Beyond the Border: Border Wait Time Measurement

Beyond the Border:
Border Wait Time Measurement
Regional Roundtable Discussions
Transport Canada
U.S. Department of Transportation –
Federal Highway Administration
Memorandum of Cooperation
• Signed March 9, 2010 by:
•
•
•
•
Transport Canada
U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA)
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
• The participants intended to work together to identify opportunities
for cooperation on specific projects and activities that foster the use
of technology to measure border wait times at US-Canada land
border crossings by forming a Border Wait Time Working Group
Beyond the Border
• On February 4, 2011, Prime Minister Harper and President Obama
announced a shared vision for perimeter security and economic
competitiveness with focus on four areas of cooperation:
• Addressing threats early; trade facilitation, economic growth and jobs;
cross-border law enforcement; and critical infrastructure and cybersecurity
• On December 7, 2011, President Obama and Prime Minister Harper
released an Action Plan to implement this shared vision:
• A key commitment was to “implement a border wait-time measurement
system at mutually determined high priority Canada-United States
border crossings”
• Canada and the U.S. agreed to implement these systems at the top 20
high-priority Canada-U.S. land border crossings
High-Priority Border Crossings
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Point Roberts, WA – Boundary Bay, B.C.
Peace Arch: Blaine, WA (I-5) – Douglas, B.C. (Hwy 99)
Pacific Highway: Blaine, WA (WSR 543) – Hwy 15, B.C.
Lynden, WA (WSR 539) – Aldergrove, B.C. (Hwy 13)
Sumas, WA (WSR 9) – Huntingdon, B.C. (Hwy 11)
Sweetgrass, MT (I-15) – Coutts, AB (Hwy 4)
Portal, ND (US Rt 52) – North Portal, SK (Hwy 39)
Pembina, ND (I-29) – Emerson, MB (Hwy 75)
International Bridge: Sault Ste. Marie , MI – SSM, ON
Blue Water Bridge: Port Huron, MI – Sarnia, ON
• Already completed
(7 crossings)
•A
• New Beyond the Border
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Detroit-Windsor Tunnel: Detroit, MI – Windsor, ON
Ambassador Bridge: Detroit, MI – Windsor, ON
Peace Bridge: Buffalo, NY (I-190) – Fort Erie, ON (QEW)
Rainbow Bridge: Niagara Falls, NY – Niagara Falls, ON
Queenston-Lewiston Bridge: Lewiston, NY – Queenston, ON
1000 Islands Bridge: Alexandria Bay, NY – Lansdowne, ON
Champlain, NY (I-87) – St-Bernard de Lacolle, QC (Rte 15)
Highgate Springs, VT – St-Armand/Phillipsburg, QC (Rte 133)
Madawaska, ME – Edmundston, NB
Calais, ME (International Ave) – St. Stephen, NB (Hwy 1)
Progress to Date
• Of the top 20 crossings identified, the following 7 have already been
instrumented with border wait time technology through various
different programs:
• British Columbia




Peace Arch (Highway 99/Interstate 5)
Pacific Highway (Highway 15/WA State Road 543)
Aldergrove (Highway 13/WA State Road 539)
Huntingdon (Highway 11/Interstate 9)
• Ontario



Peace Bridge (Queen Elizabeth Way/Interstate 190)
Queenston-Lewiston (Highway 405/Interstate 190)
Blue Water Bridge (Highway 402/Interstates 69 and 94)
The Border Issue
• Longer wait times
• Volatility and unpredictability of crossing times
• Increasing congestion and safety concerns
• Impacts on traffic flow in border communities
• Environmental and health impacts
• Inconsistencies between crossings
• Financial impacts
The Causes
• Accuracy of information
• Capacity constraints
• Limited crossing options for commercial operators
• Lack of planning
• Increased focus on security
• Jurisdictional complexity
• Impact of infrastructure improvements
Why Measure Border Wait Time?
