1 Freight Performance Measurement Presented to Transportation Border Working Group on 7 June 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
BI-NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP STUDY Canada-U.S.-Ontario-Michigan Partnership Border Study.
Advertisements

Tennessee Department of Transportation ITS Mobility and Operations Summit Performance Measures November 18 – 19, 2009.
Transportation Border Working Group
Idaho/Canada Border Issues Transportation Border Working Group Meeting Coeur d’Alene, ID April 22-23, 2008.
Export and Rail Freight Trends at the U.S.-Canadian Border Chris Dingman Northern Border Transportation Specialist United States Department of Transportation.
Beyond the Border Action Plan Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (BIIP) 1.
Beyond the Border Integrated Cargo Security Strategy Canada – United States Transportation Border Working Group Detroit, Michigan April , 2013.
Title Subtitle Meeting Date Office of Transportation Performance Management MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Performance Management.
Developing Freight Performance Measures At U.S. Canadian Border Crossings Bruce Lambert.
Operations / ITS Provisions in SAFETEA-LU What’s in There and What’s Not Jeff Lindley Operations / ITS Discipline Meeting August 16, 2005.
URBAN FREIGHT Getting kicked to the curb?. How will we live?
Freight Data - A Transportation Perspective September 2010 Michael Sprung – FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations.
Washington State Truck Freight Performance Measure Research Interim Report Dale A Tabat Truck Freight Program and Policy Manager Freight Systems Division.
1 Freight Performance Measurement Presented to Texas Border Partnership Group 14 June 2006.
TxDOT Project Developing Freight Highway Corridor Performance Measure Strategies in Texas.
Beyond the Border Action Plan Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (BIIP)
Freight Performance Measures Crystal Jones FHWA Office of Freight Management and Operations.
Jeffrey F. Paniati Executive Director Federal Highway Administration US Department of Transportation Washington, DC Reducing Congestion Tools of.
Getting More Value from All Highway Data FHWA’s Current Initiatives and Future Plans Presented at Data System Requirements and Gaps to Support Restructuring.
Talking Freight April 15, General Themes Seen in Reauthorization Proposals/Positions Defining a federal role in freight and goods movement given.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to Talking Operations Webinar presented by Richard Margiotta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. June 28, 2006.
October 6, :30 – 11:00. MPM Team Agenda Review of MPM program and team MAP-21 and other updates Mobility performance measures reporting On-going.
GeoResources Institute Spatial Technologies for Freight Transportation Efficiency, Planning, and Safety Chuck O’Hara, Ph.D. Associate.
Overview of Project Main objective of study is to assess the impact of delay at border crossings and resulting changes in user benefits and broad macroeconomic.
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Act of 2011 Potential Freight Implications FHWA Talking Freight December 2011 Tony Furst, Director FHWA.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION BORDER WAIT TIME WORKING GROUP.
Incorporating Management and Operations and the Congestion Management Process into Metropolitan Transportation Planning FHWA/FTA Webinar June 24, 2008.
TSM&O FLORIDA’S STATEWIDE IMPLEMENTATION Elizabeth Birriel, PEElizabeth Birriel, PE Florida Department of TransportationFlorida Department of TransportationTranspo2012.
BPAC. “Congestion management is the application of strategies to improve transportation system performance and reliability by reducing the adverse impacts.
May 27, :00 – 11:45. MPM Team Agenda 1.Review of MPM program and team 2.MAP-21 and other updates 3. On-going activities 4. Outreach and upcoming.
National Multimodal Freight Trends/Issues/Forecasts/ Policy Implications.
KEY PROVISIONS OF THE DRIVE* ACT H.R. 22, as passed by the Senate on July 30, 2015 *Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Thomas.
Freight Performance Measures Unit 4: Performance Measures.
An Integrated Systems Approach for Border Crossings Transportation Border Working Group Semiannual Meeting Burlington VT June 10-11, 2003 Kevin L. Bebenek.
Promoting security, travel, and trade Transportation Border Working Group – April 2008.
Beyond the Border Action Plan Border Wait Time Measurement Technology.
Border Efficiency Research Initiatives American Transportation Research Institute August 16, 2006.
5 th Bi-Annual Border to Border Conference Performance Measures at Commercial Ports of Entry Juan Carlos Villa.
Beyond the Border Canada – United States Transportation Border Working Group Buffalo, New York April 8-9, 2014.
Module Funding Sources, Requirements, and Opportunities Identify, access, and share funding to support road safety initiatives.
Developing Real-Time Freight Performance Measures Crystal Jones FHWA Office of Freight Management October 20, 2004.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © About SHRP 2 L11 Travel Time Reliability Research 1) Current & Future User Needs SHRP2 L11 Study Objectives:
Making Work Zones Work Better Chung Eng Work Zone Mobility & Safety Team Office of Transportation Operations Federal Highway Administration US Department.
Freight Data for System Performance Measurement Jeff Short American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) Talking Freight August 18, 2010.
Border Trade Alliance Maria Luisa O’Connell BTA President March 11, 2008.
Western Cascadia Border Operations: delay and the impact on supply chains Anne Goodchild April 23, 2008 Assistant Professor Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Context and Priorities April 9,  Why FHWA Focuses on Improving Operations  FHWA Operations Program Areas  Key Current Program Priorities.
1 based on Federal Highway Administration Capability Maturity Model Workshops Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) Performance Measurement.
Michele Mueller Senior Project Manager Applying Intelligent Transportation Systems to Cross Border Issues TC / FHWA Regional Roundtable Mike Barnet Senior.
Abstract Background Methodology Methods While the project is in the data-collection and background research phase, there are several studies that utilize.
Tiffany Julien Office of Freight Management and Operations Implementation of the National Freight Network 1.
Regional Concept for Transportation Operations: An action plan to address transportation operations in Southeast Michigan Talking Technology & Transportation.
National Modeling TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference May 5, 2013.
Safe roads, Reliable journeys, Informed travellers Highways Agency’s Journey Time Reliability Target With Thanks to Paresh Tailor Business Planning & Performance.
April 13, 2010 Paul Belella In association with: Border Wait Time Measurement Test, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies.
Freight Partnerships = Economic Development and Freight Performance Pete Rahn Missouri Department of Transportation AASHTO 2009 Annual Meeting Palm Desert,
Transportation System Management & Intelligent Transportation Systems May 5, 2009 Steve Heminger Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
TRAVEL TIME ANALYSIS Use of Data IN-KY-OH Traffic Incident Management Conference October 9, 2015 Dayton, OH.
The Border Challenge TBDBTA October 26, 2007 Montreal, Quebec Canada.
December 17, 2010 Developing Transit Performance Measures for Integrated Multi-Modal Corridor Management.
Border Technology Update BORDER INFORMATION FLOW ARCHITECTURE WORKING GROUP Presented to Transportation Border Working Group (TBWG) 29 April 03 Washington,
1 USDOT Congestion Initiative Baltimore – Washington Regional Traffic Signal Forum Maritime Institute Linthicum, MD March 14, 2007 Regina McElroy Director,
FHWA Operations Core Business Unit National Associations Working Group April 8, 1999 Christine Johnson Program Manager and Director, ITS Joint Program.
1 NTOC Talking Operations – Road Weather Management – September 30, 2008 VII & Road Weather Pat Kennedy, Transportation Specialist FHWA/Office of Operations,
Freight Railway Integration Strategy For Inter-American Development Bank Transport Week 2009 by Transportation Technology Center, Inc. (TTCI) Subsidiary.
A COMPARATIVE STUDY Dr. Shahram Tahmasseby Transportation Systems Engineer, The City of Calgary Calgary, Alberta, CANADA.
Assessing Performance of the National Highway System, Freight Movement on the Interstate System, and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement.
Gateways & Trade Corridors FLUIDITY INDICATOR June 2014.
October 22, 2013 Ontario Ministry of Transportation Transportation Planning Branch Systems Analysis and Forecasting Office Rob Tardif Ontario Update on.
Mobility Goal--Continually improve the public’s access to activities, goods, and services through preservation, improvement, and expansion of the highway.
Presentation transcript:

