Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

LTC, Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 11/04/2010


Published on

On November 4, 2010 the Leoanrd Transportation Center hosted the 2010 Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference on the campus of Cal State San Bernardino.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

LTC, Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 11/04/2010

  1. 1. Inland Empire Clusters of Opportunity Project Transportation/Logistics ACTION PLAN HIGHLIGHTS
  2. 2. ACTION PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Priority Opportunities New/Expanding Markets: • Increased import and export business forecast through 2015 in the Inland Empire New Products: • New Technology (transportation vehicles) - Diesel engine retrofits per CARB regulations - Other alternative fuels • New technology (software to cut fuel usage) New Processes: • Consolidation of warehouses (So. Cal. trend) • Available and more attractive space – more opportunities for new technology adoption
  3. 3. ACTION PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Priority Requirements Workforce Development • Technical training programs • Career awareness – high school and college (changing the perception of young people about the industry) • Basic work ethic, soft skills (employability training) Economic Development • Streamline / redesign regulations & incentives • Transitional assistance to meet mandates • Innovative local government response to fast- changing vehicle technology • Inform local businesses of new technologies
  4. 4. ACTION PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Measurable Outcomes Workforce Development • Increased # of program completers in technical fields and # employed • # of internships or other work share models • Soft skills training developed and implemented (# of program completers) Economic Development • Utilizing partners to reach out to businesses • # of businesses to explore new technologies • A strategy for attracting new businesses into the region • New fast-track permit structures created
  5. 5. ACTION PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Priority Strategies Workforce Development • Develop marketing campaign to attract high school grads to logistics industry • Develop best practices for a work-share model • Identify long-term employer training needs • Use OJT funds to incentivize employers to hire new grads Economic Development • Identify bottlenecks and possible solutions • Top-down review of incentives and change them to promote our objectives • Pursue state and federal funding for new technology adoption • Contact military bases to check out new tech
  6. 6. POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION COMMITMENTS Local & Regional Partners State Government Partners Federal Government Partners Other Partners Public Private Workforce Development -San Bernardino Co WIB -Riverside Co WIB - Regional ROPs -ATTEi/College of the Desert -regional colleges -Prof Dev Center, SBCCD -CSU SB Lennar Transportation Center •Apex Logistics •Distribution Mgt Assoc. •Dalton Trucking •Schneider Logistics •Sunrise Ford •Technicolor •Bremach •Boshart Engineering •Complete Coach Works •Decuir Engine Technologies •SunEcoEnergy CA Energy Commission CWIB AQMD CA Trucking Association ETP DOL EDF
  7. 7. POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION COMMITMENTS Local & Regional Partners State Government Partners Federal Government Partners Other Partners Public Private Economic Development -San Bernardino Co EDA -Riverside Co EDA •Apex Logistics •Distribution Mgt Assoc. •Dalton Trucking •Schneider Logistics •Sunrise Ford •Technicolor •Bremach •Boshart Engineering •Complete Coach Works •Decuir Engine Technologies •SunEcoEnergy CA Energy Commission AQMD CA Trucking Association GoED U.S. Dept of Commerce U.S. Dept of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) EDF National Association of Clean Air Agencies Alternative Fuel & Vehicle Institute (AFVi)
  8. 8. 12 Current Policy Initiatives and Future Research Needs Huasha Liu Director, Land Use and Environmental PlanningNovember 4, 2010 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
  9. 9. 13  1) SCAG Organization and Region Overview  2) Regional Challenges  3) Completed, Current, and Ongoing Research Activities  4) Future Potential Research Initiatives  5) Funding Opportunities  6) How to Conduct Research with SCAG Topics
  10. 10. 14 1) SCAG Organization and Region Overview
  11. 11. 190 cities 19 million residents 7.2 million jobs Largest Metropolitan Planning Organization SCAG REGION Southern California Association of Governments
  12. 12. 17th largest economy in the world Shares the characteristics of many nations
  13. 13. Federal and State Government Mandates to Develop Regional Plans: Transportation Planning -Regional Transportation Plan -Federal Transportation Improvement Program -Goods Movement Land Use Planning -Regional Housing Needs Assessment -SB 375: Sustainable Communities Strategy -Compass Blueprint Environmental Planning -RTP Program EIR -Air Quality Planning Program -Intergovernmental Review What is SCAG’s role in the Region?
  14. 14. We do not have the authority to: Regulate Tax Implement
  15. 15. We do have the authority to:Plan Program Study/Research Monitor Coordinate
  16. 16. Highlight of Services to Local Jurisdictions • SCAG GIS Services – Software training and data assistance for cities and counties to support local planning • Compass Blueprint Program – 84 Demonstration Projects Completed – $7.4 million awarded since 2005 – $5 million will be awarded per year from this year forward • Green Cities Recognition Awards – New incentive program promoting GHG reduction – $2 million per year in cash awards from this year forward
  17. 17. SCAG LOCAL COMMUNITY FEDERALSTATE Subregions General Public Planning Orgs. Transportation Orgs. Transportation Commissions Air Quality Management Districts Highway (FHWA) Transit (FTA) Aviation (FAA) Railroad (FRA) Environment (EPA) Housing (HUD) Transportation (DOT/CTC/BT&H) Air Quality (CARB) Councils of Government (CALCOG) Housing (BT&H) Requires Close Collaboration with Partner Agencies in the Region
  18. 18. 22 2) Regional Challenges
  19. 19. Anticipated growth of 4 million people and 2.4 million jobs to the region by 2035 Like adding two cities the size of Chicago between 2000 & 2035 Economy/Jobs Traffic Congestion Aging Population & Economic Impacts Air Quality Energy and Resources Urban Sprawl Public Health Housing Affordability Shrinking Federal & State Funding Regional Challenges
  20. 20. 0-20 yrs 21-64 yrs 65+ yrs 5.9 million 31% 2.0 million 11% 2010 6.6 million 29% 12.6 million 55% 3.8 million 17% 2035 0-20 yrs 21-64 yrs 65+ yrs 11.2 million 59% Percentages do not add to 100% due to rounding Source: SCAG, Local Input/General Plan Growth Forecast, March 2010 Huge Shift in the Age of Population in SCAG Region
  21. 21. Household Type 1960 2000 2005 2040 HH with Children 48% 33% 32% 27% HH without Children 52% 67% 68% 73% Single-Person HH 13% 26% 31% 34% Source: Dr. Arthur C. Nelson, Presidential Professor & Director of Metropolitan Research, University of Utah. “Traditional” Households on the Wane in the U.S.