• Automated systems to collect and disseminate information on
border wait time can provide key benefits:
• Provide accurate information to the traveling public and stakeholders;
• Improve predictability, reliability and consistency of wait time data;
• Reduce traveler delays and congestions by helping to ensure a smoother
flow of traffic;
• Reduce environmental impacts;
• Help to reduce errors and bias;
• Optimize the allocation of resources for border management; and,
• Enhance economic competitiveness
How Do We Use The Information?
• Data from automated systems benefit a variety of stakeholders:
• Public agencies can use the data to measure performance and prioritize
actions and improvements;
• Private agencies can use the data to plan operations and ensure supply
chain reliability;
• Individuals can use the data to inform and adjust travel plans
Taken together, these actions can help reduce wait times and
improve the overall efficiency of the border!
Challenges
• Challenges faced in implementing the Beyond the Border
commitment:
• Managing different geographical and technical states of readiness at
various border crossings
• Bi-National collaboration

Requires significant cooperation between stakeholders including federal,
provincial, state, local governments, and border operators
• The Border Wait Time (BWT) Working Group engaged a consultant
to collect information on high-priority crossings, assessed their
readiness for implementation, and defined actions to move forward
• The initiative showed that crossings are at varying levels of readiness and
provided recommendations to help build capacity but no specific
recommendations around technology
Report
• In 2013, a consultant was engaged to further efforts to implement
automated border wait time measurement solutions in a
coordinated fashion by facilitating stakeholder coordination and
project development at 13 ports of entry
• A team of experts collected information on high-priority crossing
sites, assessed their readiness for implementation, and defined
action plans to move forward
• The project produced a combination of detailed site preparation
reports for each crossing and a set of high-level conclusions and
recommendations.
Project Overview
Crossings
• Crossing
locations
included sites
from coast to
coast
• Sites were
chosen based
on several
factors
including
volume
• Crossings were
presented by
region to
support
coordination
Regional Grouping Included Crossing Sites
Maritimes
Calais – St. Stephen (3 crossings)
Houlton – Woodstock
Madawaska – Edmundston
St. Lawrence
Derby Line – Stanstead
Highgate Springs – St. Armand
Champlain – St. Bernard de Lacolle
Great Lakes
1000 Islands – Lansdowne
Blue Water Bridge (has since been
completed)
Sault Ste. Marie
Great Plains
Pembina – Emerson
Portal – North Portal
Coutts – Sweetgrass
Pacific
Point Roberts – Boundary Bay
US State
Maine
Maine
Maine
Vermont
Vermont
New York
New York
Michigan
Michigan
CA Province
New Brunswick
New Brunswick
New Brunswick
Quebec
Quebec
Quebec
Ontario
Ontario
Ontario
North Dakota
North Dakota
Montana
Washington
Manitoba
Saskatchewan
Alberta
British Columbia
Key Project Results
• Readiness Assessment
• Each site was visited to collect information and meet with stakeholders
• Goal was to determine what will be necessary to prepare sites for BWT
measurement system implementation
• Key outputs:
• Site Profiles
• Site Readiness Assessments
Key Project Results
• High-Level Conclusions:
• Despite common functionality, sites have many unique attributes




Roadway geometry and riding surfaces
Local operations
Device mounting options
Power and communications infrastructure availability
• Significant decisions at nearly all sites




Which technology type is most appropriate
Whether to procure a turn-key solution, acquire a service, or self-equip
Who will assume what roles regarding implementation, operations and
maintenance
How to fund deployment and ongoing operations
Key Project Results
• General Recommendations:
• BWT Working Group partner agencies should establish a mechanism for
providing ongoing guidance and technical support to stakeholders
• BWT Working Group partner agencies should compile a master BWT
Stakeholder Directory and provide it in an easily-accessible location
• BWT Working Group partner agencies and the stakeholders should
collaborate on defining a compilation of information sources and a
questionnaire to inquire about the availability of supporting
infrastructure
Key Project Results – Procurement
• Procurement Recommendations:
• BWT Working Group partner agencies should consider providing
ongoing stakeholder technical and project management support for
procurement efforts at the sites that express a need for it
• BWT Working Group partner agencies should host or sponsor a webbased workshop and periodic follow-up sessions to provide guidance
and facilitate the exchange of ideas regarding procurement of BWT
measurement systems
Key Project Results –
Operations & Maintenance
• Operations and Maintenance Recommendations:
• The stakeholder forums, directory and guidance documentation
recommendations discussed above should be expanded to include
operations-related topics
• Since it is likely that multiple distribution channels will be used (e.g.,
web sites, dynamic message signs, smartphone apps, etc.), there should
be some discussion of provisions for wait time dissemination
• The stakeholder forums, directory and guidance documentation
recommendations discussed above should be expanded to include
maintenance-related topics
Border Wait Time Peer Exchange
• December 9-10, 2014
• Phoenix, Arizona
• Tri-National: Canada, Mexico and the United States
• Objective: To help federal agencies, state and provincial departments of
transportation, local planning organizations, bridge authorities and
other organizations understand methodologies and tools for collecting
and using border wait time data to improve outcomes and achieve
performance goals and targets
Discussion Topics
• Topics included:
•
•
•
•
•
Performance measures
Definitions and metrics
Past, current, and future projects and systems
Data storage and data mining
Future research trends and technologies
Border Wait Time Data
• Data from automated systems are useful for a variety of
stakeholders:
• Travellers/ Public
• Private sector
• Public agencies – border agencies and transportation departments
Lessons Learned
• Participants discussed lessons learned to inform automated border
wait time efforts, including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Setting achievable goals and expanding systems incrementally
Considering who will use the data and how it will be used
Ensuring thorough detail in data purchase agreements
Developing MOUs for data sharing, where appropriate
Considering funding issues – short and long term
Ensuring consistency with other systems
Next Steps/Needs
• Gather accurate, reliable and complete data on border wait time,
including origin and destination data
• Develop a common set of metrics, definitions, methodologies and
performance measures
• Adopt a holistic approach to managing and reducing border wait
time (e.g. Traffic Management Centres)
• Apply best practices for disseminating data to the public
• Maintain coordination and strong partnerships
• Use border wait time data to make decisions and direct policy
Point Roberts, WA – Boundary Bay, BC
Vehicles
# of PIL
Auto/Commercial
Avg. Daily
Volume
Avg. Wait
Time
Current ITS
Infrst.
NEXUS/FAST?
Passenger &
Commercial
3, 1
3000(cars)
50 (com)
15 - 20 min
RFID, ALPR , CCTV
NEXUS
Vehicles
# of PIL
Auto/Commercial
Avg. Daily
Volume
Avg. Wait
Time
Current ITS
Infrst.
NEXUS/FAST?
Passenger &
Commercial
3, 1
1900-2150 (cars)
50 (com)
10-15 min
RFID, ALPR ,CCTV
NEXUS
Technologies
• Global Positioning Systems (GPS)
• Bluetooth Devices
• Video Image Recognition
• Radio-frequency identification (RFID)
• Loops
• RADAR
• Variable Message Signs (VMS)
Global Positioning Systems (GPS)
• GPS is a space-based satellite navigation system that provides location and
time information for equipped devices. Depending on equipment
configuration, the accuracy of GPS ranges from less than a centimeter - 95
percent of the time - to about 100 meters.
• Estimated cost
• Subscription fees to access data through a variety of companies (e.g.,
Google, TomTom, Inrix)
• Study: Measuring Cross-Border Travel Times for Freight: Otay Mesa
International Border Crossing
Benefits
•
Can be used to collect vehicle-related
data (e.g., average idle times at select
intersections)
•
Reduces travel time of emergency
vehicles
•
Ability to collect and archive data on
congestion along highway corridors
Cons
•
Uncertainty about volume of data
through crossings
•
Limited accuracy of location
measurement precludes by-lane
processing
•
Ongoing fees (tracking service provider)
Bluetooth Devices
• Bluetooth is a data communications protocol used for wireless mobile
communications. It can connect several devices simultaneously, helping to
overcome problems of synchronization and can exchange data over short
distances from fixed and mobile devices.
