PROJECT DESCRIPTION BORDER WAIT TIME WORKING GROUP.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview What is the National ITS Architecture? User Services
Advertisements

Border Wait Time Test, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies Status Update – October 2011.
Border Wait Time Test, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies Project Briefing– October 22, 2013 Tiffany Julien- FHWA.
MAP-21 Performance Management Framework August 8, 2013 Sherry Riklin Bob Tuccillo Angela Dluger The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
Policy Overview Hugh Conroy Whatcom Council of Governments (MPO) Bellingham, WA TBWG Data Workshop Detroit Metro, Michigan Crowne Plaza Hotel,
Transportation Border Working Group Montreal October 22 and 23, 2013 CBSA Project Update.
Title Subtitle Meeting Date Office of Transportation Performance Management MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Performance Management.
Operations / ITS Provisions in SAFETEA-LU What’s in There and What’s Not Jeff Lindley Operations / ITS Discipline Meeting August 16, 2005.
Border Architecture US/Mexico Presented to Border Partnership Working Group 11 January 2006.
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OVERVIEW Lecture 2. n Provide a historical perspective of the evolution of PMS over the last 20 years n Describe the basic.
PHAB's Approach to Internal and External Evaluation Jessica Kronstadt | Director of Research and Evaluation | November 18, 2014 APHA 2014 Annual Meeting.
Calais, ME-St. Stephen,NB Border Crossing Project A Case Study.
Freight Performance Measures Crystal Jones FHWA Office of Freight Management and Operations.
Talking Freight April 15, General Themes Seen in Reauthorization Proposals/Positions Defining a federal role in freight and goods movement given.
AASHTO Subcommittee on Rail Transportation Sept. 18, 2012 Kevin Chesnik.
International Road Transport Facilitation Results from a survey in the League of Arab States based on driver records Riyadh, November 13, 2013.
Barrington Road at Jane Addams Memorial Tollway (Interstate 90) Interchange Improvement Study Hoffman Estates Village Hall June 27, 2012.
Freight Bottleneck Study Update to the Intermodal, Freight, and Safety Subcommittee of the Regional Transportation Council September 12, 2002 North Central.
Climate Policy Development Tom Peterson The Center For Climate Strategies August 25, 2005.
1 SHRP 2 Implementation Outcomes and Products July 28, 2010 Accelerating solutions for highway safety, renewal, reliability, and capacity.
Border Information Flow Architecture Pilot Project Funding Program Transportation Border Working Group, Québec October 27, 2010.
Bi-national Collaboration in Delivering Port-of-Entry Highway Infrastructure Improvements Case Study: Pembina-Emerson Port-of-Entry and Innovations in.
CSUN Engineering Management Systems Engineering Management MSE607B Chapter 2, Part II The System Engineering Process.
1 Freight Performance Measurement Presented to Transportation Border Working Group on 7 June 2006.
1 Road Weather Management Performance Metrics Development: An Update Chris Cluett, Leon Osborne, Arthur Handman, Jeff Jenq ITS America 2007 Annual Meeting.
USDOT, RITA RITA: Oversight of USDOT’s R&D programs  University Transportation Centers $100M  UTC Consortia $80M  UTC Multimodal R&D $40M  Intelligent.
Cross-Border Coordination FHWA’s Role in Border Planning Lisa M. Dye International Transportation Program Engineer Federal Highway Administration Border.
1 IntelliDrive SM Research, Development and Emerging Technologies National ITS Perspective Panel Joseph I. Peters, Ph.D. Federal Highway Administration.
Beyond the Border Action Plan Border Wait Time Measurement Technology.
TBWG April 2012 Ed Strocko Federal Highway Administration.
BAD Building Technical Assistance Grant Program Overview Luke Elser Northern WV Brownfields Assistance Center January 16 th, 2015.
ITS Standards Program Strategic Plan Summary June 16, 2009 Blake Christie Principal Engineer, Noblis for Steve Sill Project Manager, ITS Standards Program.
Professionalizing Mobility Management: Developing Standards and Competencies Julie Dupree, Easter Seals Association of Travel Instruction Conference August.