  22. 22. 3) Completed, Current, and Ongoing Research Activities
  23. 23. Examples of Completed Research • Transportation System Research – Metro Gold Line Corridor Study (UCLA) – Port and Modal Elasticity Study Phase II (Consultant) • Socio-Economic Analysis – Wage and Job Dynamics (Cal Lutheran University) • Model/Tool Development – Envision Tomorrow scenario builder (Consultant)
  24. 24. Examples of Current Research • Transportation System Research – Congestion pricing analysis (Consultant) • Environmental Planning Research – Climate & Economic Development Project (Consultant) • Model/Tool Development – Activity-based transportation model (UCSB/ASU/UT) – Land use model (UC Davis, University of Calgary) – Sustainability tool (Consultant) – California Land Opportunity Tracking System (UCLA)
  25. 25. Ongoing Research • Socio-Economic Analysis – Regional demographic trends (In-house) – Aging/ethnic diversity (In-house) – City level population projections (In-house) – Spatial distribution of population and employment (In- house) – County level population and employment balance (In- house) • Model/Tool Development – Parcel data development, improvement, and dissemination (In-house)
  26. 26. 4) Future Potential Research Initiatives
  27. 27. • Travel Behavior Analysis – Specifically for elderly people, minority groups, and women – Regional mode choice analysis – Inter-regional travel analysis – Household Travel Survey (HTS) data analysis • Transportation System Research – Transit accessibility analysis – Aviation demand forecast – Seaport and airport truck demand – Non-motorized travel demand analysis – Transportation finance analysis • Model/Tool Development – Dynamic Traffic Assignment and its link to emission model – Travel Demand Management impact analysis tool – Heavy-duty truck model Transportation Planning Related Research
  28. 28. • Economic Analysis – Subcenter identification – Regional economic growth strategy • Model/Tool Development – Econometric forecast model – Small area land use, employment, demographic database Land Use Planning Related Research
  29. 29. Environmental Planning Research • Environmental Justice • Air quality and emissions model • Impact Analysis of Potential Land Use/Transportation Scenarios • Model/Tool Development – Greenhouse gas emission / Carbon calculator
  30. 30. 34 5) Funding Opportunities
  31. 31. HUD Sustainable Communities Planning Grant Program • Supports multi-jurisdictional regional efforts that integrate housing, economic development, transportation, resource planning, and sustainability • $100 million available through competitive application process • Grant was awarded in October 2010 – California was allocated $5.5 million or 5.5% of the total available funds – California’s population represents 12% of the national total
  32. 32. California’s Strategic Growth Council – The Council is a cabinet level committee that is coordinating the activities of state agencies to meet the goals of AB 32 and improve California’s • Air and water quality • Natural resource protection • Housing affordability • Infrastructure systems • Public health
  33. 33. • Planning Grant Program – $66 million total over three grant cycles – First cycle is $22 million – Funding has three focus areas • Local Sustainable Planning (minimum 25% of funds) • Regional SB 375 Planning (minimum 25% of funds) • Regional Planning Activities (minimum 10% of funds) – 20% funding set aside for projects that target Economically Disadvantaged Communities (EDCs) – Schedule • Awards will be announced on November 10th California’s Strategic Growth Council
  34. 34. • Urban Greening Grant Program – $64 million over three funding cycles – First cycle is $21.3 million – Grant Program can fund projects or plans • Project proposals can be submitted by cities, counties, or non profits • Proposals for plans can be submitted by cities, counties, nonprofits, COGs, MPOs, JPAs, or special districts. – Schedule • Funds will be awarded November 2010 California’s Strategic Growth Council
  35. 35. SCAG’s University Partnership Program • Funding opportunity for regional research – $250,000 will soon be available for academic research related to SCAG’s policy objectives • Establishes a committee of regional academics – Helps SCAG receive academic input on projects – Identifies mutual interests for development of possible joint projects • Timeframe – Grant program will be initiated in early 2011
  36. 36. US Department of Energy’s (DOE) Clean Cities Program • The Clean Cities Program helps local organizations establish government-industry partnerships to reduce petroleum consumption – Facilitates information exchange and technology transfer – Provides tools to local coalitions • Alternative Fuels and Vehicles Data Center:
  37. 37. California Energy Commission • Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Program (AB 118) – $100 Million Annual Budget • The program will support projects that meet any of the following criteria: – Produce alternative and renewable low-carbon fuels in California – Decrease, on a full fuel cycle basis, the overall impact and carbon footprint of alternative and renewable fuels and increase sustainability – Expand fuel infrastructure, fueling stations, and equipment – Improve light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicle technologies – Retrofit medium- and heavy-duty on-road and non-road vehicle fleets – Expand infrastructure connected with existing fleets, public transit, and transportation corridors – Establish workforce training programs, conduct public education and promotion, and create technology centers
  38. 38. – Eligible recipients include: • Public agencies • Private businesses • Public-private partnerships • Vehicle and technology consortia • Workforce training partnerships and collaboratives • Fleet owners • Consumers • Recreational boaters • Academic institutions – Schedule • Proposals are due November 30th, 2010 California Energy Commission (Con’t)
  39. 39. Additional Grant Resources • Websites: • (Central Contractor Registration) • (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance) • (Federal Publications Seminar) • (Foundation Finder) • • (General Services Administration) • • • (Office of Management and Budget- OMB) • Professional Training & Organizations: • Federal Publications Seminar ( • Grant Writing USA ( • Management Concepts ( • Grants Professional Organization ( • National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA) ( • National Grants Management Association (NGMA) ( • Society of Research Administrators (SRA) (
  40. 40. 6) How to Conduct Research with SCAG
  41. 41. How to Conduct Research with SCAG • SCAG procedure: – Register as a vendor ( – Review RFPs and submit proposal
  42. 42. For more information please contact Huasha Liu Director, Land Use and Environmental Planning
  43. 43. On September 27, 2006, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB32 is a law that mandates a reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. This has resulted in the CARB “Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Aerodynamic Efficiency Measure”. CARB says that significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal relying on existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. These requirements mirror the Federal “Smartway” program. The GHG regulation focuses specifically on hardware but we have known for years that that the number one efficiency factor is the driver. And frankly that is being overlooked. Mark Sturdevant- Chairperson- California Trucking Association, San Bernardino/Riverside Unit
  44. 44. (Directly from the EPA website) What are the basic specifications for a US EPA Certified SmartWay tractor? •Model Year 2007 or later engine; •Integrated cab-high roof fairing; •Tractor-mounted side fairing gap reducers; •Tractor fuel-tank side fairings; •Aerodynamic bumper and mirrors; Options for reducing periods of extended engine idling (auxiliary power units, generator sets, direct fired heaters, battery powered HVAC system, and automatic engine start/stop system); and Options for low-rolling resistance tires (single wide or dual) mounted on aluminum wheels. What is missing? Driver efficiency training programs.
  45. 45. 51 51 19 Years of Federal Truck Engine Emission Changes 1988 1991 199419982002/2004 2007 0.01 1.2 Nitrogen Oxides - NOx (g/bhp -hr) ParticulateMatter-PM(g/bhp-hr) In order to meet EPA 07 emissions regulations, traditional exhaust/muffler systems must be replaced by an Aftertreatment System - (it is not possible to meet EPA 07 emissions regulations by making changes to the engine alone)
  46. 46. 20 years of Reductions to the 2010 Federal Engine Standard for NOx and PM Department 52 0.10 0.01 0.2 1.2 2.5 4.0 5.0 EPA ‘98 PM [g/hp-hr] EPA ‘94 North America EPA 2010 EPA ‘02 EPA ‘07 EPA 2010 PM: 0.01 g/hp-hr NOx: 0.2 g/hp-hr