• Estimated cost
• The cost of a Bluetooth reader is approximately $5,000 plus installation
and maintenance costs = $100,000 to install plus $1,000-$2,000/month
• Example
• This was used as a technology in the Buffalo-Niagara region (QueenstonLewiston Bridge and Peace Bridge)/ Hybrid system at Blue Water Bridge
Benefits
Cons
•
Low power consumption/ low maintenance
fees
•
Requires reader and communications
installation
•
Adequate for lower volume border crossings
•
Uncertainty regarding sample size
•
Often used to validate accuracy of other
system
•
Must filter out multiple devices in individual
vehicles
•
Issues around latency
Video Image Recognition
• Video image processing uses video or cameras to catch images of each passing
vehicle, and extracts individual vehicle information including vehicle length,
width, color, and sometimes, license plate. The extracted vehicle features from
both upstream and downstream detection stations are then compared with
each other to find the best matches
• Estimated cost
• Sensor purchase cost between $5000 - $26,000 (US$)
• Example
• This has been used in the San Ysidro, California-Tijuana, Mexico region
Benefits
•
•
Cons
Estimates the wait time for the next
vehicle entering the queue (futureoriented), rather than recording the
wait time for a vehicle that has already
left the queue
•
Occlusion (large vehicles blocking the
next lane so that the detector cannot
“see” vehicles)
•
High equipment costs
Can be used as a substitute for loop
detectors in environments such as
bridge decks where loop detectors are
unsuitable
•
Cameras need to be cleaned generally
twice per year
•
Potential privacy concerns
Radio-Frequency Identification(RFID)
• A Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) transponder or tag is mounted in the
windshield of participating vehicles. Readers located upstream of the queue and
at customs primary inspection read the tags. The time elapse between the two
readings of each transponder represents the travel time between the two readers.
• Estimated cost
• The cost to implement a functioning RFID system have been estimated
between $100,000.00 - $200,000 (costs can vary widely based on the
number of locations where it will be installed)
• RFID-based border wait time system at Nogales-Mariposa POE/ heavily
in use at Southern border
Benefits
•
Detects issues in advance which can
potentially reduce maintenance and
repair costs
•
Well-evolved technology used for a
number of applications/ Standards in
place
•
Can be integrated with existing
systems/adaptable
Cons
•
Requires reader and networks installed
and upgraded
•
Costly to implement on a per-lane basis
•
Need to ensure large enough sample size
(for example analyze the number of
vehicles that have a relevant
device/RFID-readable tags)
Loop Detectors
• Loop detectors are coils of wire embedded in the roadway to detect the presence of
vehicles, measure their speed and classify each vehicle as a car or a truck. Loops are
used extensively by transportation authorities throughout the world to measure
highway congestion, activate traffic signals and count vehicles. Their performance
and reliability have been well-documented and road managers have successfully
integrated them into their normal traffic operations.
• Estimated cost
•
Approximately $2000/loop
• Example:
•
Loops were selected for the first border wait time system deployed in British Columbia
(Pacific Highway; Douglas (Peace Arch); Aldergrove)
Benefits
Cons
•
Technology is widely deployed and wellunderstood by transportation agencies
•
Requires cutting of pavement surface for
installation and maintenance
•
Inexpensive and easy to install
•
Can be damaged by heavy vehicles and
affected by weather
•
Approach is in use worldwide and
considered accurate in Pacific region
•
Requires reader and communications
installation
Can readily distinguish between vehicle
types
•
Costly to implement on a per-lane basis
•
Accuracy can be an issue
•
RADAR
• Relies on vehicle counts and classifications measured at upstream and
downstream locations, using radar-based detectors in common use by
transportation agencies
• Estimated cost
• $10,000.00 each (actual cost 2009)
Benefits
•
Technology is deployed and
understood by transportation
agencies
•
Can readily distinguish between
vehicle types
•
Increases driver awareness of speed
•
Easy to displace and relocate
Cons
•
Technology has issues dealing with
stopped traffic and adjacent vehicles
•
Requires reader and communications
installation
•
Results from BWT technology
assessment generally inconclusive
Variable Message Signs (VMS)
• Electronic traffic signs with adjustable messages which provide motorists with current
information concerning border wait time, but which also have application in respect of
upcoming traffic, exits, roadway conditions, construction, etc.