1 Freight Performance Measurement Presented to Transportation Border Working Group on 7 June 2006

2 Goals of the FPM Initiative Short Term Support Monitoring Progress in Global Connectivity Continuous and Accurate Data Mid Term Develop a rich data source that can be used by stakeholders in the transportation community and by academia Output that is flexible and useful for a variety of audiences Long Term Use (sound FPM) data to target investment in National Highway System based where the greatest needs exist Better truck travel data that could increase the strength and ranking of freight projects against general transportation projects

3 Global Connectivity Desired Outcome: Sustain the economic efficiency of goods movement on the surface transportation system. Measure(s): Travel time in significant freight corridors (baseline to be determined in FY 2006). Average Speed Buffer Time Index (a measure of travel time reliability) Delay time at NHS border crossings (baseline to be determined in FY 2006). (Measures TBD) Examples: Total Crossing Time Average Wait Time

4 Data Collection Method  What?  Methodology use Trucks as Probes  Automatic Vehicle Location(AVL)/Satellite Technology  GPS Coordinates (Date and Time Stamped)  Unique Carrier ID  How?  Contractual partnership with American Transportation Research Institute, a Satellite Technology Vendor and Carriers  Initial data based on voluntary participation by selected carriers subscribers  Data Cleansing techniques allowed research team to collect data from all/most of the vendor’s carrier subscribers (~250,000 vehicles)

5 Accomplishments  Collecting, Analyzing and Processing data for Five Freight Significant Corridors  (I5, I10, I45, I65, I70)  1 Year of Data as of Jan 06  Collecting data for five US/Cda land border crossing areas  1 Year of Data as of Aug 06  As of 1 April 2006 we expanded data collection and analysis to 20 additional corridors (a more robust data set, greater “National Picture”)  Case studies scheduled with 8 States along the corridors  Weather and Work Zone Case Studies  New contract with technology vendor to include access to data for up to 10, 000 miles of arterials  Short Term and Long Term Data Sharing Strategies developed