  47. 47. 53 CARB On-Road Truck and Bus Regulation Tandem Axle Tractor with Sleeper Single Axle Tractor Bus CARB has passed the most stringent truck emissions regulations in the history of USA transportation. Between 2011 and 2023 every commercial vehicle #14,001 and greater will have to be retrofitted or replaced with a newer, low emission truck. The table to the right shows the number and types of vehicles that would be subject to the proposed regulation. As can be seen, there are almost 400,000 in-state vehicles, and just over 550,000 interstate vehicles that operate in California each year. Less than 5 percent of these vehicles are motor coaches and school buses. Reefer truck Hay truck Drilling rig
  48. 48. 54 EPA07 Aftertreatment Device In order to meet EPA07 emissions regulations the traditional muffler has been replaced by a new Aftertreatment Device (ATD) or otherwise referred to as a DPF. Description TheATDcombines a DOC and DPF to burn off collected particulate matter (PM) in a process called ‘regeneration’. Without adequate temperatures for regeneration,the filter will continue to trap PM and eventually plug. 98% of the diesel soot is trapped in the DPF
  49. 49. 55 DEF Level Gauge Lamps DEF Lamp 75% to 100% 4 green lights off 50% to 75% 3 green lights off 25% to 50% 2 green lights off 10% to 25% 1 green light off 5% to 10% 1 yellow light on solid 0% to 5% 1 red light flashing on flashing 2010 Engine Operation- Driver Inducements In addition to the BlueTec hardware is a new DEF gauge. Just like filling up their diesel tank, drivers will need to remember to watch their DEF gauge and fill it when needed. FULL EMPTY 25% Engine Derate 55 MPH Vehicle Speed Limit Check Engine Lamp Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL)
  50. 50. 56 Warning Light (Triggers) – EPA07 Engines Zone 1Trigger (AutoRegen) Zone 2Trigger (AutoRegen) Zone 3Trigger (AutoRegen) Zone 4Trigger (ParkedRegen) Zone 5Trigger (ParkedRegen) Series60Truck& Coach 7.6Hrs 315Miles 198kgfuel 13.5Hrs 460Miles 289kgfuel 14.5Hrs 520Miles 327kgfuel 15Hrs 550Miles 345kgfuel 19Hrs 800Miles 502kgfuel HDEP (DD13& DD15) 8Hrs 325Miles 203Kg 14Hrs 540Miles 338Kg 15Hrs 600Miles 375Kg 15.5Hrs 625Miles 391Kg 20Hrs 800Miles 500Kg MBE4000 8Hrs 300Miles Nofueltrig 16Hrs 450Miles Nofueltrig 17Hrs 500Miles Nofueltrig 17.5Hrs 525Miles Nofueltrig 28Hrs 800Miles Nofueltrig MBE900– 9.0” Low HPUnits 6Hrs 124Miles 30kg fuel 7.5Hrs 174Miles 55kg fuel 8.5Hrs 217Miles 65kg fuel 9Hrs 239Miles 75kg fuel 10Hrs 283Miles 85kg fuel MBE900– 10.5” HighHPUnits 8Hrs 280Miles 60kg fuel 9.5Hrs 357Miles 90kg fuel 10.5Hrs 388Miles 105kgfuel 11Hrs 419Miles 115kgfuel 12Hrs 466Miles 140kgfuel SOLID FLASHING FLASHING + FLASHING +
  51. 51. Summary of Significant Factors Influencing Fuel Economy % Penalty Drivers: Worst to Best drivers within a fleet/industry- (1.8 Mpg) up to 30% Route: Interstate vs Intrastate (Congested roads) up to 1.2 Mpg 20% Vehicle Speed: 55 Mph vs 65MPH (.08+ Mpg) Aero dependent 13% Aerodynamics: Worst to Best Class 8 Tractors at 60 Mph (.55 Mpg) 9% Aerodynamics : Smartway Dry Van/Reefer vs non-Smartway Van/Reefer (.6Mpg) 6% Climate: Summer (70F or Higher) vs Winter (25F)- (.75 Mpg) 13% Wind / Terrain – (.75 Mpg) 13% Idle Time: 1 Gallon Per Hour of Idling (up to 1.5 Mpg) 20% Tires: Non -Smartway vs Smartway Low Rolling Resistance(.25 Mpg) 4% As shown above the “driver” has the single greatest effect on fuel efficiency and GHG emissions
  52. 52. Garth Hopkins Chief, Office of Regional and Interagency Planning California Department of Transportation HQ Division of Transportation Planning
  53. 53. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) •Caltrans carries out its mission of improving mobility across California with six primary programs: Aeronautics, Highway Transportation, Mass Transportation, Transportation Planning, Administration and the Equipment Service Center; •Manages more than 50,000 miles of California's highway and freeway lanes; •Provides inter-city rail services; •Permits more than 400 public-use airports and special-use hospital heliports; •And work with local/regional agencies. •The Caltrans Fiscal Year 2009/10 Highlights Report is available at:
  54. 54. The Strategic Research Plan • Approved in 2008/2009 • Driven by research needs and the Caltrans Strategic Plan • 38 Strategic Research Questions (SRQs) • 9 Priority SRQs
  55. 55. • Organized the SRQs into five groups – Safety • SF1 Design and Construction • SF4 Proactive Safety – Mobility • M1 Data • M2 ICM • M5 TDM Real Time • M6 TDM System Elements – Goods Movement • M8 Goods Movement – Climate Change • ST6 Climate Change – Infrastructure • ST9 Transportation Infrastructure Research SF4 Proactive Safety M5 TDM Real Time M2 Integrated Corridor Mgmt M1 Data SF1 Design Construction Safety M8 Goods Movement M6 TDM System Elements ST9 Transportation Infrastructure ST6 Climate Change
  56. 56. Presentation Content Climate Change, $185,000 GoodsMovement, $75,000 Infrastructure, $2,943,000 Mobility, $1,730,558 Safety, $2,462,605 Priority SRQ Research- Total 10/11 Requestedand Allocated
  57. 57. Summary of Selected Current Climate Change and Energy Related Research Projects •Traffic & Travel Demand Management •Alternative Fuels/Vehicles •Data, Modeling & Performance Measures •Climate Change Adaptation •Planning and Policy •Materials
  58. 58. My View of Needed Climate Change & Alternative Fuel Related Research Topics Climate Change •How is climate change going to impact our transportation infrastructure over the next 100 years? •How should all levels of government and the private sector begin to plan for these changes? Alternative Fuels •What are some valid estimates of the statewide alternative vehicle fleet, and what types of fuel will they be using? •What will be the impacts, and what should Caltrans and the regional planning agencies be doing to prepare for this?
  59. 59. Caltrans Research Funds • State Planning and Research Funds – available through the Caltrans Division of Research and Innovation – Contact Nancy Chinlund at • Partnership Planning and State Transit Planning (5304) Funds – Contact LaNae Van Valen at
  60. 60. • Elizabeth Ambos, Ph.D., Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research Initiatives and Partnerships, California State University Office of the Chancellor • Sheila Thomas, Dean, Extended Education Office of the California State University Office of the Chancellor CSU-Wide Transportation Research & Education Programs Group
  61. 61. Performance Evaluation of Bus Lines with Data Envelopment Analysis and Geographic Information Systems Yong Lao, Professor Division of Social, Behavioral and Global Studies California State University Monterey Bay November 4, 2010
  62. 62. Project Background • Currently public transit agencies are under increasing pressure to operate more efficiently as the level of government funding reduces, or as a result of changing ownerships or regulations. • The majority of the existing research focuses on the operations of the public transit system, attempting to evaluate performances from the management perspective. • The characteristics of local population and commuting pattern largely determine the passenger demand as well as operational scale for the public transit system.
  63. 63. The Goal • To combine Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to examine the performance of the public transit system in Monterey-Salinas area. – Operational efficiency: measures the productivity of a public transit agency, focusing on the input elements controlled by the management. – Spatial effectiveness: measures how well the general public is being served, focusing on the environmental elements often beyond the control of the management.
  64. 64. Questions Raised • What are the operational costs and benefits associated with a bus line? • How to identify and create the service corridor, demographic profile and travel pattern associated with a bus line? • How to measure and compare the operational efficiency and spatial effectiveness of bus lines?
  65. 65. The Use of GIS • Overlay and analyze demographic variables at census tract level. – Population density (population per sq miles) – Population 65 years and over – Journey to work by bus – Private vehicle occupancy – Total disabilities – Median household income
  66. 66. Using the Weighted Linear Combination Method to Model the Level of Demand Data Variables Weight Population 65 years and over 15% Journey to work by bus 40% Private vehicle occupancy 15% Total disabilities 10% Median household income 20%
  67. 67. The Level of Service • Calculate the number of bus stops per census tract. • Calculate the level of service by dividing the number of bus stops by the level of demand at each census tract.
  68. 68. Data Envelopment Analysis • Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is a widely used optimization technique to evaluate efficiencies of decision making units • First introduced by Charnes and Cooper in 1978 • Examples: banks, schools, libraries, government agencies, etc.