Managing Travel for Planned Special Events: What, Why, & Benefits Walt Dunn, P.E. Dunn Engineering Associates, P.C. Talking Operations Seminar January.
Ohio Department of Transportation Steering Committee Meeting #3 Steering Committee Meeting #1May 30, 2012 Steering Committee Meeting #1 WELCOME Steering.
Engaging State DOT’s Engaging State DOT’s 2008 ITS America State Chapters Council Annual Meeting and State Chapters Strengthening Workshop Bernie Arseneau,
Guidance and Support of ITS Programs Michael Freitas May 2000 US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration.
Working Smart for the Customer’s Benefit Pam Hutton AASHTO SHRP2 Implementation Manager June 11, 2013.
MATOC Trial Phase Dec 2008 to Jun 2009 Presentation to the Transportation Planning Board Richard W. Steeg, PE Chair MATOC Steering Committee VDOT Regional.
MIT - October 1, 2004Jeffrey D. Ensor 1 RSTP Planning for Operations Jeffrey D. Ensor Malaysia Transport Group M.I.T. October 1, 2004.
Border Wait Time Measurement Technology. Beyond the Border: A shared vision for perimeter security and economic competitiveness On February 4, 2011, Prime.
Regional Concept of Transportation Operations: The Hampton Roads Experience Presented by: Camelia Ravanbakht, PhD Talking Technology & Transportation (T3)
1 Geospatial Line of Business Update FGDC Coordination Group April 14, 2009.
Michele Mueller Senior Project Manager Applying Intelligent Transportation Systems to Cross Border Issues TC / FHWA Regional Roundtable Mike Barnet Senior.
USDOT’s IntelliDrive Program Smart Roadside Initiative – How it Fits.
December 16, :00 – 2:45. MPM Team Agenda 1.Review of MPM Program and Team 2.Consensus items document 3. Upcoming activities 4. Discussion.
Incorporating Connected/Automated Vehicles into the Transportation Planning Process November, 2015 Max Azizi US DOT.
April 13, 2010 Paul Belella In association with: Border Wait Time Measurement Test, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies.
Technology Subcommittee November Topical Outline Technology Subcommittee Technology Subcommittee RoleRole Work PlanWork Plan ActivitiesActivities.
Discussion of Priority Activities for Next Eighteen Months Action Plans.
Creating Dynamic Value: Program Marketing and Two-Tiered Solicitation and Selection TRB Representatives / Annual RAC Meeting July 22-26, 2012.
Border Technology Update BORDER INFORMATION FLOW ARCHITECTURE WORKING GROUP Presented to Transportation Border Working Group (TBWG) 29 April 03 Washington,
For Presentation at 28 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting Vancouver, Canada Walter Kulyk Director, Office of Mobility Innovation Federal Transit.
1 Briefing on the TPB Transportation Planning Process Certification Summary Report Sandra Jackson Federal Highway Administration Transportation Planning.
U.S. - Canada Border Economic Costs A Study Conducted by Dr. John Taylor and Associates for FHWA, MDOT and NYDOT June 2003.
Canada Border Services Agency Update Transportation Border Working Group Niagara Falls, Ontario October 24, 2006.
Border Master Plan Laredo, Texas July 28, 2010  Laredo District  Coahuila  Nuevo León  Tamaulipas.
Freight Railway Integration Strategy For Inter-American Development Bank Transport Week 2009 by Transportation Technology Center, Inc. (TTCI) Subsidiary.
T H E M O D E L B O R D E R O F T H E 2 1 ST C E N T U R Y U N A F R O N T E R A D E S E G U R I D A D Y P R O S P E R I D A D © Copyright SecureOrigins,
1. Freight Transport System Facilities: Seaports Airports Rail yards Distribution centers Warehouses High traffic roads Border crossings 2 Modes:
Border Wait-Time Emissions Analysis Study 1 Project Briefing Travis Black Federal Highway Administration November 14, 2012.
Transportation Border Working Group - Vancouver October 21 and 22, 2014 CBSA Infrastructure Project Update.
ITS Session TBWG, Boston, April 13-14, 2010
Multi-state Corridor Pooled Fund Program
Border Crossing Best Practices Guidebook
Oregon Freight Plan Amendment
Chapter 5. The Transportation-Planning Process
BORDER WAIT TIME WORKING GROUP Technology Evaluation and Deployment
Beyond the Border Action Plan
Chicago to Council Bluffs-Omaha
Presentation transcript:

PROJECT DESCRIPTION BORDER WAIT TIME WORKING GROUP

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Program to Deploy and Evaluate Technologies to Measure Border Wait Times at US-Canada Border Crossings –Encompasses Passenger and Freight –Maximum Utilization of Market Ready Solutions –Engages Border Stakeholders

3 BACKGROUND NEED –Border wait times and delay are an important concern to travelers and border agencies –Real-time wait time data are used to make travel and operational decisions –Current data collection methods are largely manual and dissemination and archiving limited –Adoption of a 100% automated solution for collection and dissemination is highly desirable PARTICIPANTS –US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) –Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) –Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) –Transport Canada (TC)

4 PROJECT PURPOSE Identify and evaluate automated, technology-based solutions for measuring border wait time at Ports of Entry along US-Canada border crossing Deploy a solution for measuring border wait time at two Ports of Entry

5 CUSTOMS EFFICIENCIES EXPECTED The final automated land border wait time solution will allow customs agencies to: –Eliminate manual reporting of wait times; –Obtain standard, reliable, and consistent wait time and delay information in real-time; –Improve customer service by increasing availability of staff for enforcement operations; –Improve agency transparency by enabling land border wait times to be easily shared with participating agencies and regional traffic management centers; –Reduce delays in trade/commercial movement and loss of business income at the regional, state/provincial, and national level; and –Reduce environmental costs by decreasing pollution and carbon emissions associated with heavy congestion.

6 TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS EXPECTED The final automated land border wait time solution will allow transportation agencies to: –Identify where and when delays occur along approach roads to border crossings to be able to prioritize new investment in added capacity and evaluate success of those projects; –Assist in developing and implementing new and traditional demand management and mobility management strategies that result in more efficient use of transportation resources; and –Disseminate traveler information in real-time to assist driver decision making regarding where and when to approach a border crossing

7 GENERAL PROJECT DESIGN 1.Form inter-agency partnership and funding arrangements 2.Review available technology solutions 3.Define business requirements 4.Identify and prepare two test-bed locations 5.Design an application process enabling vendors to submit their solutions for testing and evaluation 6.Engage a 3 rd party systems integrator/evaluator to manage application process and conduct evaluations 7.Conduct testing of solutions at test-bed locations and document findings 8.Deploy a solution at two-test bed locations

8 ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO DATE Agreement on definition of Border Wait Time: –“The time it takes, in minutes, for a vehicle to reach the primary inspection booth after arriving at the end of the queue”. White Paper – Inventory of Current Programs for Measuring Border Wait Times at Land Border Crossings. Site visits to Peace Arch, Queenston-Lewiston Bridge, Otay Mesa Request For Information (RFI) – Land Border Operational Awareness

9 SCHEDULE May 2009 –Project Charter –Inter-agency cooperative agreements and funding arrangements –Business requirements –Review of solutions –Application to participate in evaluation –Selection and preparation of test-beds July 2009 –Procurement of 3 rd party systems integrator/evaluator –Technical memo describing evaluation strategy and protocol

10 SCHEDULE (continued) August – October 2009 –Deployment and testing of solutions November 2009 –Technical memorandum describing evaluation findings for each solution tested December 2009 –Final Report –Deployment of operational solutions at two test-best locations