1 / 19

TRADEOFFS BETWEEN SECURITY AND INSPECTION CAPACITY: POLICY OPTIONS FOR LAND BORDER PORTS OF ENTRY

TRADEOFFS BETWEEN SECURITY AND INSPECTION CAPACITY: POLICY OPTIONS FOR LAND BORDER PORTS OF ENTRY. Hilma Villegas Patrick L. Gurian, Josiah McC. Heyman, Adrian Mata, Robert Falcone, Edward Ostapowicz, Steven Wilrigs, Michael Petragnani, Eric Eisele

havyn
Download Presentation

TRADEOFFS BETWEEN SECURITY AND INSPECTION CAPACITY: POLICY OPTIONS FOR LAND BORDER PORTS OF ENTRY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TRADEOFFS BETWEEN SECURITY AND INSPECTION CAPACITY:POLICY OPTIONS FOR LAND BORDER PORTS OF ENTRY Hilma Villegas Patrick L. Gurian, Josiah McC. Heyman, Adrian Mata, Robert Falcone, Edward Ostapowicz, Steven Wilrigs, Michael Petragnani, Eric Eisele 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, January 2006, Washington, DC.

  2. BACKGROUND • Post-9/11, international ports-of-entry are seen as a means to protect the United States against entry of terrorists. • In binational metropolitan areas (El Paso-Ciudad Juarez) ports of entry are key nodes in local transportation network • delays at border propagate throughout region (Villalobos et al. 2005)

  3. BACKGROUND • In the fall of 2001 stringent inspections and waits of several hours at the border crossings. • Anecdotal evidence that at least one compartment of each vehicle was opened and inspected • Inspections have relaxed and border wait times for 2004-2005 are usually 30 minutes or less. • Has the policy of more detailed inspections yielded to the needs of the local community?

  4. SCOPE OF STUDY • Collect data on existing non-commercial primary inspections to characterize current inspection practices. • Evaluate the feasibility of three alternative inspection strategies • El Paso-Ciudad Juarez area is used as a case study.

  5. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • Increase inspection time: open one compartment on each vehicle. • Limit time of primary inspection and increase referrals to secondary inspections. • Shift crossers from normal, non-commercial lanes to dedicated SENTRI lanes. SENTRI is program of pre-registration and background checks for frequent crossers with the expectation of shorter lines and faster inspections

  6. PRIMARY INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS • December 2004 through June of 2005 • 1228 non-SENTRI (normal) non-commercial vehicles • 789 SENTRI vehicles

  7. PRIMARY INSPECTION OBSERVATIONS • Non-SENTRI mean = 34 seconds • SENTRI mean = 15 seconds • Of non-SENTRI inspections, 45% lasted 20 seconds or less.

  8. Primary Inspection Observations • 21% of non-SENTRI inspections were “high-attention” inspections (at least one compartment was opened) • 5% of SENTRI inspections were “high attention”

  9. Capacity and Demand:Average inspection times obtained from the observations can be converted to throughput rates and compared to demand figures.

  10. Option #1: More high attention inspections • Current mean=34 seconds • High attention mean=70 seconds • Capacity will be exceeded • In accord with anecdotal experiences post-9/11

  11. Option #2: Large variation in primary inspection times for non-SENTRI crossers was observed, 1-249 sec: What if we truncated at 90 or 63 seconds and send more to secondary?

  12. Option #2: Truncate Primary Inspections • Truncating at 63 sec allows for 35% high attention inspections rather than 21% if mean of 34 sec is maintained • Truncated high-attention mean is 51 sec • 7 times more secondary inspections • Space may be there but staffing is less clear

  13. Option #3: Expanding SENTRI-Shifting crossers to the SENTRI program allows more time for inspecting the remaining non-SENTRI crossers.

  14. Option #3: Expand SENTRI • Doubling or tripling the program is necessary to allow for substantial increases in the number of “high attention” inspections

  15. Level of overcapacity required to permit longer inspection times.

  16. Policy Implications • About 60% of crossers cross weekly or more frequently (Howard 2005) • We would need almost all of these people enrolled in SENTRI to allow “high attention” inspections for most non-SENTRI crossers • Not likely at $400/year

  17. CONCLUSIONS • Current inspections appear to be largely cursory, providing little time for a large fraction of entering vehicles. • No single alternative solves the problem • Alternatives can be implemented incrementally and should incrementally improve the situation in primary. • Divert more problematic cases to secondary inspections • Increasing the use of the SENTRI program.

  18. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE WORK • Impact on secondary not considered • Queue formation and dissipation not considered • Capacity assuming queue is present • Impact on region-wide traffic flows not investigated • Novel technologies may provide other alternatives to consider

  19. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • NSF supplemental funding for undergraduate research • Yi-Chang Chiu, Thomas Fullerton, Cheryl Howard, and Jorge Villalobos shared data and assisted with the study

More Related