  69. 69. Using DEA to Evaluate MST Bus Lines • Monterey Salinas Transit (MST) – Currently the MST transit system serves a 280 square-mile area of Monterey County and Southern Santa Cruz County – With an annual budget of $20.2 million, MST employs more than 2100 people, operating 86 vehicles and 50 routes. • Each bus line is treated as a DMU in the DEA model. – There are 24 fixed bus lines
  70. 70. DEA Model Variables • j: decision making units, j = 1,…,n • i: input, i = 1,…,m • r: output, r = 1,…,s • xij: The i th input for DMU j • yrj: the r th output for DMU j • λj: the weight parameter for DMU j • µ: the level of output • θ: relative efficiency score, θ = 1/µ
  71. 71. The DEA Model nj sryy mixxts Max j n j jrjrj n j jijij ,...,10 ,...,1µ ,...,1. µ 1 1 0 0          
  72. 72. Input and Output Variables for the DEA Model Input Variable Output Variable Operational Efficiency Round Trip Distance Number of Bus Stops Operation Time Total number of passengers per year Spatial Effectiveness Within ¼ mile of each bus stop: Commuters who use buses Population 65 and older Disabled population Total number of passengers per year
  73. 73. The Service Corridor Of A Bus Line
  74. 74. DEA Model Results and Recommendations
  75. 75. DMU Name Operational Efficiency Spatial Effectiveness Group 1: Best performers, bench marks Line10 1 1 Line26 1 1 Line41 1 1 Line43 0.98992 1 Line9 0.85952 0.71146 Line1 0.70888 0.9474 Line20 0.81071 0.79233
  76. 76. Group 2: Effective performers, should be supported and subsidized Line29 0.64766 0.95302 Line5 0.61046 0.9646 Line4 0.52416 1 Line44 0.50752 1 Line28 0.47374 1 Line2 0.4358 1 Line17 0.31974 1 Line24 0.24423 1 Line16 0.22729 0.63025
  77. 77. Group 3: Efficient performers, still has great potentials to improve Line25 1 0.0058 Line11 1 0.00649 Line46 1 0.18167 Line42 0.58767 0.02124
  78. 78. Group 4: Worst performers, should be re-planned or eliminated Line23 0.33705 0.31493 Line21 0.31237 0.15116 Line27 0.22978 0.05281 Line45 0.34507 0.04755
  79. 79. Comparison of Operational Efficiency and Spatial Effectiveness -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 2 3 4 Bus Line Group DEAScores Average Score of Operational Efficiency Average Score of Spatial Effectiveness Difference
  80. 80. Conclusions • By combining GIS and DEA, we are able to closely monitor the commuting pattern, demographic information, and performance related to each bus line. • GIS is mainly used for preparing and analyzing data for the DEA model. • The DEA approach can help us to better understand the impact of socio-economic environment on business operations. • The results of the study provide useful information for improving MST operations and services.
  81. 81. SB375 Implementation and Integration of Transportation and Land Use Planning Center for GIS Research, Cal Poly Pomona Michael Reibel, Geography Dohyung Kim, Urban & Regional Planning
  82. 82. Currently in final year of a three year project Ultimate goal: Help reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GhG) by assisting in newly mandated planning efforts that fight sprawl Strategy: First determine, then help meet technical assistance needs for increased geospatial analysis required for compliance with climate change law SB 375
  83. 83. SB 375 The aim of SB375 is to channel land use development into higher-density, more mixed-use and less car dependent patterns to reduce vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and thus greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions
  84. 84. • SB 375 creates an integrated planning process for regional growth • Lead agencies are metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) • Buy-in from local agencies is essential • Requires far more integration of land use planning with transportation planning, and far more geospatial analysis than was previously necessary
  85. 85. First Year (2008-2009) • Performed survey of local transportation agencies’ geospatial analysis capabilities • Performed detailed assessment of necessary steps for SB 375 implementation • Synthesized previous two steps into a gap assessment of local transportation agencies’ ability to monitor and contribute to SB 375 planning through their respective MPOs
  86. 86. Second Year (2009-2010) • Created custom GIS toolkit to perform optimal growth allocations under the constraints of SB 375 • Substantially automates and simplifies the mandated planning process • Through extensive research, created tables of default local amenity values and their respective distance decay functions as part of optimal allocation • Includes “what-if” scenario planning tools
  87. 87. Third Year (2010-2011) • Continuing to refine custom SB 375 GIS Toolkit • Writing a user manual and training materials • Developing an intensive day-long training program curriculum for toolkit users • Working with Cal Poly Pomona College of the Extended University preparing to offer the intensive training curriculum to stakeholders through our extension program
  88. 88. Beyond? May provide direct technical assistance to local agencies and/or smaller MPOs in preparing the Sustainable Communities Strategies required under SB375
  89. 89. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 CSULA Hydrogen Station and Power, Energy and Transportation Program David Blekhman, PhD Associate Professor Power, Energy and Transportation California State University Los Angeles 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 111
  90. 90. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Outline • Hydrogen Facility Introduction • Research Opportunities • Power, Energy and Transportation Program • LTC Funded Projects 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 112
  91. 91. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Hydrogen Fueling • Establish a Sustainable Hydrogen Fueling Facility at Cal State L.A – CARB No. 06-618 $2,700,000 – DOE Award #DE-09EE0000443 $475,750 – AQMD, MSRC, Ahmanson Foundation, AAA 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 113
  92. 92. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Design Upgrade Images are courtesy Leo A Daly 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 114
  93. 93. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 The Team and Equipment • Cal State LA – Project management • General Physics – major equipment • Weaver – Leo-A-Daly-architect – EPC4H2-engineering – Quantum Technologies- hydrogen dispensing – Others • Major Equipment – Electrolyzer Hydrogenics HYSTAT 30—60 kg/day – 350 bar compressor PDC-4- 1000/7500—0.044 kg/min – 700 bar compressor Hydro PAC C12-60-10500XL (2) –0.5 kg/min each – Storage tanks (3) CPI 8x16247—20kg/350 bar each 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 115
  94. 94. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Equipment Layout and Hydrogen Flow Walking tours 700bar 700bar 350bar  Electrolyzer 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 116
  95. 95. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Research Opportunities • Performance Optimization, Hydrogen Fleet and Infrastructure Analysis • Smart Grid: Load Following with Renewable Power Generation – Off-peak load – Load shedding • Workforce, Public and Professional Education Intermittent wind exceeds load Electrolyzers demonstrate quick start-stop without degradation 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 117
  96. 96. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Power, Energy and Transportation Emphasis Department of Technology • TECH 370 Power, Energy and Transportation • TECH 405 Advanced Engine Design • TECH 470 Electric, Hybrid and Alternatively Fueled Vehicles • TECH 474 Power Generation, Distribution and Utilization (+Smart Grid) • TECH 476 Electronic and Computer Control Systems • TECH 478 Fuel Cells, Emerging Technologies • TECH 478 Photovoltaics, Emerging Technologies 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 118
  97. 97. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Zero Emissions Laboratory Electro lyzer Fuel Cell Test Station H2 Renewable Power Supply and Weather Station ` H2 NiMHMH March 25, 2009 Hydrogen Station Permitting Workshop organized by NREL and hosted by CSULA Fuel Cell GM and Toyota SUVs. Heliocentris: Nexa Training System Complete, Proton-Hogen GC600 Electrolyzer 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 119
  98. 98. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 2010 Hydrogen Design Contest: Designing a Hydrogen Community Sponsored and supported by the National Hydrogen Association’s Hydrogen Education Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, Chevron, FuelCellStore, and the California Fuel Cell Partnership. 5 Tech and 2 ME students on the team. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 120
  99. 99. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 2010 Santa Monica Alt Car Expo Hydrogen Super Eagle on display and Cal State LA students at 2010 Santa Monica Alt Car Expo 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 121
  100. 100. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Synergistic Activities • Hydrogen and fuel Cell Education at California State University Los Angeles • Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology Center for Energy and Sustainability (CEaS) • Research Experience for Undergraduates Site in Energy and Sustainability • Establishing a Demonstration Hydrogen Fueling Station at Cal State L.A. • Sempra sponsored senior design • Southern California Edison: $30,000 donation for Power, Energy and Transportation Program • Leonard Transportation Center at Cal State San Bernardino: “Building Hydrogen Economy One Block at the Time,” $5,000; “Effective Decision Making Starts with an Effective Curriculum,” $5000. LTC SCE Sempra REU CREST Hydrogen Station HFCT Education 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 122
  101. 101. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Building Hydrogen Economy One Block at the Time Figure 1: H2A Cash Flow Diagram, august 2009 • Assess the costs of H2 production using NREL’s H2A model 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 123
  102. 102. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 Hydrogen Costs From The Model 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 5 10 15 20 25 Analysis Period (Operational Life of the Plant) PriceofHydrogenperkg($/kg) Figure 1: Price of Hydrogen per kg vs. Analysis Period 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Plant Capacity (kg H2/day) CostofHydrogenperkg($/kg)60 kg / day Figure 2: Price of Hydrogen per kg vs. Daily Hydrogen Production Capacity 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 124
  103. 103. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 TECH 470 Electric, Hybrid and Alternatively Fueled Vehicles • Lab 1--DC Motors and Generators: Efficiency and Losses • Lab 2--AC Motors: Efficiency and Losses – Instructor manual – Student manual – Solution manual Hampden Electric Motor Testing Station 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 125
  104. 104. 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 END Questions? 4th Annual Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010 126
  105. 105. What if Crash Data Does Not Mean for Mapping: Lesson Learned from Crash Mapping for Riverside County Do Kim, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University - Pomona
  106. 106. Project Background • Improvement of bicyclists and pedestrians safety in Riverside County – Finding physical environment factors to bicyclists and pedestrian crashes – Funded by Leonard Transportation Center
  107. 107. Crash Mapping • Converting text or tabular data to spatial data that locates crashes on a roadway map
  108. 108. Crash Data Flow
  109. 109. Crash Data • Crash data is important data for measuring safety on highways, but local governments do not often utilize this data. • The main reason for the limited uses is the inefficiency of crash data and its conflicts with the current crash mapping methodologies.