• Estimated cost
• $15,000.00-21,000.00 (for smaller, portable signs) $75,000+ for larger, fixed
signs - (2010 estimate)
• Example
• Since March 2014, 15 colour variable signs able to showcase over 30 different
messages have been in operation at the Peace Bridge crossing, linking Fort Erie, ON
and Buffalo, NY. (Total project cost $800k cost-shared by PBA and CBSA.)
Benefits
•
Can decrease time required to clear any type
of accident because motorists have advanced
warning and can avoid areas/routes where
accidents are reported (e.g., on highways)
•
High levels of motorist satisfaction
•
Low operating costs
•
"Click of a button" updating by port allows
rapid adjustment to real-time traffic
situations and queuing patterns
Cons
•
Can be difficult to view at times of intense
brightness
•
Requires significant maintenance, especially
in harsh and extreme weather conditions
•
High initial installation costs
Canadian Funding
• Transport Canada has capital funding available to negotiate
agreements on wait time technology for the remaining thirteen
crossings
• Costs at each site would likely include: hardware, cabling, software,
system integration and field equipment
•
Funding will be provided under the terms and conditions of the
Gateways and Border Crossings Fund
•
Ongoing operations and maintenance costs will be the
responsibility of the recipient and will require ongoing dialogue
with the Canada Border Services Agency to ensure continued and
consistent automated reporting
U.S. Funding
• FHWA has pilot project funding available for State DOTs, MPOs, regional
planning agencies, or joint teams to implement technology to measure
border wait time and delay at selected border crossings.
• The main objective is to collect timely and accurate data regarding the
amount of time that border users wait to cross is crucial to creating a more
reliable border crossing experience. The expected benefits are data and
information that can be used to:
• Enable commercial and non-commercial drivers to make informed decisions
about when and where to cross the border;
• Operate transportation and border facility systems effectively;
• Plan appropriately for future needs;
• Evaluate the effects of improvements; and
• Educate and inform public agencies, freight stakeholders, and the motoring
public.
• Initial Period of Performance is 18 months
Information Dissemination
• There are mobile apps available for smartphones which can provide
information found on agency websites (e.g. Customs and Border Protection)
• As part of the Beyond the Border Action Plan to implement BWT
technology at certain locations, the CBSA launched the redesigned BWT
application in June 2014.
• The following five POE are capturing automated border wait time data on
commercial and travellers lanes using either Bluetooth or inductive loops:
▫
▫
▫
▫
▫
Peace Bridge
Queenston-Lewiston Bridge
Pacific Highway
Douglas (Peace Arch), and
Aldergrove
Archiving Data
• In addition to providing performance metrics for the border
crossing as a whole, archived data allows for comparative analyses
of crossings, evaluations of various technologies deployed to
calculate delay, near-time reporting of conditions to subscribers,
monitoring trends, and analyses of economic impacts
• The U.S. – Canada Border Data Warehouse is a dynamic database
accessed online and connects users to archived wait times collected
from two U.S. – Canada border regions: the Cascade Gateway, and
Buffalo-Niagara
• The database and website are scalable to allow for new wait time systems
to be added as they are installed
• The objective of the site is to provide “one stop shopping” for highresolution border wait time data that is comparable across all connected
crossings
• www.borderdatawarehouse.com
Contacts
Julie Irvine
Programs Advisor, Transportation Infrastructure Programs
Transport Canada
(613) 949-1251
[email protected]
Tiffany Julien
Transportation Specialist, Federal Highway Administration
Office of Freight Management and Operations
(202) 366-9241
[email protected]