Canadian Freight IssuesCanadian Freight Issues

ITS America CVFM Summer Meeting

Intermodal Freight Special Interest Group

August 31, 2005

2

Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline

• Border Initiatives:–Border Information Flows

Architecture (BIFA)–25% Challenge–Intelligent Border Crossings

• Freight Strategy

Border Information Flow Border Information Flow ArchitectureArchitecture

ArchitectureDevelopment

Team

4

BIFA OverviewBIFA Overview

• Initiative originated as an action item of the Transportation Border Working Group (TBWG)

• Transport Canada and US Department of Transportation (FHWA) leading the effort

• Work will follow a methodology based on US/Canada Intelligent Transportation System- Regional Architecture

5

Focus of InitiativeFocus of Initiative

• Identify technologies and agencies that use technologies at or near the border

• Identify priorities of these various agencies

• Promote interoperability of technologies

• Reduce technology investment cost

• Enhance information exchange, coordination and communication

6

Scope of BIFAScope of BIFA

• Geographic Scope–Region covering both sides of US

Canada border

–Must be representative of border areas from• British Columbia/Washington to Maine/New Brunswick

7

Scope of ServicesScope of Services

• BIFA Services will likely go somewhat beyond services covered by National Architectures

Services covered byNational Architectures BIFA Services

8

ServicesServices

• Starting point is set of Border Processes developed by Working Group

9

• People/ immigration

• Goods

• Conveyances

• Traffic monitoring

• Incident response

• Traveler information

• Inspection-lane opening and closing

• Traffic sorting for primary inspection, including dedicated lanes (NEXUS/FAST)

Tolling

• Bridge

• Tunnel

• Highway

• Safety inspections

• Weights/ Dimensions enforcement

• Credentials

• Permits/ Taxes/ Insurance

•Supply chain security

• Security

• Transportation Operations

• Transportation Planning

• Trade Policy

• Inspection and Enforcement

• POE facility analysis

• Regulatory and legislative policy analysis

• Modeling (using archived statistics)

2. Entry (Pre-clearance)

4. Conveyance Safety and Security

3. Traffic Management and Operations

5. Policy/Planning 1. Inspection

• People

• Cargo

• Outbound clearances (both inspection and “back office”)

• HazMat pre-notification

+1. Post- Clearance

• Safety Inspection

Border ProcessesBorder Processes

10

BIFA Architecture BIFA Architecture Development ProcessDevelopment Process

• ITS Architecture Familiarization– Webcast in December 2004

• Workshop #1- March 05– One day meeting to discuss

• Services and stakeholders

• Develop draft BIFA based on results of workshop 1

• Workshop #2- 29-30 August in Chicago– 2-day stakeholder meeting to review draft

architecture

• Create final BIFA NLT Dec 05

11

BIFA Outputs - WebBIFA Outputs - Web

12

BIFA Outputs - WebBIFA Outputs - Web

• Built by extracting data from BIFA Turbo database

• Links to all information – including descriptions & diagrams

• Access web based output at:–http://www.iteris.com/itsarch/bifa

13

BIFA- ScopeBIFA- Scope“Surrounding Region” Approach“Surrounding Region” Approach

• Include Border Crossing Systems

• Include Systems that interface to Border Crossing Systems

• Include ITS/ Related Systems that interface across the border

US/Canada

Border Crossing SystemsU.S.

Canada

US

SupportingSystems

Canada

SupportingSystems

US

ITS Systems

Canada

ITS Systems

US

ITS Systems

US

Other Systems

Canada

ITS Systems

Canada

Other Systems

BIFA

14

BIFA StakeholdersBIFA Stakeholders

• 47 Stakeholders documented– US and Canadian government agencies– Private travelers and companies

• Some are specific: FMCSA or Transport Canada

• Some are generic: “County or Municipal Public Safety Agencies”

• Supports goal of using BIFA in many regional or project architectures.

15

Next Steps and Take-AwaysNext Steps and Take-Aways

• Architecture is a framework for deployment of ITS and other technology in Border Regions – use is not mandatory– FHWA and Transport Canada to promote and monitor usage

of the architecture by border areas

– Focused outreach to non-traditional user of ITS architecture (i.e., Border Inspection Agencies, Bridge and Tunnel Operators)

• Architecture development is an iterative process , FHWA and Transport Canada to develop a plan for future update

• ITS Specialists, particularly those in northern border states encouraged to participate in review of architecture

• Potential in FY06 for partnering with states in border areas to demonstrate how the architecture can be used

25% Challenge25% Challenge

17

The 25% ChallengeThe 25% Challenge

• On December 17, 2004, Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan and former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge met with bridge, tunnel and ferry operators in Detroit, Michigan.

• Together, in cooperation with these operators, a commitment was made to reduce transit times in the Windsor-Detroit Gateway by 25% over the next year.

18

The 25% Challenge

• A metrics sub-committee was established to recommend how to measure “transit time” to evaluate whether the 25% reduction was met.