  110. 110. Riverside County Crash Data Analysis • Collected from California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) • 5 year of pedestrian and bicycle crashes (2004 – 2008) • Total 4,769 crashes were reported during the period (2,230 bicycle and 2,539 pedestrian crashes)
  111. 111. Automatic Mapping Using Geocoding • ArcGIS Geocoding engine is the most well- known address matching function. • However, it only matched 1,107 out of 4,769 (23%) crashes after intensive data cleaning and pre-processing.
  112. 112. Main Issue with Geocoding • Geocoding engine identifies the locations of property addresses and intersections. • However, the large portion of location information of crash data is certain distance and direction from intersections W 500 E 300 S 1000
  113. 113. Matching with Customized Application • The application moves crash records from intersections by given distance and direction. Crash Record = 500 ft South from University Ave. & 1st St.
  114. 114. Results with Customized Application • Matched 2,094 records more (44%)
  115. 115. Manual Matching • Most time consuming and labor intensive works • Need to review the location information of each individual record one by one using the customized application • Systemic conflicts + Human errors
  116. 116. State Road Names vs. Local Names • Police officers collect state road numbers, but the street names of roadway network are local names.
  117. 117. State Road vs. Local Name Resolution • A street alias table can resolve this issue. • 629 records (13%) belong to this category.
  118. 118. Multiple Candidate Issue • Multiple possibilities of a matching point • ArcGIS Geocoding uses zip codes for zonal details, crash records do not have the zip codes Crash Record = ORANGE ST & 10TH ST
  119. 119. Multiple Candidate Resolution • Screening with city boundaries • 159 (3%) crashes ORANGE ST & 10TH ST at city of Riverside
  120. 120. Human Errors on Data Collection • Incomplete information – University Ave & 1st (St) – (W) Palo BLVD & Main St • Redundant Information – Chicago Ave & 1981 Chicago Ave • Others – Misspelled street names – Using place names instead of street names (e.g. Gateway Plaza) – And so on…
  121. 121. Human Error Resolution • Review each individual record one by one and correct if mistakes are identified • 587 records (12%) matched
  122. 122. Unmatchable Crashes • Irresolvable humane errors Crash Record = CYPRESS AVE & PHILBIN AVE CYPRESS AVE PHILBIN AVE
  123. 123. Impacts of The Errors Crash Record = GRAND AVE & 4TH ST • Possibly change the crash hotspots by excluding crashes at particular locations from mapping
  124. 124. Incremental Resolutions • Reduce human errors by educating police officers and data entry persons • Construct better quality of roadway network data • Develop street alias tables • Adopt crash mapping software
  125. 125. MN DOT Case • Minnesota Crash Mapping Analysis Tool (MnCMAT) – Crash mapping and analysis software covering entire state
  126. 126. FL DOT Case • Web-based State Crash Record System – Police officers pinpoint crash locations on a map that displays an aerial photograph of the area pulled up directly from the sever, much like systems such as Google Maps or Yahoo Maps.
  127. 127. Impact of Inland Ports on Southern California’s Freight Transportation Network Ardavan Asef-Vaziri Systems and Operations Management College of Business and Economics Mansour Rahimi Industrial and Systems Engineering University of Southern California Robert Harrison Center of Transportation Research University of Texas
  128. 128. Container Handling 2007: World Total 450 MTEUs RANK PORT (Country) Million TEUs 1 Singapore (Singapore) 27.9 2 Shanghai (China) 26.2 3 Hong Kong (China) 24 4 Shenzhen (China) 21.1 5 Los Angeles & Long Beach (US) 15.7 6 Yingkou/Liaonian (China) 13.7 7 Busan (South Korea) 13.3 8 Rotterdam (Netherlands) 10.8 9 Dubai Ports (UAE) 10.7 10 Kaohsiung (Taiwan) 10.3 11 Hamburg (Germany) 9.9 12 Qingdao (China) 9.4 13 Ningbo (China) 9.3 14 Guangzhou (China) 9.2 15 Antwerp (Belgium) 8.2 16 Port Kelang (Malaysia) 7.1 17 Tianjin (China) 7.1 18 Tanjung Pelepas (Malaysia) 5.5 19 New York / New Jersey (US) 5.3 20 Bremen (Germany) 4.9
  129. 129. Container Handling SPB Ports: US Total 23 MTEUs 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 1990 1995 2000 2005 Million TEUs LA Million TEUs LB Million TEUs Total
  130. 130. Strategic Positioning, Essence of Process Flow, Operational Performance Measures Process competencies Customer Value Proposition Customer satisfaction Customer expectations Financial performance    •Flow time reduction is the most important dimension in the customer value proposition. •Straightforward capacity increases such as more highways and larger ports, do not work anymore.
  131. 131. US-China Alternative Routes Narvik, Norway Vostochny, Russia Hong Kong, China Singapore Rotterdam, Netherlands Savannah Norfolk New York Prince Rupert, Canada Savannah Norfolk New York Los Angeles Colima, Mexico Ensenada, Mexico
  132. 132. Four Characteristics of Forecasts • Forecasts are usually (always) inaccurate (wrong). • Forecasts should be accompanied by a measure of forecast error. • Aggregate forecasts are more accurate than individual forecasts. Aggregate forecasts reduce the amount of variability – relative to the aggregate mean demand. StdDev of sum of two variables is less than sum of StdDev of the two variables. • Long-range forecasts are less accurate than short-range forecasts. Forecasts further into the future tends to be less accurate than those of more imminent events. As time passes, we get better information, and make better. prediction.
  133. 133. Strategic Positioning and Smooth Flow 3-4 days 14 days 2-3 days 22 days 31 days
  134. 134. Container Movement in Southern California
  135. 135. Current Practice 220K daily truck VMTs
  136. 136. Inland Port Concept 120K daily truck VMTs Clean air locomotive/maglev/etc. Zero-emission vehicles
  137. 137. Inland Port’s Primary Functions Modal Change Truck to Train Unsorted Containers on Train Decreased Truck VMT I710, I110 Mobility Safety Sustainability Increased Port Capacity
  138. 138. Current DS Route Secondary DS Route Current Single Stack Route •Next Day Service to Columbus •Reduce Transit to Chicago by 1 Day •Will Shave Approx. 225 Route Miles Off Each Container Move to Chicago •Greater Efficiencies •High Speed Double Stack Heartland Corridor Route Port-Heartland High Speed Doublestack Corridor
  139. 139. 99,000 SF Available
  140. 140. DC/PCs Locations in Southern California
  141. 141. Single Facility Location Model |||| 00 i m i ii m i i YywXxwZ    Minimize:
  142. 142. Six Inland Port
  143. 143. Location-Allocation Model niji n j m i ij GPOdwrZ    ),( 1 1 mjmir n j ij ,.....,2,1,,.....,1,01 1  mjCtr j m i iij ,.....,2,1 1  Minimize: Subject to:
  144. 144. DC/PCs Allocated to Each Inland Port
  145. 145. Impact of Inland Ports on Daily VMT 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Inland Ports in Operations DailyVMT VenturaN. of Port E. of LA Orange Mira Loma Commerce
  146. 146. A Decision Support Tool
  147. 147. ASRS/AGVS Technology at Inland Port
  148. 148. Smart Dial-a-Ride for Demand-Responsive Transit Sponsor: Leonard Transportation Center (CSUSB) Integration of Bicycling and Walking Facilities into Urban Infrastructure Sponsor: Mineta Transportation Institute (SJSU) Cornelius Nuworsoo, Ph.D. Associate Professor Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo
  149. 149. Smart Dial-A-Ride
  150. 150. Lessons from Senior Mobility Study • Survey of seniors revealed: • (a) seniors in general would prefer on-demand services as much as, if not more than any other public transportation mode
  151. 151. Lessons from Senior Mobility Study • Survey of seniors revealed: • (b) seniors with physical limitations would prefer on- demand as much as, if not more than, any other means of travel; (. . . . group may grow with longevity!)
  152. 152. Lessons from Senior Mobility Study Why the Preference? • Relatively dispersed pattern of land development in metropolitan US on-demand services offer . . . • the closest type of public transport service to the overwhelmingly chosen form of personal transportation, the automobile
  153. 153. The Problem •Demand-response service is expensive to provide (Rosenbloom, 2003): •Of all public transit modes in California, dial-a-ride transit was: •(a) least-used, •(b) least productive •(c) most subsidized •Subsidy per ride: •dial-a-ride: $2.00 to $10.15 •fixed route: $1.16 to $3.89 •(Nuworsoo, 2001, unpublished). Hierarchies of Transit Operating Ratios -- CA 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Single-mode rail Mixed-mode Dial-a-ride operatingratio
  154. 154. Ray of Hope! • Some on-demand operations exhibit comparable levels of efficiency to standard transit! • How do they do it? 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 <2 2-4 4-6 6-8 8-10 >10 NumberofAgencies Operating Cost Per Passenger Trip ($) MB 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 <2 2-4 4-6 6-8 8-10 >10 NumberofAgencies Operating Cost Per Passenger Trip ($) DRT
  155. 155. The Need • Need to rethink and revamp operation of on- demand service . . . .if society is to meet future mobility preferences of very large incoming cohorts of seniors
  156. 156. Hypothesis • An efficient and widely available on-demand system: • . . . . may be viewed as an advanced form of car (or vehicle) sharing • . . . . can serve the niche between the private automobile and fixed route service while society attempts to change land use patterns to more compact forms that support additional fixed route service
  157. 157. Project’s Benefits • Develop efficient concept of operations from cases • Develop affordable dispatch assistance tool from concept • Provide vital senior mobility for expanding cohort • Provide opportunity for wider vehicle sharing and connections to fixed-route transit and other terminals • Contribute to: • Promote cost savings (users and govt.) • reduce energy consumption and • reduce air pollution
  158. 158. Bicycling and Walking Facilities
  159. 159. Motivation Problem • Many design guidelines and manuals • Limited work on user preferences of treatments Therefore • Bicycling and Walking Facility study . . . . • Case study of selected bicycling- & walking-friendly communities in California : • Davis • Palo Alto • San Luis Obispo
  160. 160. Key Lessons User Preferences: • Complete network of separated bicycling & walking facilities that serve desired destinations • Majority of respondents would prefer to bike . . . • 10 to 20 min for work, school, other business • < 10 min for shopping • > 30 min for recreation Implication . . . • . . . . . This suggests how far away land use and activities should be placed from residences and work places to promote bicycling
  161. 161. Key Lessons User Preferences: • Ratings of factors in decision to cycle or walk . . . 0 1 2 3 4 5 Travel distance Quality of facilities for cycling or walking Climate Difficulty of terrain Directness of connections to destination Availability Facilities for Bicycling or walking Physical ability Availability of Bicycle Parking at Destination Availability of Showers at Destination
  162. 162. Key Lessons World Trend: • 3-way separation (autos; bicycles; walkers) Santa Barbara
  163. 163. Project’s Benefits • The product is a guide for local level planning that addresses . . . . • transferable policies • infrastructure systems • public education • key user preferences • The guide will help local governments plan for transportation alternatives that can . . . . • promote healthy living, • reduce energy consumption and • reduce environmental pollution
  164. 164. Thanks! Questions?
  165. 165. CHALLENGES FOR TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP: THE CASE OF CALIFORNIA’S SR-91 EXPRESS LANES Anna Ya Ni California State University-San Bernardino Jack R. Widmeyer Transportation Research Conference, 2010
  166. 166. PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP “a contractual arrangement between public and private-sector entities, typically involving a government agency contracting with a business or non- profit entity in order to renovate, construct, operate, maintain, and/or manage a facility or system, in whole or in part, that provides a public service”—GAO/GGD-99-71 • Characteristics of PPP : – Involves “two or more actors,” at least one of which is a public entity. – Each of the participating actors can bargain on its own behalf. – The partnership involves a long-term, “enduring” relationship. – Each actor must be able to bring either material or symbolic goods to the relationship. – All actors have a “shared responsibility” for the outcomes (pp. 12-13) – Peters (1998).
  167. 167. TRANSPORTATION PPP • Design-Build (DB) • Design-Build-Operate (DBO), Design-Build-Maintain (DBM), and Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM) • Design-Build-Operate-Turnover (DBOT), Build- Operate-Transfer (BOT), and Design-Build-Warranty (DBW) • Build-Own-Operate (BOO), Buy-Build-Operate (BBO), and Buy/Lease-Develop-Operate (BDO) • Maintenance and Operation • Program Management and Strategic Planning
  168. 168. BENEFITS OF TRANSPORTATION PPP • Saving Cost • Sharing Risks • Expediting Project • Improving Project Certainty • Leveraging Expertise • Encouraging Innovations
  169. 169. CHALLENGES OF TRANSPORTATION PPP • Legal Challenges • Political Challenges • Financial Challenges • Risk-Sharing Challenges • Partnership Challenges – Interest Diversion – Information Asymmetry – Agent Capture – Accountability
  170. 170. THE SR91 EXPRESS LANES PPP • Policy Background – AB 680 • Phase One—Design-Build-Operate • Phase Two—The Non-Compete Controversy and the Transfer – The non-compete clause – AB 1010 • Phase Three—New Operation Contract • Recent Development – SB 1316
  171. 171. DISTRIBUTION OF EFFORTS Development Stage Private Public Land investment Existing state ownership Plan/environmental objectives State transportation plan Engineering design/permits CPTC Construction CPTC Tollway operation CPTC Roadway maintenance Caltrans provides Roadway policing California Highway Patrol provides *Price (2001)
  172. 172. LESSONS LEARNED • Gaining public acceptance is critical to the success of any transport PPP project • Aligning partners’ interests is fundamental to sustaining a viable, working partnership • Public agency needs to build up organizational capacity for contractual relationship and for contingencies • Public officials need to embrace the entrepreneur spirit that actively takes risk and seeks return-on- investment
  173. 173. The Clean Truck Program: Implementation of an Environmental Sustainability Initiative Christopher B. Clott & Bruce C. Hartman ABS School of Maritime Policy and Management California Maritime Academy
  174. 174. Introduction • Clean Truck Program is a controversial environmental sustainability initiative adopted by several major North American maritime ports as a means of restricting use of drayage trucks hauling goods to and from port terminal operations. • The Port of Los Angeles implementation of Clean Truck initiative involves environmental considerations, legal questions, labor and private industry considerations. • Has national implications for implementation of regulatory policies on interstate commerce.
  175. 175. Our study probes the following points: • The issues and interest groups involved in the effort of seaports to regulate harbor trucking. • Harbor trucking pollution policies and current litigation surrounding the issue. • Market concerns and economic decisions of the interest groups involved. • Individual port decision making. • Incentive based responses to social policy imperatives.
  176. 176. Background I. Containers brought to and from vessels by short haul diesel trucks connecting ports with nearby yards, railheads, warehouses, etc. II. Until the Clean Truck initiative rigs primarily operated by independent owner-operators with older model trucks working on per contract or per load basis with low pay and low barriers to entry.
  177. 177. A. Infrastructure and Pollution Issues • L.A. Basin regarded as one of most air polluted regions within United States. • Growth of trade volume thru LA and LGB in last two decades led to increased congestion and concentrated port truck traffic. • Civil suits filed against Ports on behalf of nearby residents suffering health problems. • Federal efforts to reduce diesel truck exhaust have been ongoing since 1980’s. • State efforts thru CARB to reduce emissions over and above Federal EPA regulations.
  178. 178. B. Clean Air Plan • Progressive goals to ban old trucks from port and require purchase of new trucks or refitting of trucks to meet 2007 emission standards. • Concession agreement part of plan put into place by POLA would require truckers to operate with employer driver workforce, phase out owner operators. • Concession arrangement opposed by a multitude of business interests as infringement in violation of trucking deregulation through Congressional action in the 1980’s and 90’s.
  179. 179. C. Port Trucking Industry • Typical port truck driver unable to afford purchase of newer model trucks or retrofitting without significant economic support. • Federal law under the FAAAA Act of 1986 prohibits states and localities from imposing rules on motor carriers engaged in interstate commerce. • POLA argued they needed legal authority to enact policies to protect their financial interests under “market participant” doctrine. • The Ports of Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle, Tacoma and New York/New Jersey have Clean Truck Programs in operation.
  180. 180. D. Lawsuit and Court Proceedings • American Trucking Association (ATA) brought suit against POLA arguing that concession agreement was violation of Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. • In Sept. 2008 U.S. District Court ruled against ATA allowing Port to proceed with plan as scheduled. • FMC first opposed and then supported Clean Truck Program.
  181. 181. D. Lawsuit and Court Proceedings (cont.) • ATA appealed to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2009, won injunction against concession agreement. • Left unchallenged by ATA were aspects related to older vehicle retirement, truck registry and other efficiencies. • In Oct. 2009 Port of Long Beach reached separate agreement with ATA requiring drivers to meet environmental guidelines, but no concession agreement.
  182. 182. D. Lawsuit and Court Proceedings (cont.) • A civil trial of ATA lawsuit was argued in April 2010 in the U.S. District Court. A ruling on Sept. 10 upheld the POLA concession agreements. ATA challenged that decision and on Oct. 27 the Judge granted a preliminary injunction blocking implementation. • Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the case again in March 2011. • Case expected to ultimately reach U.S. Supreme Court on primacy of federal law in interstate commerce.
  183. 183. E. Labor Involvement? • Independent owner-operators by law cannot be organized by labor unions. • If motor carriers are required to have employee- drivers by the Port, drivers could be legally organized. • Environmental, community and labor groups, including Teamsters support the POLA position. • ATA argues that Clean Truck program is primarily a Teamster backed initiative to rewrite deregulation of trucking .
  184. 184. III. Modeling Port Pollution Control • Stakeholder interests conflict regarding pollution abatement. • Legal challenges prevented full implementation of some plans. • Ports must maintain competitive position and service container traffic while reducing pollution by a target percentage within a particular time frame. • Should ports set own standards or wait for decisions on global or federal level? • Insight from a simple game theory model of trucking process.
  185. 185. Players • Decisions affect (1)competitive position of the port (2)investment in pollution control for trucks (3)use of trucks in supply chains. a) Port Authorities- set standards and operate with some govt. oversight. b) Port Terminal Operators- choose carriers c) Large Motor Carriers- upgrade trucks. d) Small Motor Carriers- choose operators e) Owner-Operators- upgrade trucks f) Unions/Teamsters- contract with large carriers g) Federal Govt.- set pollution standards h) Regional/City Govt.- set local standards i) Environmental Interests- part. In legal action j) Industry Interests- part. In legal action • Teamsters Union appears in our model only by effect on cost of freight movement through higher wage, therefore higher cost per TEU moved thru a given port. • Not considered as lobbyists, influencers, and legal activists, or as organizers of employee operators.
  186. 186. Decision Relations • Port sets the goals, capital support for improvement, participant fees, other rules. • Each PTO selects motor carriers that are small and large. • LMC’s responsible for truck upgrades. SMC’s might or might not upgrade truck. • LMC selects OPS as employee operators (higher wage rate) or owner-operators (lower wage rate) • SMC selects only OPS-OO’s at lower wage. • Subsidies can induce more cooperation to reach pollution goals. • Too low a subsidy may create reluctance to upgrade.
  187. 187. VI. Port Competition and Cooperation a) All North American ports must set pollution standards high enough to satisfy regional interest groups but low enough to assure that there will be available trucks to handle volume. b) Lawsuit progression suggests federal standards may be put in place. Individual port negotiations would be null and void. c) Interest in ports to join together in setting common pollution standards.
  188. 188. Assumption • Assumption: if an LMC elects 100% participation in an upgrade of trucks to the standard set they will also pay the union wage. • We found some basis for this assumption from practitioners
  189. 189. Upgrading Trucks • LMC’s,SMC’s have a choice about percentage of their operators they will choose with upgraded trucks. • If LMC upgrades entire fleet, percentage pD is 100%, and LMC will choose EO’s or will pay high wage rate; translates into higher truck cost per TEU moved. If LMC chooses pD EO’s and (1- pD) OO’s, it will on average pay blended cost per TEU. • OO has a choice of whether to upgrade her truck at capital expense. OO gets lower wage rate but must cover capital cost. Percent qk is likelihood that OOk chooses to upgrade her truck.
  190. 190. Simple Game Model • Interaction between MC and OO a simultaneous move strategic game; MC chooses strategy pD; OO chooses qk • Payoff function for each player is income less cost: – MC associating with OO: ft – cD (pd – qk) – OO associating with MC: wt – ck (pd – qk) • ft, wt are freight rate and wage/period – t are average TEUs/trip, trips/period • cD , ck are cost per period to upgrade net of subsidy • Assume reasonable life of upgrade, eg 5 years, linear depreciation • Some ports may give different subsidies to MC and OO • Rational play and common knowledge  Nash Equilibrium Outcome
  191. 191. Strategy Space of MC and OO types
  192. 192. Model Results • Each best response exists only in upper or lower triangle (respectively). • The Pareto order of each best response from smaller values to larger – player prefers smallest percent strategy it can. • Nash Equilibrium strategy profiles for this game are exactly on diagonal p=q. • Pareto ordered from (0,0) best, to (1,1) worst. • Certain regions infeasible – cost exceeds income
  193. 193. What should Port Do? • Both MC and OO prefer no upgrade (probability zero). • In NE each chooses percentage other chooses. • Port tries to increase percentages. Port should keep percentage same for both D and O. • Induce parties to jointly play high p = q. Treat MC and OO same. • Higher subsidies reduce costs c per period. • Keep c low for MC and OO to increase profit; more likely to play NE with higher p=q, more likely to convert trucks.
  194. 194. Players’ Expectations Matter • If either freight rates f or wages w are too low relative to subsidy, gray infeasible region creeps close to NE line. • If either f or w are expected to be volatile, player of that type might decide that risk it drops too low means she should not join game. • Subsidies keep infeasible regions away from NE. • Different subsidies to OO and MC do not affect NE; simply change feasible regions.
  195. 195. Our Suggestions 1. Percentages of trucks upgraded should be the same for drayage firms and owner operators. 2. Trucking participants will seek the lowest percentage of upgrade possible. 3. Subsidies for upgrading should be large enough such that participants will choose to participate or risk losing business for not doing so. Relevant in periods like the recent one when freight rates plummeted. Many truckers felt they could not hold on if rates went lower, and chose not to upgrade. Result today is shortages of trucks in some ports; volume cannot be handled without longer waits.
  196. 196. Conclusions A. Current legal actions show that many interest groups can hold up implementation of air pollution abatement procedures. B. Legal/legislative decisions can prove counterproductive to ports C. Clean truck policies can be modeled as a strategy for the probability of upgrading, freight rates for operators, wages and the cost of upgrading fleets.
  197. 197. Final Thought • Actions must take in account freight rate fluctuations and wages that would cause parties not to generate a profit. • Risk factor will cause parties not to participate without an expectation of success. • Upgrade of drayage trucks can be implemented by port management when subsidies are conditioned by an understanding of choices made by participants.
  198. 198. A New Method to Identify Hot Spots in roadway Network BY Wen Cheng, Ph.D., PE Assistant Professor Civil Engineering Department Cal Poly Pomona
  199. 199. Presentation Outline • Hotspot Identification (HSID) background • Description of the new proposed HSID method • Application of the new method • Summary and Conclusions
  200. 200. Crashes in Real Life: Huge Burden
  201. 201. Crashes in the U.S. • 42,116 fatalities (i.e., 115 persons killed/day) • 1.51 fatalities/100M VMT • 14.79 fatalities/100K Population • 231 Billion Economic Cost • 41% alcohol-related fatalities • 29.7% Speed-related fatal crashes Source: 2005 NHTSA
  202. 202. Crashes in California Source: 2005 CA Statistical Abstract
  203. 203. How to address safety challenges • ISTEA legislation (1991) and TEA-21(1998) required each state develop safety management systems. • SAFETEA-LU (2005) establishes a new core Highway Safety Improvement Program –structured and funded to make significant progress in reducing highway fatalities
  204. 204. Safety Management System Basic Components 1 •Identification of hot spots 2 •Diagnosis of crash problems 3 •Selection of countermeasures 4 •Evaluation of countermeasures
  205. 205. Current Practice of HSID • Rank a set of candidate locations in terms of the registered accident counts or expected long-term accident counts • General assumptions –accident process can be viewed as a sequence of Bernoulli trials –Accident counts of the set of locations follow negative binomial distribution
  206. 206. State-of-the-art HSID Method: Bayesian )( )|()( )|( Kf kKfkf Kkf   Where: f (k)= prior pdf of k’s of reference population (similar sites ), it follows gamma distribution whose parameters are obtained based on empirical data. f (K|k)= pdf of accident counts on a specific site whose expected safety is k, it is Poisson distribution. f (K)= pdf of a group of collected accident counts. f ( k|K)= posterior pdf of λ of the site which has x counts.
  207. 207. General Process of Diagnosis 1 • Identification of dominant accident types of hot spots 2 • Data amplification by detailed on-site investigation (maybe include conflict studies) 3 • Identification of dominant factors and/or road features 4 • Determine the nature of the accident problem
  208. 208. General Process of Countermeasure Selection 1 • Determine the range of measures likely to influence the dominant accident types and road features 2 • Select countermeasures expected to reduce the number and severity of accidents of the type dominant at the location 3 • Check that adopted countermeasures do not have undesirable consequences, either in safety terms or in traffic efficiency terms
  209. 209. Problems of Current Safety Practice • The safety management components are somewhat isolated • Much less safety resources are allocated to the first step: HSID • Much more resources are invested in the subsequent steps. • Result: the substantial resources invested in the subsequent steps could be wasted on the sites that are wrongly identified in the first step
  210. 210. The New HSID Method Proposed • Streamline the safety improvement process by incorporating the crash type and crash severity into HSID step. • Crash type recognition: facilitate the crash diagnosis process. • Crash Severity recognition: facilitate the economic evaluation of countermeasure alternatives. • All information is incorporated under Bayesian framework.
  211. 211. Case Study: City of Corona • Crossroads Collision Database software • 298 Intersections: 141 signalized and 157 non-signalized • Crash period: 10 years (2000~2009). • A set of roadway factors: minor ADT, major ADT, speed limit, etc.
  212. 212. Method Evaluation • Crash data divided into 2 groups: Before period (2000~2004), After (2005~2009) • Use top 10% locations as crash hotspots • Evaluation criteria: overall crash costs of future period for all crashes and crash types. • Results: type-and-severity recognition method shows advantages over the typical one in terms of both criteria.
  213. 213. Discussion on Future Direction • Crash data from other cities or counties are needed. • Data sample size (298) is relatively small. • Special statistical modeling techniques are required to address issues associated with crash type and severity.
  214. 214. Assessing Public perception of user-based fees and tolls (Leonard Transportation Center) Anurag Pande, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Cal Poly State University , San Luis Obispo, CA
  215. 215. Outline • Research Project Information • Research Motivation • Research Tasks • Impact on local, regional, and state level • Ongoing Research Efforts with CSU UTCs
  216. 216. Project Information • Assessment of public perception of user- based fees and tolls to finance transportation infrastructure improvements • In response to LTC RFP for Need Based Research • Theme: Mobility – In collaboration with Dr. Cornelius Nuworsoo – Student Assistant Ms. Adriana Jordan
  217. 217. Research Motivation State and local fuel tax revenues in Thousands of dollars (Source: Tax Policy Center) -- 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 California Fuel Tax Revenues California
  218. 218. Research Motivation •User-based fees are one mechanism of financing infrastructure in the face of declining tax revenues •However, is it acceptable to the public?
  219. 219. Research Motivation •Recent research from NCHRP showed that perception of the user based fees may not be as negative as once thought •In this project we want to survey public opinion in the inland empire region to assess: –public’s perception of specifically directed user based fees collected as tolls –what information makes people more or less likely to support these fees
  220. 220. Stakeholder Interviews •Interviews with the following interest groups: • AAA as a representative of the auto owners •Elected Officials •Trucking Corporations •CSU San Bernardino as a major area trip generator •Caltrans •Independent Truckers •Transportation Consulting Firms •Consumer Corporations w/ Distribution Centers in the inland empire area
  221. 221. Stakeholder Interviews •Representatives from each stakeholder group were asked about: • Their role in the community •View on Traffic Congestion •Their interest group’s opinion on user-based fees •Their familiarity with the arguments for or against such fees •Any additional comments
  222. 222. Public Opinion Survey •Based on detailed literature review and stakeholder interviews a public survey instrument was designed. •The survey included questions on: – Demographics –Travel Behavior •It seeks opinion on the following issues: –Congestion in the inland empire –Transportation financing mechanisms –Toll roads and HOT Lanes –Toll collection
  223. 223. Public Opinion Survey Interviews are currently being conducted over the phone with the option of taking the survey online •Obtained the Random Digit Dialing (RDD) sample from STS •Surveys are being conducted in English or Spanish based on choice of individual survey participant •We have 50 responses from RDD sample of about 3000 phone numbers (including cell phones)
  224. 224. Impact on Local, Regional, and State Level •Study results will provide insight to local and regional agencies about public’s view of toll roads and user-based fees •These opinions can be used to formulate attractive policy proposals for tackling congestion and raising revenues •Research effort provides a model for statewide survey with similar objectives •Can provide policy makers with more options to raise funds for infrastructure priorities in this era of budget cuts and declining revenues
  225. 225. Ongoing Projects with CSU UTCs • Proactive assessment of accident risk to improve safety on a system of freeways – Funded by Mineta Transportation Institute – In collaboration with Dr. Cornelius Nuworsoo (Cal Poly) and Dr. Katherine Cushing (SJSU) • Integrating Effective Routing Strategies within the Emergency Management Decision Support System – Funded by Mineta Transportation Institute – In collaboration with Dr. Frances Edwards – Student Assistant Mr. Joe Yu