227 Non-Urbanized: 12,681,230 11,894,636 12,506,704 25,000,000 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE MILES 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 28

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 38 of 106 ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 1,458,639 1,556,374 1,453,386 Urbanized: 682,561 691,711 712,044 Non-Urbanized: 776,078 864,663 741,342 2,000,000 ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 1,281,027 1,314,759 1,299,427 Urbanized: 648,231 664,457 679,545 Non-Urbanized: 632,796 650,303 619,882 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 29

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 39 of 106 SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $55,868,062 $56,491,396 $62,916,321 Urbanized: $28,621,784 $30,250,429 $34,823,865 Non-Urbanized: $27,246,278 $26,240,967 $28,092,456 70,000,000 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $55,615,467 $58,200,659 $61,845,834 Urbanized: $30,511,415 $31,434,441 $35,323,802 Non-Urbanized: $25,104,052 $26,766,218 $26,522,032 70,000,000 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 30

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 40 of 106 ANNUAL COST PER PASSENGER TRIP SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $4.77 $5.01 $5.21 Urbanized: $3.59 $3.65 $4.04 Non-Urbanized: $7.97 $8.90 $8.48 $10.00 $8.00 ANNUAL COST PER PASSENGER TRIP $6.00 $4.00 $2.00 STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE MILE SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $2.34 $2.53 $2.41 Urbanized: $2.87 $4.05 $3.21 Non-Urbanized: $1.91 $1.76 $1.80 $5.00 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE MILE $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 31

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 41 of 106 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $2.46 $2.65 $2.73 Urbanized: $3.06 $3.13 $3.49 Non-Urbanized: $1.98 $2.25 $2.12 $4.00 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE HOUR SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $38.13 $37.40 $42.55 Urbanized: $44.70 $45.44 $49.61 Non-Urbanized: $32.35 $30.96 $35.78 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE HOUR $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 32

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 42 of 106 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: $43.41 $44.27 $47.59 Urbanized: $47.07 $47.31 $51.98 Non-Urbanized: $39.67 $41.16 $42.79 ANNUAL COST PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR $60.00 $50.00 $40.00 $30.00 $20.00 $10.00 STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 0.5 0.5 0.5 Urbanized: 0.9 0.9 0.9 Non-Urbanized: 0.3.03.03 1.0 ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE MILE 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 33

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 43 of 106 ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 9.1 8.8 9.1 Urbanized: 13.1 13.0 12.9 Non-Urbanized: 5.0 4.6 5.1 15.0 ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS PER VEHICLE REVENUE HOUR 10.0 5.0 - STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN ANNUAL FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO SERVICE AREA FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Statewide: 37.8% 32.4% 32.9% Urbanized: 30.7% 22.8% 23.8% Non-Urbanized: 46.3% 43.7% 45.1% 50.0% 40.0% ANNUAL FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% STATEWIDE URBAN NON-URBAN 34

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 44 of 106 PUBLIC PROVIDER SUMMARIES

Case 1:12-cv-00203-CKK-BMK-JDB Document 258-1 Filed 08/30/12 Page 45 of 106 PUBLIC PROVIDER SUMMARIES AIKEN AREA COUNCIL ON AGING, INC 159 Morgan Street Aiken, South Carolina 29802 Telephone: (803) 648-5447 Website: www.aacoa.net Director: Scott Murphy Service Modes: Fixed Route & Deviated Fixed Route Service Type: Urban & Non-Urbanized Area Counties Served: Aiken County TOTAL FLEET SIZE Total Service Area: 26 Urban Service Area: 11 Non-Urban Service Area: 15 ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS Total Service Area: 18,324 Urban Service Area: 11,853 Non-Urban Service Area: 6,471 ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES Total Service Area: 284,552 Urban Service Area: 172,638 Non-Urban Service Area: 111,914 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE MILES Total Service Area: 273,692 Urban Service Area: 161,778 Non-urban Service Area: 111,914 ANNUAL VEHICLE REVENUE HOURS Total Service Area: 18,496 Urban Service Area: 12,075 Non-Urban Service Area: 6,420 Total Service Area: $350,344 Urban Service Area: $191,273 Non-Urban Service Area: $159,071 $400,000.00 $350,000.00 $300,000.00 $250,000.00 $200,000.00 $150,000.00 $100,000.00 $50,000.00 Total Service Area: $479,872 Urban Service Area: $318,657 Non-Urban Service Area: $161,215 $600,000.00 $500,000.00 $400,000.00 $300,000.00 $200,000.00 $100,000.00 ANNUAL VEHICLE HOURS Total Service Area: 19,612 Urbanized Service Area: 12,819 Non-Urban Service Area: 6,792 35