6

7

8 CY 2005 Results Monthly Buffer Index for Five Corridors (CY05) JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPTOCTNOVDEC Month Buffer Index Interstate 5 Interstate 10 Interstate 45 Interstate 65 Interstate 70

9 Average Speeds Five Corridors (CY 2005) JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPTOCTNOVDEC Month Speed (MPH) Interstate 5 Interstate 10 Interstate 45 Interstate 65 Interstate 70 CY 2005 Results

10 Key Border Challenges – Some key border crossing points are seriously congested and transit times and the associated transportation costs are high. Physical infrastructure (transportation and other) at some border crossings require upgrading Clearance and Inspection procedures change and vary Localized data collection systems differ dramatically

11 FPM Border Component Data Collection Began 7/01/05 for 5 Crossings –Blaine (Pacific Highway): Blaine, WA –Pembina: Pembina, ND –Ambassador Bridge: Detroit, MI –Peace Bridge: Buffalo, NY –Champlain: Champlain, NY Continue to coordinate w/ Transport Canada on their Border Wait Time Study Effort looks at crossings as well as transportation network that supports the crossings

12 Pacific Highway/Blaine U.S. Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Washington State Highway 543 1) Interstate 5 Canadian Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAYS 1) Blaine Border Area (Route ID ‘BC’): 2) British Columbia Provincial 99 3) BC Provincial 15

13 U.S. Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAYS 1)Michigan Route 3 2)Interstate 75 3)Interstate 94 4)Interstate 96 5)The Ambassador Bridge (AB): Canadian Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAYS 1)ON Provincial 401 2)ON Provincial 3)E.C. Row EXPY FEEDER ROADS 4) ON Provincial 403 AMBASSADOR

14 PEMBINA U.S. Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Interstate 29 Canadian Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Manitoba Provincial 75 FEEDER ROADS 1)Trans Canada 100 (Winnipeg) 2) Trans Canada 1 3) Trans Canada 17 (Ontario)

15 PEACE BRIDGE U.S. Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAYS 1)Peace Bridge Connector (US) 2) Interstate 190 FEEDER ROADS 1) Interstate 90 2) Interstate 79 Canadian Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Queen Elizabeth Way FEEDER ROADS 4) ON Provincial 403 5) ON Provincial 407

16 CHAMPLAIN U.S. Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Interstate 87 (I-87 Canadian Roadways PRIMARY HIGHWAY 1)Provincial 15 2)Provincial 30 3)Provincial 20

17 What Will be the Measures? Average delay per Truck Trip (in Minutes or Hours) Average Travel Time Total Delay Average annual cost of delay Buffer Time Buffer Index

18 Crossing NameLocationAnnual Inbound Trucks 2003 [1] [1] Average Annual Delay /CV (mins) Average Annual Delay (hours) Annual $125/hr Blaine Pacific Highway Blaine, WA/ Surrey, BC 652, $10.1 M PembinaPembina, ND/ Emerson, MB 201, $3.6M Ambassador Bridge Detroit, MI/ Windsor, ON *1,634, $15.3M Peace BridgeBuffalo, NY/ Ft. Erie, ON *1,162, $15.8M ChamplainChaplain, NY/ Lacolle, QC 387, $5.3M [1][1] Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Border Crossing Entry Data, U.S./Canada; 2003 APPLYING THE RESULTS NOTIONAL

19 Frequently Asked Questions Q: What is the primary focus of the initiative A: Historical data for monitoring performance. Not probable this will evolve to a “real-time” product Q: What is the sample size A: Technology vendor, has approximately 250,000 in USA, Canadian subsidiary adds additional vehicles Q: How did you select the five crossings? A: Five Border Crossings account for over 55% of inbound CV to US Q: Who Owns the data? A: The carriers who subscribe to the vendor’s service Q: Can we share the data A: Aggregated/summarized data can be shared with little limitations, currently able to share raw data with public transportation agencies (primarily for assessment of utility) Q: What are the next steps

20 Key Next Steps Analyzing the US/Cda border data and developing appropriate measures of delay and wait time –Initiate effort to collect US/MX border data Synchronizing/Collaborating with Transport Canada Border Wait Time Project Assessing utility beyond FHWA PM needs – Case Studies under way State Case Studies ( (includes Washington) Weather Case Study Work Zone Case Study Developing Tools to Disseminate the Data Operationalizing the Data (Near-Real time processing) Transitioning data to a performance measurement framework –Targets –Strategies and tactics to produce positive change

21 Future Research Arterial Data Collection and Analysis Incidents (Network Effects) Congestion Pricing at the Border Linked Journeys Directional Data Analysis Data to support Planning –Demand Modeling –Forecasting Models –Economic Analysis –Project Analysis (Before, After, During)

22 More Information Crystal Jones FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations