Border Wait Time Test, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies

1. Border Wait TimeTest, Evaluation and Deployment of Automated, Real-Time Technologies Project Briefing– October 22, 2013Tiffany Julien- FHWA

2. Border Wait Time Deployment • Goal to: “Implement an automated border wait-time measurement system” • Provide continuous wait time measures for cars, trucks and NEXUS vehicles • Increases operational and manpower efficiency and provide information to aid travelers in crossing choices

3. Organization • Border Wait Time Working Group: • US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) • U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) • Canada Border Services Agency, (CBSA), • Transport Canada (TC) • Bridge Authorities/Other: • Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority • Niagara Falls Bridge Commission • Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition • Whatcom Council of Governments • Contractors: • SAIC • Delcan Corporation • FreeAhead supported by Fast Lane Software and TPA-NA • Governments: • Ministry of Transport Ontario • Ministry of Transport British Columbia • NYSDOT • NY Thruway • WADOT

4. Project Conducted in 2 Phases • Phase 1 – a series of technologies tested with independent evaluation – Bluetooth selected • Phase 2 – implementation of Bluetooth solution at two Niagara crossings • Peace Bridge • Queenston –Lewiston Bridge • Optimize system and long term operations

5. Key Lessons Learned • Technical Implementation: • Planning and design • Deployment • Review and adjust system • Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities: • Needs and restrictions • Ability to support system within organizational structures • Inter-agency agreements • Future Procurements: • Clearly state requirements so solutions proposed are requirement-driven (with clear acceptance criteria). • Obtain inter-stakeholder agreement on procurement process and delivery and ongoing operations upfront

6. Technical Implementation Lessons Learned • When designing new implementations it would be advisable for the developer to remain flexible in all aspects of the plans as many border crossing have a unique geometry, differing vehicle configurations, customized layouts for duty free, select combinations of priority systems for FAST Tracks, Ready lanes; Nexus Lanes, etc. • Site visits should be incorporated into the design process to ensure that structures are suitable for mounting, traffic patterns are fully understood, info- and infra-structure properly supports the design, and that the system will not interfere with existing operations in any way. • A period of system testing and tuning should be planned for to allow relocation or adjustment of field components and software modifications to account for site-specific anomalies and to optimize performance.

7. Stakeholder R & RsLessons Learned • In any situation where stakeholders are being asked to engage in and perform activities that are outside their normal operations, challenges will arise and individuals and organizations will be asked to engage in actions that are somewhat foreign. Consultation with stakeholders upfront is key. • For future deployments that focus from the start on a long-term solution, it will be important that stakeholder roles and responsibilities be negotiated at the outset. Generically speaking, these negotiations will need to address two categories of responsibilities: • Securing commitments for funding and managing any necessary procurement actions. • Reaching agreement on a variety of systems-related issues such as the type of procurement, the nature of arrangements for system O&M, ownership of system components and plans for power and comms for systems.

8. Future ProcurementsLessons Learned • The requirements defined for system performance were invaluable during this project, and as a result that procurement process was relatively straightforward and simple. The system developers that designed and implemented systems were given clear expectations and as a result, problems were avoided with all vendors. • All stakeholders—including the system developer—will benefit from the existence of a formalized system accuracy assessment methodology. If a provider is to comply with contractual requirements related to accuracy, and compensation is dependent upon meeting those requirements, then a final, verifiable method must be in place. • The nature of the contract to be executed needs to be decided in advance. At a high level, this means that decisions need to be reached regarding whether a provider will develop and turn over a turnkey solution, or be asked to provide a service where wait time information is delivered in exchanged for a subscription or service fee.

9. Moving Forward • Project officially ended September 30, 2013. • Ongoing operation and maintenance (O&M) of the BWT system. • Challenges arise due to the system being in and servicing a multi-national, multi-jurisdictional area. Issues of funding, differing agency/organizational needs, rules, regulations and restrictions complicate transition of the system.

10. Questions? • Tiffany Julien, FHWA, Office of Freight Management and Operations 202-366-9241, tiffany.julien@dot.gov