• A suite of ITS solutions are being considered to automatically measure transit times in real-time at the 3 Gateway crossings:– Ambassador Bridge– Blue Water Bridge– Detroit-Windsor Tunnel

Intelligent Border Intelligent Border Crossings ProjectCrossings Project

20

Ontario Intelligent Border Ontario Intelligent Border CrossingCrossing

• The Government of Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation have partnered to develop an Action Plan for the Intelligent Border Crossings.

• The plan will outline a strategy for the deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) at Ontario’s 14 land border crossings with the U.S., and 1 ferry crossing

21

Ontario Intelligent Border Ontario Intelligent Border CrossingCrossing

• 3 “Early Win” projects have already been announced for the Windsor Gateway

• A Discussion Paper is being prepared to solicit public comment on concepts

• Concept of Operations to be issued this fall

• Deployment Strategy to be issued this winter

• Design and implementation to begin in 2006

• More information at: www.intelligentborder.ca

A Canadian Freight A Canadian Freight StrategyStrategy

23

A Canadian Freight A Canadian Freight StrategyStrategy

• Origins of the Initiative:– Transport Canada embarked on consultations in

2003-04 on subject of intermodal freight – industry stakeholders and other levels of

government

• Outcomes– “Intermodalism” not really an issue, since need for

move to greater connectivity between modes would be driven by market forces

– Real issue that emerged was the ability of the system to move freight efficiently and accommodate growth.

24

1. Context: Freight 1. Context: Freight Movement BasicsMovement Basics

• Canada most trade dependent G7 countries (trade = 85% GDP); fluid freight transportation vital to strengthening Canada’s competitive position

• Freight moves everywhere, but major freight flows are highly concentrated and only select components of the national network are critical to freight movement:

• Network mixture of public and private; key transfer nodes in gateways largely private

• Private sector is primary player; in freight, the public sector is always a partner, facilitator, regulator

25

2. Challenges2. Challenges

• Freight transportation facing three major challenges:– Shifting trade patterns – moderate growth in NAFTA and

internal trade; explosive growth in trans-Pacific trade, particularly containerized shipments, straining capacity at busiest ports and surface modes that serve them; stiff competition among international ports to take advantage of opportunities

– Concentration of economic activity in large urban centres – highest population density, highest traffic use of transportation infrastructure

– The Impacts of the “Security Age” – Felt across all modes, all nations; effective transportation security management essential for Canada to optimize opportunities in North American market

26

3. Consultation Outcomes3. Consultation Outcomes

• Findings of TC intermodal consultations in 2003-04 reflect these challenges:– Concerns about capacity of transportation system

to accommodate growth– Need to create the conditions for sustained

infrastructure investment (private and public sectors)

– Concerns about the impact of border security– Need to coordinate public and private sectors to

advance freight transportation planning, contribute to resolving key issues (e.g. the urban freight stresses)

27

A Canadian Freight A Canadian Freight StrategyStrategy

• The Department is considering options that could form a federal freight strategy

• Key elements: – In the short term: can we apply a freight

perspective to transportation efficiency and gateway and corridor issues?

– Longer term Vision: Initiatives to promote efficiency

• Work is still in its early stages of development

• Likely to be the subject of a public discussion paper

For Further Information:For Further Information:

Susan SpencerSusan SpencerDirector, ITS OfficeDirector, ITS OfficeTransport CanadaTransport Canadaspences@tc.gc.caspences@tc.gc.ca

29

Border Information Flow Border Information Flow Architecture (BIFA)Architecture (BIFA)

• Developed as a “generic” regional ITS architecture

• Will have components of regional ITS architecture except

• Project Sequencing• List of Agreements

30

What does “generic” mean?What does “generic” mean?

• Architecture contains representative elements, services, etc.

• Element example:–State DOT TMC (vs VTrans Statewide TOC)

31

BIFA and Other Regional BIFA and Other Regional ArchitecturesArchitectures

• BIFA “overlaps” with existing and planned regional architectures

State/Province

Regional Architecture

State/Province

Regional Architecture

Alaska Statewide Montana Statewide

British Columbia

Provincial North Dakota Statewide

Idaho Statewide New Hampshire

Statewide (TRIO)

Northern Region New York Statewide

Maine Statewide Niagara Region

TRIO Vermont Statewide

Michigan Statewide Washington Statewide

Southeast Michigan North Central Region

Minnesota Statewide Northwest Region

32

Regional ITS Architecture Regional ITS Architecture Components*Components*

• Description of region (Scope)

• Agencies and stakeholders

• Operational concept that identifies roles & responsibilities of stakeholders

• Inventory of systems

• Needs and Services provided

* Based on FHWA guidance for development of Regional ITS Architecture, Oct 2001

33

• Information exchanges

• System functional requirements (high level)

• Identification of relevant ITS standards

• (List of) Any agreements required for operations

• Sequence of projects required for implementation

• Procedure for maintaining the regional ITS architecture

Regional ITS Architecture Regional ITS Architecture Components (cont)Components (cont)