WCCC Board of Directors Quarterly Meeting Tuesday, April 21 – Wednesday, April 22, 2009 Hosts: Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and the Alaska Railroad Corporation 327 W Ship Creek Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (Note: All Times as Alaska Daylight Time – 1 Hour Earlier than WA, OR, CA)

SANDAG Staff Contact: Linda Culp, (619) 699-6957; [email protected]

Conference Call Information For All Meetings: 1-877-356- 9437, Access Code 9805119

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

2:00 pm ITS, Operations, and Environment Committee

Alternative Fuel Corridor Program Climate Change Activities Alaska Environmental Strategies Best Practices Manual

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

8:30 am WCCC Board of Directors

Coalition Business Plan Outreach Program Funding Opportunities Goods Movement Committee Federal Relations Committee Marad and Intermodal System Report Goods Movement in Alaska

2:00 pm Adjourn

www.westcoastcorridors.org

MEETING LOCATION

Meetings are being hosted by the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and the Alaska Railroad Corporation. The physical location will be at the Railroad Corporation:

Alaska Railroad Corporation 327 W Ship Creek Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501

Offices are about 7 miles from the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport.

Please RSVP for the meeting as we may have transportation arranged to and from the airport and we’ll need your name for security reasons at the office.

2 ITS, Operations and Environment Committee Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:00 PM Bruce Agnew, Rex Burkholder, Co-Chairs

Agenda

ITEM # ACTION

1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS (Bruce Agnew, Co-Chair)

2. ALTERNATIVE FUEL CORRIDOR PROGRAM:

+2A. INTERSTATE CLEAN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR INFORMATION (Cliff Gladstein, President, Gladstein & Neandross)

This program, started in 1996, has led to $50 million for alternative fueling stations on parts of I-5, CA-99, I-10, I-15, and I-80 in California, , and Utah.

+2B. DOT I-5 PROGRAM PROPOSAL SUPPORT (Lynn Averbeck, ODOT)

ODOT is proposing an I-5 alternative fuel program that includes the placement of fueling stations at rest stops and other locations. ODOT staff will present the proposed program.

2C. COALITION ROLE DISCUSSION

The Coalition is proposing to support this effort through outreach and educational methods. The Committee will review several opportunities for assistance.

3. CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVITIES DISCUSSION

Last month, the Committee heard two presentations on climate change activities. The Committee should discuss possible opportunities for Coalition activities.

3 ITEM # ACTION

4. ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES DISCUSSION

Local representatives will present information on key environmental issues facing Alaska. Presentations will include: ƒ Diana Carlson and Lyn Dookozian, Endangered Species Act and the Impact on the Port of Anchorage Intermodal Expansion Project. ƒ Jackie Poston, Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation, on Climate Change and how Alaska is dealing with the issue

+5. BEST PRACTICES MANUAL (Glenn Pascal) APPROVE

The draft best practices manual was introduced and reviewed at last month’s Committee meeting with a 30-day comment period. The Committee will discuss the final draft and is asked to recommend approval to the Board of Directors. The project manager will also describe the process for keeping the manual current.

+ indicates attachment

4

ITS, OPERATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE

April 21, 20099 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 2A

Action Requested: INFORMATION

INTERSTATE CLEAN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR

(The Material herein is taken from the ICTC website. It gives a good overview of this very interesting project which was begun more than a decade ago. It presents an excellent case study in public private partnerships.)

The Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor is a planned network of alternative fuel dispensing stations along key roadways that serve associated alternative fuel vehicle (AFV) fleets that move freight between cities and states in the Western . It is the first economically sustainable and most successful planned clean fuel corridor of its kind in the nation.

The goal of the ICTC Project is to mobilize and concentrate public and private resources to maximize the commercial viability of clean, alternative fuel trucks in goods movement. The ICTC Project links truck fleet operators to engine, chassis and fuel providers, as well as to public agencies that provide technical and financial assistance in order to facilitate the deployment of alternative fuel trucks and development of alternative fuel infrastructure along the corridor.

The United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), California Energy Commission (CEC), San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD), Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), and the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) have mutually funded the Project and are members of the Project's Steering Committee. The ICTC Project provides a unique opportunity for these agencies to coordinate their respective air quality and energy agendas through this single collaborative effort.

5

Through the support of the ICTC Steering Committee, the project provides complimentary technical and grant funding services to heavy-duty fleet operators looking to deploy alternative fuel heavy- duty trucks and infrastructure at key locations along the corridor.

HISTORY

The ICTC grew out of efforts undertaken to address issues raised by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, and the 1992 Energy Policy Act (EPAct) regarding the air pollution and the country's growing dependence on imported oil. Throughout the early and mid 1990s, awareness of the role of diesel on public health and exacerbating regional haze was growing. In addition, the 1990-91 Gulf War as well as several unexpected price shocks reminded the nation of the adverse economic consequences of our transportation system's almost total reliance on petroleum. Reducing the country's use of diesel fuel was seen as a way to address these problems simultaneously.

In 1993, the United States Department of Energy (US-DOE) developed the "Clean Cities Program," which encourages public private partnerships to advance the purchase and use of clean alternative fuel vehicle technology and infrastructure on a local and regional level. The concept of Clean Cities was to start small, build awareness of the link between air pollution and petroleum-dependent transportation, and introduce fleet operators to new options for vehicle fuel. The idea was to create interest and build momentum, with the hope that each community would begin to work together to develop and implement an AFV deployment plan tailored to its individual needs and that would enable it to reap the rewards of mutual action. As the Clean Cities program expanded the next logical step was to link Clean Cities together through an integrated network of Clean Fuel Corridors.

One of the early proponents of the corridor concept in the Western United States was Ken Kelley, President and CEO of JBK Trucking Company. In late 1995, Gladstein, Neandross & Associates (GNA) and Ruby Mountain, Inc., working with the late Carl Moyer, Mike Jackson, and Charlotte Pera of Acurex Environmental, developed Kelley's idea into the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor. As originally envisioned, the ICTC was to link the region's five major air quality non-attainment areas: Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Sacramento, Salt Lake City and the San Joaquin Valley along the I-80, I-5/CA- 99 and the I-15.

The initial goals of the ICTC were to:

• Create a triangular corridor that would provide alternative fuel coverage for over 1,800 miles of some of the nation's busiest interstate highways.

• Install 10 natural gas fueling stations along the three legs of the corridor;

• Deploy 250 new heavy-duty AFV's to utilize this infrastructure;

• Displacing over 4.7 million gallons of petroleum fuel annually;

• Reducing emissions of priority pollutants by over 131 tons a annually;

• Generating over $19 million in private investment in new alternative fuel infrastructure.

6

By January, 1996, major environmental agencies and air districts agreed to fund the Project and become members of the Project's Steering Committee. Later, other smaller agencies agreed to support the ICTC Project.

As evidenced by the successes realized by the ICTC thus far, the ICTC Project has been one of the most successful programs of it kind anywhere in the world. As the Project's successes are continually being updated, please view the "ICTC News Updates" section of the site to see the most current Achievements of the ICTC.

ACHIEVEMENTS

By any measure, the ICTC Project has been one of the most successful programs of it kind anywhere in the world. Since its inception, the ICTC has become the nation's most successful public-private partnership dedicated to accelerating the market penetration of clean, alternative fuel vehicles in the interstate movement of goods. In that time the project has exceeded most of its initial goals and is well on the way to accomplishing them all. At present, ICTC staff has helped to secure $23.8 million in funding to:

• Build twenty-three (23) public access natural gas fueling stations in California and Nevada.

• Deploy 514 heavy-duty and 160 light duty natural gas and LPG vehicles to use these stations;

• Reduce emission of NOx by over 350 tons and diesel consumption by 5.5 million gallons annually; and

• Generate over $75 million in public and private investment.

In addition to the ICTC achievements, GNA has been able to expand the ICTC fleet education and outreach efforts through a series of Niche Market Workshops. To date, GNA and the ICTC have also brought together 3,500 participants, including more than 1,900 individuals from 1,300 different public and private fleets, at nine national ICTC conferences and local ICTC briefings. These workshops have been the source for the development and funding of over 20 vehicle and infrastructure deployment projects as well as the catalyst for the countless similar projects by ICTC stakeholders

STEERING COMMITEE

The ICTC Steering Committee is comprised of representatives from the state and federal government agencies highlighted below. Steering Committee members set the broad policy objectives of the ICTC Project. Through regular monthly conference calls, the Steering Committee actively participates in the development of deployment projects. Working through the ICTC Project, the Steering Committee also coordinates resources, strategizes about joint activity, and shares information about the latest developments in policy and technology. Through the financial support, expertise, and leadership of these agencies, the ICTC has developed into the nation's most successful clean corridor effort.

7

ICTC Steering Committee members include:

1. Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 2. California Air Resources Board 3. California Energy Commission 4. Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District 5. Riverside County Transportation Commission 6. San Bernardino Associated Governments 7. South Coast Air Quality Management District 8. U.S. Department of Energy, Clean Cities Program 9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX

8 Agenda Item #2B Oregon Department of Transportation ITS, Ops, Env Committee

Alternative Fuels Corridor I-5: Canada to

The states of Oregon, , and California want to develop alternative fueling stations along Interstate 5 from The Oregon portion… Canada to Mexico.

The development and use of the alternative fuels corridor would encourage greater use of alternative fuels to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation sources. Thirty-eight percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Oregon come from transportation sources.

Alternative fuel distribution facilities would be installed, operated and maintained by private vendors in a cooperative, contractual relationship with the three states at interstate safety rest areas, other state-owned property, or possibly through partnerships with existing gas station owners within the Interstate 5 corridor.

Alternative fuels that would be offered are still under consideration as part of project implementation, but could include “next generation” blends of biodiesel and ethanol, hydrogen, compressed natural gas, electricity and/or other fuels as they are developed.

The states hired consultants to perform economic feasibility analysis of the project concept. In Oregon, the analysis confirmed that the project is viable as a public/private partnership, if the states can allow limited commercial development (food services and sale of convenience items) in addition to requiring the alternative fuel sales.

The states submitted a tri-state application to the FHWA in October, 2008, and received an “intent to approve” letter from FHWA in January, 2009. FHWA intends to approve the project concept under the existing Interstate Oasis Program. The States originally applied under the Special Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding 4/14/2009

9 The Alternative Fuels Corridor: I-5 from Baja to B.C. Page 10

Experimental Process (SEP-15) program. However, during review of the SEP-15 application, FHWA determined that a SEP-15 approval would not be necessary, because the project can be implemented under the existing Interstate Oasis Program, through modification of program guidance. Late in the first quarter or early in the second quarter of 2009, FHWA will post a notice in the Federal Register and receive public comments when they revise the Interstate Oasis Program guidance to advance the Alternative Fuels Corridor concept. This action will enable the States to better tailor legislative proposals and procurement efforts in order to implement the program as expeditiously as possible. Our goal is to obtain necessary State law approvals, complete site surveys, issue the Request for Proposals in 200, and be under construction in 2010.

Revenues would be generated through the sale of alternative fuels and limited travel-related goods and services (food and convenience items) at rest areas and/or other commercial locations adjacent to or within a reasonable proximity to I-5. The revenues would be utilized to pay for the alternative fueling infrastructure and other modifications to the sites to accommodate the new fueling use and limited food and retail activities.

ODOT, under its Office of Innovative Partnerships, proposes to select private sector partners to build evenly spaced alternative fuel stations at state-owned rest areas and on nearby right of way along I-5. In return for financing the development and operation of the site, the private sector partners would obtain certain rights to operate concessions for state-approved goods and services.

Private partners would provide for the sale of alternative fuels, including natural gas, bio-diesel, ethanol, ammonia, hydrogen and others as they emerge, along other approved goods and services.

The alternative fuel sites would also provide electric charging stations for plug-in and all-electric vehicles.

In addition, the rest area sites would receive needed upgrades and increased security, and provided with tourism-related information in a sustainability-focused environment.

Next steps

Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding 4/14/2009

10 The Alternative Fuels Corridor: I-5 from Baja to B.C. Page 11

• ODOT will track and participate in the FHWA Federal Register notice and comment period associated with guidance modifications to the Interstate Oasis Program.

Our goal is to • ODOT is creating a public involvement plan to ˆ 2009: Obtain necessary State law approvals and publish a Request for consider all aspects of the project, including Proposals in 2009 ˆ 2010: Be under construction impacts on the community, local businesses, residents, freight movement, traveling public and the transportation system.

• ODOT is addressing state limitations involved in implementing this project.

• After state legislation passes and the FHWA notice procedure has been completed, ODOT will present its findings and recommendations to the Oregon Transportation Commission, and request approval to move ahead with a procurement process.

• ODOT will continue to coordinate the project with the other states, and lead a duo- or tri-state procurement, if there is agreement to proceed together.

Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding 4/14/2009

11 Agenda Item # 5 ITS, Ops, Env Committee

April 10, 2009

To: Executive Board members, West Coast Corridor Coalition

From: Bruce Agnew, Chair, and Glenn Pascall, Coordinator ITS, Operations & Environment Committee

Re: “Clean Green and Smart” Best Practice Manual Final draft and future process

Attached is the final draft of the manual for review at the Board meeting April 21 and 22 in Anchorage.

This draft has almost twice the content of the version that was reviewed at the meeting a month ago. The additional material is concentrated in Section IV, Alternative Propulsion Systems. Other significant additions are the Lane (Oregon) Transit Bus Rapid Transit Program in Section I and the San Diego Value Pricing Program in Section V. Those who reviewed the earlier draft can save time by focusing on these portions of the text.

We have received a high level of response from members of our peer review advisory board on the previous draft and the current draft. Along with useful refinements in the text, they expressed appreciation for the Coalition’s efforts to help build awareness of their work.

Here is the project schedule for the rest of 2009:

April 21-22: Board review and discussion the final draft of the Manual.

April 23 - May 15: Final revisions to the Manual in response to Executive Board and Advisory Board input. Completion of contact information on persons and websites.

April 23 – June 1: Work with WCCC members, including the four state DOTs and SANDAG, in formatting the Manual for the website and designing the website for easy access and navigation.

Establish the process for featuring a “Best Practice of the Month” based on an in-depth write-up and / or a “Guest Interview” with a project principal on the featured practice.

June 1 - 30: Post the website on the Web, with the above features. Gauge initial response. Make revisions as suggested by experience. Contact interested media and public officials who have not been part of the process and invite them to “check out” the website.

12 July 1 – 31: Establish a continuous updating process with the project principals in each concept area covered in the Manual. Ask these persons to identify colleagues in related areas who should be included in the network.

August 1 – December 31: Refine and “perfect” the process of information capture to assure that the Manual is continuously updated and expanded into new topic areas as they emerge. Continue outreach efforts to maximize broad dissemination of the Manual.

August 1 – December 31: Work to identify funding for continuous update, format refinement, and distribution outreach in 2010 and beyond (the project is funded through the end of 2009).

The process of continuously updating the Manual can be expected to be as intensive as the initial assembly phase because all topics are subject to high rates of change. This is due to the fact that they are either (1) areas of research whose findings and results are in ongoing evaluation; (2) pilot projects whose field outcomes are not yet complete; or (3) technologies that are in a state of constant evolution. Moreover, new topics should be expected to emerge at any time.

Put simply, the Manual will be useful so long as it is a “living document.” But because its content is cutting-edge, failure to continuously update would result in obsolescence and declining usefulness. Thus the level of effort must be sustained. With that will come the benefit of an ever larger and more effectively-linked network of primary sources on “Clean, Green and Smart” best practices. Keeping the Manual current will help assure that West Coast mobility needs are reconciled with environmental and quality of life requirements in a sustainable manner.

13 Attachment 1

- Advanced Review Draft-

Clean, Green and Smart Best Practices Manual

West Coast Corridor Coalition April 10, 2009

Table of Contents

Introduction 4 Peer Review Advisory Board Roster 6 BEST PRACTICES 8 I. Transportation Systems Analysis 8 Freight system efficiency analysis 8 Bottleneck capacity analysis 9 ITS integrated planning for goods movement 9 EPA Smart Way supply chain analysis 11 “Green” performance measures for transportation 12 Loop detector-based evaluation of system performance 13 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) deployment strategy 14 Fully Featured Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor Development 15

II. Traveler Information Integration 17 Trucker website 17 Truck Smart Parking 17 New Mobility Hub Networks 19 Safety roadside rest area “hot spots” 20 Ridesharing 21 Carsharing 22 Automobile Smart Parking 24 Transit Smart Parking 24 “Last-mile” connectivity to public transit 26

III. Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure 27 Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) / Intellidrive 27 Intellidrive safety applications – USDOT, NHTSA 28 SafeTrip 21 30 Mobile Millennium 32

2 Strategy framework for new technology adoption 33 Active Traffic Management (ATM) 35 Adaptive transit signal priority 36

IV. Alternative Propulsion Technologies 38

Zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) 38 California Clean Mobility Partnership 41 High-performance batteries 42 Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) 44 Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) 47 Hybrid conversions / retrofits 52 Public awareness / acceptance / adoption of “green vehicles 53 Cleaner diesel: West Coast Collaborative 55 Cleaner diesel: Cascade Sierra Solutions 56 Cleaner diesel: Vehicle exchange program 57 Cleaner diesel: American Trucking Association 58 Cleaner diesel: Freight rail locomotives 59 Hybrid electric and natural gas trucks 60 Sustainable Transportation Energy Pathways (STEP) 64 Algae as a bio-fuel 66 Interstate 5 alternative fuels corridor 67 Alternative fuels corridor economic feasibility 68

V. Law & Regulation 70

Seamless weigh station pre-clearance of trucks 70 Signature-based commercial vehicle classification system 73 Highway user taxation based on miles driven (VMT) 74 Real-time variable pricing of roadways 78

Conclusion 79

3 Introduction

The West Coast Corridor Coalition was launched in November 2001 by transportation policy leaders in California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska to address the looming challenge of goods movement in the Pacific states.

The region was absorbing a 40 percent share of U.S. port-related freight, which was growing at a record pace. The fact that each major West Coast port was located in a large urban area compounded the goods movement challenge by combining metro traffic with long haul and regional freight.

The purpose of the Coalition was three-fold: (1) to encourage freight systems approaches rather than a project-level focus in making major infrastructure investments; (2) to share best practices on freight operations; and (3) to develop a common voice on the national role played by the West Coast in moving U.S. imports and exports, and the need for national support for this role.

Five years into the Coalition’s work, a co-equal priority had emerged: growing evidence of global climate change – the increasing frequency of extreme weather events – and transportation’s inescapable part as a source of this environmental risk and impact.

This new priority did not replace the Coalition’s original mission but added a new and necessary element to the work program. Moreover, since goods movement and personal travel rely largely on the same transportation system, impact the same environment, and would potentially benefit from many of the same new technologies and practices, both aspects of transportation need to be addressed where they are intertwined.

To maximize its capacity for an effective response, the Coalition in 2007 combined two committees: ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) and Environment. The intent was to gain leverage on the challenge by harnessing advances in information technology that could empower advances in vehicle and environmental technology.

A commitment was made by the Committee and the Coalition to gather in a Best Practices Manual the most promising innovations and initiatives dealing with transportation-related impacts on the environment and climate change. The Manual would be issued periodically in hard copy, continuously updated on line, and broadly disseminated to policy makers, opinion leaders, and the interested public. A specific best practice would appear as the featured case study in each “issue” of the Manual.

The document before you is the first compilation of West Coast best practices serving the goals of “Clean, Green and Smart.” Our thanks to the outstanding practitioners who provided their research findings and practical experience. Along the way, we picked up generic insights as well. For example:

4 • There is a role for research, evaluation, and information dissemination in all phases of applying an innovation. This need does not cease with initial deployment; indeed, failure to continue evaluation could result in chronic under-deployment. Research can help innovations reach their full potential by alleviating barriers and accelerating deployment through public awareness and incentives for widespread adoption.

• At a time of major federal investment in infrastructure, innovative investments that: (1) rely on a uniform national standard to be effective; (2) are necessary to meet federal requirements; or (3) create highly leveraged benefits relative to cost, are particular candidates for inclusion in federally-funded investment.

The purpose of the Best Practices Manual is to offer an extensive menu of proposed initiatives and currently deployed projects that can reduce the environmental footprint of the transportation system by: (1) applying new fuel, drive-train, and other technologies, and/or (2) making the system more efficient in ways that reduce its required level of resource consumption relative to a given amount of goods movement or personal travel.

Each initiative or project is presented in the following format:

• Concept (a captioning phrase) • Description (what it does, how it works) • Specifics (operational experience, relevant data-points) • Status (proposed or deployed – and on what timeline) • Financing (actual or potential) • Contact (name, title, phone and e-mail information of principal sources)

The Manual is designed to be inclusive in its range of topics while not engaging in the promotion of untested ideas, to qualify descriptions with current status information, and to provide contact information that can be used by anyone seeking to perform due diligence on a specific innovation. With this disclaimer, the Manual seeks to be as comprehensive as possible in offering a full roster of ideas that can move the transportation system toward being “Clean, Green and Smart.”

The Manual is intended to reach a wide spectrum of transportation researchers, policymakers, operational managers, system users, media and the interested public. Its goals are to serve as a clearinghouse for innovations, provide a continuous update of information, support the networking of researchers with each other and the private sector, and raise the level of awareness among all parties who can help facilitate the process of adopting new technologies and systems in transportation.

May each reader find the Manual a valuable source of information that can become part of the action agenda for your agency or organization.

5 Advisory Board Roster Clean, Green and Smart Project

Part of the Best Practices Manual process has been to recruit outstanding professionals for an Advisory Board that serves two functions: to keep the project current on status updates and the flow of experience from the field, and to provide peer review so that the Manual covers content in the most widely accessible and technically accurate manner.

Those named below have agreed to serve on the Advisory Board, which will be continuously involved in content updates and periodically convened by e-mail, teleconference and videoconference.

Mark Aggar, Transportation Program Manager, Microsoft Corporation Lynn Averbeck, ITS Program Managers, ODOT Rob Bertini, Metropolitan Policy Center, Portland State University Pete Briglia, Associate Director, Transportation Northwest Regional Center, University of Washington Christina Casgar, Goods Movement Policy Manager / Freight Systems Developer, San Diego Association of Governments Sarah Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure, UC Irvine Gregg Dal Ponte, Administrator, Motor Carrier Division, ODOT Jeff Doyle, Alternative Fuels Corridor Project Manager, WSDOT Genevieve Giuliano, Director, METRANS Policy Center, USC Matt Hanson, Goods Movement Systems Developer, Caltrans Hau Hagedorn, Research Director, Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium Melissa Hewitt, ITS Project Consultant, Kimley-Horn Associates Amy Keiter, Oregon State Economic & Community Development Department Felix Kramer, Founder, Cal-Cars (the California Cars Initiative) Greg Larson, Director, Office of Traffic Operations Research, Caltrans Barbara Lewis, Office Chief, Innovative Finance, Caltrans Bill Legg, State ITS Operations Engineer, WSDOT Wes Lum, Chief, Office of Safety Innovation, Caltrans JD Margulici, Associate Director, California Center for Innovative Transportation Ed McCormack, Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Washington James Misener, Executive Director, PATH Nancy Nihan, Director, Transportation Northwest Regional Center, University of Washington Tom O’Brien, Director, Center for International Trade & Transportation, CSU Long Beach Mike Onder, Information Technology Systems Program Manager, FHWA Larry Orcutt, Chief, Division of Research & Innovation, Caltrans Janet Ray, Corporate Communications, AAA Washington Stephen Ritchie, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Irvine Caroline Rodier, Senior Research Manager, Transportation Sustainability Research Center, UC Berkeley

6 Steven Schladover, Research Engineer, PATH Susan Shaheen, Co-Director, Transportation Sustainability Research Center, UC Berkeley Elizabeth Stratton, Freight Policy and Project Manager, WSDOT Dale Tabat, Manager, Truck Freight Programs & Policy, WSDOT Tom Turrentine, Director of the Electric Vehicle Center, UC Davis Jim Whitty, Manager, Transportation Operations, Office of Innovative Partnerships & Alternative Funding, ODOT Jerry Wood, Director of Transportation, Gateway Cities Council of Governments Susan Zielinski, Managing Director, SMART, University of Michigan

7

Clean, Green and Smart Best Practices

I. Transportation Systems Analysis

Concept: Freight system efficiency analysis

Description: A daily data feed from on-board GPS units in participating trucks is used to evaluate performance of the highway system for efficiency of goods movement and eventual minimization of environmental impacts related to truck engine performance, as affected by traffic and road conditions. Zone-to-zone performance within a region is measured, toward the ultimate goal of freight performance measures for an entire state.

Specifics: The Transportation Northwest Regional Center (TransNow) and College of Engineering at the University of Washington is collecting GPS data inputs from 2,000 - 3,000 participating trucks on the daily travel conditions they encounter in the Puget Sound region and at the international border with Canada. Data is associated with specific roadways to measure the impact of bottlenecks and construction projects. It is the intent to apply this degree of detail to more precisely assess the relative benefit of specific highway projects proposed to improve reliability and throughput of the freight system.

Status: Data collection is at an advanced phase that will permit detailed analysis. When this research is complete, operational tests and full deployment of investment strategies will follow. These will be of two types: prioritizing of proposed highway construction and improvement projects on a cost-benefit basis relative to the freight system, and near real-time route advisories for the trucking industry based on performance findings from the data.

Financing: The Washington Trucking Association was active in securing funding for this project from the Washington State Legislature. TransNow is also providing funding.

Contact: Nancy Nihan, Director, Transportation Northwest Regional Center University of Washington (206) 543-8255 [email protected]

Peter Briglia, Associate Director, Transportation Northwest Regional Center, University of Washington (206) 685-1795 [email protected],edu

Edward McCormack, Research Assistant Professor Civil & Environmental Engineering, UW (206) 543-3348 [email protected]

8

Concept: Bottleneck capacity analysis

Description: This project examines traffic behavior in freeway bottlenecks. Using data from at least fifty weekdays in a minimum of twenty bottleneck sites in San Diego and elsewhere, the project intends to calculate average time gaps and lane flow ratios from traffic counts and lane occupancy data.

From this research, better planning, design, and management of freeway systems can result by assessing and predicting the bottleneck capacities of certain freeways.

Specifics: Traffic counts and lane occupancy data will be gathered using loop detectors, which are typically available at bottlenecks in the San Diego area, and videotapes to ensure a manual count accompanies the loop detectors. From these data, statistical analysis techniques will be used to identify relationships among traffic variables.

Status: Deliverables at the end of the project a final report, a workshop presentation, and an implementation package consisting of the written descriptions of capacity analysis procedures.

Financing: California Department of Transportation (Cal-trans)

Contact: James H. Banks, Professor College of Civil and Environmental Engineering San Diego State University (619) 594-7051 [email protected]

Hassan Aboukhadijeh Caltrans Project Manager (916) 654-8630 [email protected]

Concept: ITS integration planning for goods movement

Specifics: The Gateway Cities Council of Governments, representing cities on the I-710 and I-605 corridors serving the of Long Brach and Los Angeles, commissioned Kimley-Horn Associates to coordinate a stakeholder working group that would explore ITS applications in support of improving air quality and reducing congestion caused by port-related truck and rail traffic passing through the region, with the goal of minimizing environmental and community disruption while maintaining the economic vitality of a trade gateway.

The stakeholder group was remarkably diverse, including railroads, trucking companies, freight expediters, warehouse and logistics companies, AAA California, federal, state and regional transportation agencies, the ports, and individual cities.

9 Status: Kimley-Horn filed its “Gateway Cities ITS Integration Plan for Goods Movement” in August 2008. The following objectives were identified for further research and implementation:

• Complete the detection and communication infrastructure on major roadways in the region, supporting ITS-based information to be shared with trucks, dispatchers, rail operators, public agencies and individual roadway users regarding levels of congestion on I-710, I-605 and key “allowable truck route” arterials.

• Collect anonymous truck-specific performance data on speeds, idling, fuel consumption, acceleration and deceleration, to determine both the functionality of the system for goods movement and environmental effects of congestion.

• Establish a freight-focused traveler information system specific to the Gateway region that would provide drivers and dispatchers with real-time dynamic routing based on truck-experienced delays on freeways and arterials, turnaround times at terminals and queue delays at terminal gates.

• Assess drayage times for container pick-up at the ports and using this information for drayage advisories and to develop a real-time container scheduling system that “has the potential to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and improve the bottom line” for trucking companies and freight railroads.

• Examine the potential to apply dynamic congestion pricing (variable tolling) to major routes as a demand management tool in support of an optimal daily distribution of activity levels for port-related goods movement.

• Apply technology-based detection methods to truck safety checks, given the lack of land for building new inspection stations and the potential for a quicker, more reliable and less labor-intensive truck safety credentialing process.

Financing: Gateway Cities Council of Governments, California Department of Transportation, Federal Highways Administration funded the initial phase of plan development. GCCOG has received federal funds to begin the next phase – plan implementation.

Contact: Jerry Wood, P.E. Director of Transportation and Engineering Gateway Cities Council of Governments (562) 663-6850 [email protected]

Melissa Hewitt, P.E. (818) 227-2790 [email protected]

10 Concept: EPA Smart Way supply chain analysis

Description: Enabling goods-movement companies to assess the environmental footprint of their operations can help them develop supply chain strategies – management techniques and technologies – that increase the amount of cargo moved per gallon of fuel on a fleet-wide basis.

Specifics: Smart Way “packages” existing EPA programs and agreements with over 640 partners including rail carriers and most of the top trucking operators, shippers, logistics firms and suppliers. Smart Way is endorsed by the American Trucking Association.

These programs, with ongoing refinements and updates, allow operators to measure their “climate change footprint” across transport modes and to model and forecast emission reductions based on applying new technology, strategy and modes.

A variety of logistics strategies are available, include load-matching (coordinating loads with other fleets), more efficient routes (“triangular” routing), off-peak delivery schedules, and utilizing inter-modal (rail) transport for moving long-haul freight to regional distribution centers.

Smart Way originated in climate change concerns, which created the need for a multi- modal CO2-footprint model related to goods movement. Inseparable from this impact measure was the demand from both government and industry for efficiency ratings and optimization of supply chain operations.

Concern over climate change required industry to inventory, benchmark and achieve improvements. In this situation, industry welcomed a government role in developing a consistent, global methodology. EPA focused on an approach that built analyses from activity “modules” provided by shippers and carriers. This development of standards based on industry feedback is called the Charter Partner approach. The product is adaptable to commercial software packages that can be used to guide logistics decisions. Companies that participate become Smart Way certified.

Status: Smart Way assists participants with demonstrations of advanced fuel systems and other technologies, including Smart Way certification of trucks and other vehicles. Actively participating firms become Smart Way certified by developing “green” supply chains based on specific operational review and redesign. Industry partners are required to develop a three-year program and monitor its progress.

Financing: Participants are eligible for a range of financial incentives including loan guarantees and access to public-private capital. After companies have made initial outlays, the benefit of “green supply” chains is not only; it is economic, expressed in more efficient operations and reduced purchases of resource inputs.

Contact: Shan Hoel, TransGroup (Smart Way partner, Seattle) (206) 577-4803 [email protected]

11 Concept: “Green” performance measures for transportation systems

Description: Evaluate transportation system impacts on greenhouse gases, air pollution, and community quality of life by including “green” metrics in transportation data collection and evaluation.

Specifics: The PORTAL regional transportation data archive was established at Portland State University in 2004 to improve understanding of the metro region’s transportation system performance. The primary data sources for PORTAL are 600 loop detectors on metro-area freeways that stream data to servers at 20-second intervals. The loops measure vehicle count, detector occupancy (a surrogate for traffic density) and average speed in each lane. These data are combined with incident, variable message sign, bus timing and weather data. Currently computed performance measures are vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle hours traveled (VHT), travel time and delay.

PORTAL is now augmenting these measures of transportation performance with measures that assess the environmental, economic and social sustainability of Portland’s freeway system.

Environmental measures include traffic-generated carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide, which contributes to climate change. Economic and social measures include the cost of delay and personal mobility in terms of person-hours and person-miles of travel.

Status: The PORTAL database is being applied as a policy tool to help assess various design, operational and behavioral factors that affect the level of vehicle travel; the efficiency of peak-hour and off-peak hour traffic flow; and the level of fuel use and related pollution impacts.

The usefulness of the database for these purposes increases with a longer period of data collection that enables measurement of the impacts of events and trends. Accuracy of the new measures will increase as analytical algorithms are refined to convert measured data into assessments of key indicators.

Financing: OTREC’s funding sources include a federal Urban Transportation Center grant and matching funds from the four Oregon university members of OTREC, the Oregon Department of Transportation, and public and private project partners.

Contact: Robert Bertini Civil and Environmental Engineering Portland State University (503) 725-4249 [email protected]

Alexander Bigazzi Civil and Environmental Engineering Portland State University

12 (503) 725-4285 [email protected]

Hau Hagedorn, Research Program Manager, Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium (OTREC) Portland State University (503) 725-2833 [email protected]

http://www.its.pdx.edu/project.php?id=2008-02

Concept: Loop detector-based vehicle tracking to evaluate system performance

Description: RTREID (Real-time Vehicle Re-identification) is a cost-effective, real- time vehicle tracking system that utilizes existing ILD (inductive-loop detector) technology. The system provides accurate corridor travel time as well as anonymous vehicle path information. The flexibility of the system application to square and round single loop configurations allows RTREID to be free of site-specific calibration and transferability issues.

Specifics: Vehicle re-identification has emerged due to its substantial potential for effective implementation of ATMIS (Advanced Transportation Management and Information Systems). In studies of vehicle re-identification, the main stress falls on travel information, travel time estimation, and origin-destination estimation. RTREID has been developed in response to these data needs, and is designed to be implemented in real-time with existing detection technology.

RTREID is an ILD-based vehicle tracking system that re-identifies vehicles by matching inductive vehicle signatures generated via advanced detector cards. The change in inductance resulting from passage of a vehicle over a loop detector makes it possible to measure an inductive vehicle signature, which ideally is unique to that vehicle.

Advantages of employing an ILD-based system include tracing vehicles individually across multiple detection stations without privacy concerns, relatively inexpensive deployment, reproducible vehicle signatures, less complexity of analysis, and fewer market penetration problems.

Computational resources in traffic operations and the bandwidth of field communication links are often quite limited. Therefore, RTREID adopts a relatively simple data compression and transformation technique that could be integrated with a section-based freeway traffic performance measurement system. The same research group developed RTPMS, an advanced surveillance system. RTPMS was successfully deployed as a core module in a simulated real-time environment using peak-period traffic data collected along a 6.2 mile corridor on the I-405 Freeway in Irvine, California. Coverage spanned six detector stations to form five continuous sections.

13 The studies also indicate that the next-generation RTREID-2 is capable of accurately providing individual vehicle tracking information and performance measurements such as travel time and speed in a congested freeway corridor, utilizing data obtained from both homogenous and heterogeneous loop detection systems.

Status: The RTPMS is currently undergoing a real-time implementation phase that consists of installation of a wireless communications infrastructure on eighteen detector stations along the I-405 northbound freeway, followed by a system shakedown operation. In addition to the mainline detector stations, on-and-off ramp detector locations will be included in the system. Data transmission is performed over wireless cards. Currently, the status and IP data are updated in the RTPMS database at UC Irvine’s Institute of Transportation Studies. RTPMS is being tested and modified for stability to ensure smooth data transmission from the field units.

The final step in evaluation of the performance of RTPMS is setting up wireless communication along the I-405 north corridor between State Route 133 and Red Hill Avenue in Irvine. Completion of the implementation phase will yield online real-time travel performance measures generated by RTREID-2.

The ultimate goal is deployment of the system in multiple freeway and arterial corridors to provide network-wide coverage and advanced traffic surveillance. This will facilitate the development of freeway origin-destination and route performance models. While implementation of the RTPMS requires an effort, it potential should readily outweigh its cost in providing state-of-the-art measures of traffic performance using existing inductive loop detector infrastructure.

Financing: California Department of Transportation

Contact: Stephen G. Ritchie, Director Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Irvine (949) 824-4214 [email protected]

Shin-Ting (Cindy) Jeng, Postdoctoral Scholar Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Irvine [email protected]

Concept: Deployment strategy for integrated Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Description: BRT is different from traditional transit service by incorporating many rail transit features. It also differs from traditional rail due to flexibility and the possibility for incremental deployment. However, there is a lack of careful systematic analysis on when each BRT element should be implemented. Absent such a framework, deployment will be determined by the tradeoff between the costs, ease of implementation (physical

14 constraints and institutional issues) and resultant benefits will determine.

Specifics: One of PATH's on-going research projects is developing a planning framework to determine a set of optimal combinations of BRT attributes given budgetary, institutional and other types of constraints.

A related issue is integrated deployment of advanced technologies. In almost all BRT deployments, ITS and bus technologies have been applied to BRT in less than a fully integrated manner. For example, the current bus data communication system has not yet considered many BRT features. Therefore, many of the add-on functions and features cannot be integrated with the current bus system. Another example, a transit bus instrumented with advanced communication systems (ACS), signal priority systems, and bus arrival information functions is often equipped with three separate positioning systems.

Moreover, data collected by advanced location and communication systems are not integrated, and data collected from one system often cannot be used by the other systems. Few application tools are available to take advantage of the significant amount of data collected by new technologies. This non-integrated approach to add-on technologies increases the cost of the BRT system and the non-integrated systems complicate maintenance and reduce the reliability of the overall system.

Status: NBRTI (National Bus Rapid Transit Institute) at UC Berkeley proposes to conduct research on planning and deployment strategies for integrated BRT systems. This proposed study will summarize the needs, issues and options related to BRT planning, design, technology implementation, operation, and maintenance. The study will then investigate the cost / benefit implications of these options and develop a systematic methodology for phased deployment and integrated implementation of BRT technologies. The output of this research will provide transit agencies and BRT-interested professionals with critical information and decision-support tools for the planning, design and implementation of a BRT system.

Financing:

Contact: Wei-Bin Zhang California PATH and National Bus Rapid Transit Institute (NBRTI) Institute of Transportation Studies University of California at Berkeley

Concept: “Fully Featured” Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor Development

Description: In 1994, the Lane (Oregon) Transit District (LTD) began efforts to develop a fully featured bus rapid transit (BRT) system. After conducting an Urban Rail Feasibility Study in 1995, BRT was determined to be the cost-effective mode for the

15 Eugene-Springfield region. The BRT corridor development concept became an important piece in the analysis of how to meet statewide transportation goals during the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update. The project received approval from the MPO, LTD Board, Eugene and Springfield City Councils, and the Lane County Board of Commissioners. Shortly thereafter, LTD set to work incorporating as many light rail elements as possible while planning for potential corridors and developing operational details.

Specifics: LTD began operation of a four-mile BRT corridor in January 2007 and is on schedule to begin operation of a second, seven-mile corridor in late 2010. Named the EmX (Emerald Express), the BRT service features 10-minute frequencies, ADA accessible raised platforms, stations spaced every 1/3 mile, level boarding, and off-board fare collection. Over 50 percent of the length of the corridors consist of dedicated lanes. In general, LTD incorporates “green” designs at each station with native vegetation. The 63-foot articulated vehicles have a rail-like appearance, doors on both sides, emerald green exterior, and a unique layout with inward facing raised seating and on-board capacity for three bicycles.

The first corridor provides a 4-mile trunk line connection between the downtown transit centers of the cities of Eugene and Springfield. It serves the University of Oregon and Sacred Heart Medical Center, two of the largest employers and participants in LTD’s Group Pass Program. Because over 90% of riders along the corridor have pre-paid types of fare media and monthly bus passes, LTD does not yet collect fares. LTD staff has determined that the high cost to purchase and install fare box machines at the stations will not result in revenue gains until the second corridor is ready for operation. That EmX corridor will allow a one-seat ride from downtown Eugene to a new regional hospital and mall in Springfield.

Status: Ridership on the first EmX corridor has grown steadily. The corridor replaced Route 11, which had an average of 2,660 weekday riders during the fall and spring of 2006. Since operation of EmX began, the first corridor has an average of 5,000 weekday riders in 2007, and an average of 6,000 weekday riders in 2008. With the success of the first corridor, which has more than doubled ridership of the previous regular service, the International Transportation Development Program (ITDP) nominated LTD for a Sustainable Transportation Award in January 2008. Developers and city staff anticipate that over time, commercial and high-density residential growth will align along the corridors. A pilot project sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for vehicle magnetic guidance will inform service design and implementation for future corridors.

Financing: FTA funded the first 4-mile corridor for a total of $24M (20% local match) and the second, 7-mile corridor for a total of $41.3M (7% local match, 13% state match).

Contact: Tom Schwetz, Director of Planning and Development, Lane Transit District (541) 682-6203 [email protected]

16 II. Traveler Information Integration (TII)

Concept: Trucker website

Description: Based on input from state trucking associations, a unified web address provides truck drivers and truck transport operators with information on roadway and traffic conditions, weather conditions, rest area and truck stop services and parking availability, and inter-state permitting.

Specifics: The website will allow carriers to make informed decisions prior to the start of a trip as well as making adjustments during the trip.

Website information will include accident, incident and weather alerts and construction activity currently or forecast as causing delay or detours; a status map of available parking along the corridor provided by both state and private resources, potentially including a reservation system; truck stop and rest area service and amenities; and permitting for each state in the corridor, including the possible development of a single permit for all three states.

Status: The key feature of the website project – a unified web address to access all information – is in early discussion stages. However WSDOT has developed and currently hosts a Traveler Information Web-Page for the Interstate 5 Corridor linking trucker-targeted information that covers states on the I-5 corridor (Washington, Oregon and California). The web page shows links to separate sites in each state for information on travel conditions, rest areas, truck stops, local weather, truck permitting and trucker restrictions. The web page has been recently updated with cameras and provides links to the appropriate state DOT's camera and travel-time web pages.

Financing: None at this time.

Contact: Dale Tabat, Manager Truck Freight Program & Policy Washington State DOT (360) 705-6990 [email protected]

Concept: Truck Smart Parking strategy analysis

Description: An existing shortage of private and public parking for trucks has been intensified by federal rules limiting driving shifts and mandating rest periods. In the search for scarce parking spaces, drivers become fatigued and more trucks are parked illegally on ramps and shoulders, creating safety hazards. The solution is to expand capacity and improve information about available truck parking.

Status: In response to the shortage of truck parking, the federal surface transportation

17 funding act (SAFETEA-LU) authorizes a Truck Parking Facilities Pilot Program. This is a four-part project that builds on previous research by California PATH titled, "Strategies for Linking Trucking and Smart Parking Technologies."

The second PATH project includes a problem evaluation with expert interviews, data analysis of the truck parking problem, funding opportunities to address the capacity needs, interviews to understand institutional barriers to implementing truck parking solutions in California, and workshops to brief stakeholders on the problem and develop alternative deployment strategies.

There are five key research areas: First, the study addresses concerns about truck parking by reviewing the literature and conducting expert interviews with CHP (California Highway Patrol) personnel and motor carriers. ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) solutions are then recommended.

Second, researchers conducted expert interviews with Caltrans' Office of Goods Movement, Planning, and Traffic Operations, the Division of Research and Innovation, the CHP, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, the American Trucking Association, and motor carrier firms. As part of these interviews, electronic commercial vehicle operator screening is considered. The intent is to identify institutional barriers delaying ITS solutions to the parking problem, and identify steps to overcome those barriers.

Third, a behavioral analysis of 200 or more truckers at the and other locations will be conducted to assess trucker perceptions of current conditions, and responses to ITS solutions such as a reservation system.

Fourth, interviews were conducted with experts from parking technology companies (Clancy, Denso, ParkingCarma, Quixote, etc.) on providing parking information to truckers by CB-radios, changeable message signs, mobile phones, on-board computers, parking sensors, PrePass commercial transponders, and/or traveler information radios.

Finally, a preliminary site analyses will be conducted to identify suitable locations to apply ITS technologies, including rest stops in Stockton and north of Sacramento. A field test will be organized with rest stop operators, technology vendors, and trucking firms to test the technologies.

Financing: SAFETEA-LU authorizes $25 million for the establishment of a Truck Parking Pilot Facilities Program. California has received 45 million from that source and Caltrans has indicated it wants to work with Oregon and Washington to enhance truck Smart Park initiatives on the West Coast. Moreover, this effort could also be linked to the three-state I-5 alternative fuels corridor initiative (see below, page 38).

Contact: Susan Shaheen Co-Director, Transportation Research Center University of California, Berkeley

18 (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Caroline Rodier Senior Researcher, Transportation Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3524 [email protected]

Concept: New Mobility Hub Networks - an integrated VMT reduction strategy

Description: Create networks of “New Mobility Hubs” that allow people to move from point of origin to destination in the most efficient way, through software development that makes servers more powerful than in the past.

New Mobility Hub Networks link different modes of transport including buses, trains, streetcars, clean-fuel taxis and car-share or bike-share vehicles to provide convenient, practical door-to-door trips that the user finds preferable to traditional use of a single- occupancy vehicle.

Specifics: A range of innovations can link different modes of transportation services, IT technologies, and designs and infrastructures to provide integrated urban transportation choices enabling users to select the best mode for each purpose.

Transportation systems can be designed to make travel by bus and rail transit, car-sharing and bicycle-sharing, and walking all as easy and efficient as possible, with emphasis on seamless connectivity among modes of travel. Modal transfer can be facilitated through real-time arrival, departure, availability and access information at public kiosks, via cell phone and through electronic signage.

Where practical, augment these transport amenities with satellite offices (remote work stations), day care, cafes, shops, entertainment, restrooms and showers. For the user, New Mobility Hub Networks connect a full range of transport with other services, products and technologies. For the developer, Hubs have the virtue of being scalable and thus adaptable to retrofits and expansions of existing sites, especially those that are or could be activity nodes.

The concept originally developed from integrated “Mobil Punkt” work in Bremen, Germany in the late 1990s under the leadership of Michael Glotz Richter, who continues to be an active project partner.

Status: Joint concept development by the lead co-partners (see Financing, below) is currently under way. Other participating entities, including Toronto, Ontario, are serving as sites for pilot projects and field testing of concepts. Corporations including Royal Dutch Shell, Cisco, Cherokee and GoLoco have participated in visioning sessions on the meaning of the New Mobility for their companies and globally.

19 Financing: The University of Michigan SMART (Sustainable Mobility and Accessibility Research and Transformation) Program catalyzes hub network projects and partnerships in cities. The Ford Motor Company Sustainable Business Development Program has provided funding.

Contact: Susan Zielinski, Managing Director, SMART, University of Michigan, 2378 Perry Building, 330 Packard Street, Ann Arbor MI 48106.

(734) 763-1190 (phone) (734) 647-5461 (fax) [email protected]

Concept: Safety Roadside Rest Area (SRRA) Hot Spots:

Description: To meet the increasing demand for Internet access by the traveling public, this project investigated providing travel-related information to the public by kiosk, laptop computers, personal data assistants, and cell phones. such information might include transportation and safety advisories including emergencies, road conditions, and road closures; tourist information on local attractions and services such as parks, museums, hotels, and restaurants; and historical information on the region.

Status: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has partnered with the Great Valley Center (GCV) to launch a field operational test of wireless Internet and Internet kiosks at two rest areas (Phillip S. Raine and Enoch Christoffersen) along State Route (SR) 99. Caltrans has developed recommendations for the state based on study findings.

The objectives of this field test and related WiFi technologies include: improving traveler safety; reducing traveler delays; promoting tourism of local natural, cultural, and historical resources; and contributing to California's economic development. This project is a research evaluation of the field test, including institutional, user, and financial analyses.

Financing:

Contact: Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 sashaheen@tsrc,berkeley.edu

Caroline Rodier, Senior Researcher Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3524 [email protected]

20 Concept: Ride-sharing

Description: Carpooling and vanpooling reduce commute costs, save time through access to HOV lanes, and relieve pollution and congestion by reducing vehicle-miles traveled. Carpools are usually based on privately-owned vehicles, vanpools on vans that are rented or supplied by employers, non-profit agencies or government.

Many public transit agencies and community transit providers offer ride-matching services, connecting travelers with similar schedules and routes. At least one private company (Microsoft) has gone farther to develop commute compatibility profiles focused on ride-matching at a person-to-person level. This can be combined with personal paging on a mobile phone call to inform participants in “virtual” carpools of pre-screened persons who are planning a trip at the same time.

Status: In 2006 and 2007, Innovative Mobility Research (IMR) joined with the 511 Regional Rideshare Program to develop and implement an on-line survey of the use of 511 for ridesharing purposes. 511 is a free phone and Web service in the Bay Area that provides real-time information on traffic conditions, incidents and driving times; public transit schedules, routes and fares; carpool and vanpool referrals; bicycling and other transportation information.

The survey results were used to determine the effectiveness of 511 in encouraging individuals to switch from driving alone to using commuter alternatives, particularly carpooling and vanpooling.

In March 2009, King County Metro (Seattle) and the Washington State Department of Transportation began development of an updated ridesharing application that provides ride-matching services in the Pacific Northwest tri-state area of Washington, Oregon and .

King County Metro originally partnered with Puget Sound transit agencies in 2001 on the development and implementation of one of the first online vanpool and carpool ride- matching services available in the country. It was subsequently expanded in 2005 to cover the entire state of Washington, and again in 2007 to cover Boise and Ketchum, Idaho.

The new application will provide

Improved and expanded matching capability: • Map-based origin-destination and along-the-route matching; • New types of rides - commute, dynamic (same day), one-way, one-time, long distance; • Customizable matching for private groups or special events (soccer team, wedding, church, school); • Ability to enter and maintain multiple trips by re-using selected matching information.

Branding the ridesharing web site with the look and feel of a company or organization:

21 • Ability to manage a Guaranteed Ride Home program online; • Ability to run reports about employee participation and show effects of reduced trips and vehicle miles traveled.

Provision of Commute Program Management Tools: • Ability for employers to create and promote transportation incentives; • Ability to track commuter participation through calendar registration.

Longer term, the project is exploring opportunities to enhance the system with technologies to optimize rider/driver matching in real time and integrate the requesting of riders/drivers with existing calendaring tools.

The go live date for the new application is January 2010.

Financing: Bt the sponsoring agencies for the Bay Area and Northwest programs.

Contact: Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Park Woodworth, Manager Para-transit / Rideshare Operations King County Metro Transit (206) 263-4494 [email protected]

Mark Aggar, Director, Environmental Technology Strategy Microsoft Corporation [email protected]

Website: RideshareOnline.com

Concept: Carsharing

Description: Carsharing offers an alternative to owning or leasing an auto. It allows people to rent cars on a daily or even hourly basis, paying only for the time they use the car and the mileage they drive. The operators of the carsharing service provide vehicle maintenance, repair and insurance.

The environmental benefits of carsharing result from the behaviors that are encouraged by its use – more careful consideration of the need, duration and distance of auto trips; and of alternative modes including public transit, biking and walking.

Specifics: Members of a carsharing program pick up and return vehicles at shared –use lots that are located throughout an urban region or concentrated around public transit

22 stations, employers or activity centers. Typically, the member makes an advanced reservation, gains entrance to the vehicle with a card or key, and drives away. When finished with the trip, the carsharing member returns it to its home parking space, locks it, and leaves it for the next user.

This efficient use pattern has a clear benefit in reduced parking demand at residential locations and participating public transit stations and member employer sites. It provides incentives for more thoughtful vehicle use, which creates energy savings and air quality benefits.

One specific application of carsharing is to facilitate public transit use through “station car” programs that facilitate transit access for users whose final destination would otherwise be located too far from the endpoint of the transit route. These users complete the final leg of their trip in station cars.

Carsharing is also a “natural” match to driver populations willing to test advanced technology vehicles. A decade ago, CarLink I was launched to allow employees of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory access to 12 compressed natural gas Honda Civic autos for use between a public transit station and work. Other participant members could pick up the cars at the station and use them on evenings and weekends. Scheduling technology and vehicle tracking systems were employed.

CarLink I resulted in a net reduction of about 20 vehicle miles per commuter per day. CarLink II, launched in 2001, introduced more advanced vehicle access, reservation and tracking technologies. At the conclusion of the research phase in July 2002, the project transitioned to the carsharing provider Flexcar to manage as a commercial enterprise (in 2007 Flexcar and Zipcar merged and the operation is now known as Zipcar).

Status: As of July 2008, nineteen U.S. carsharing programs claimed 279,174 members sharing 5,838 vehicles. Canada’s 14 organizations shared 1,667 vehicles among 39,664 members. This initial deployment represents a fraction of the potential if program design and public policy successfully address barriers to program expansion (see next section).

Financing: Carsharing is a new mode and would benefit from sustained public policy support that fosters its viability; for example, provision of dedicated parking spaces and exemption from taxation levied on conventional car rentals could greatly aid expansion of this concept.

Contact: Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

23 Concept: Automobile Smart Parking

Description: Advanced parking systems and technologies are used to assist drivers in locating available parking places, thereby reducing time loss, street congestion, distance traveled and fuel consumed by drivers trying to park their vehicles. They often assist in electronic payment as well.

Specifics: Drivers can be informed of parking lot location, capacity, and spaces available by dynamic displays on electronic message signs or by Internet or mobile phone. Automated payment systems can allow for seamless transactions that enhance trip efficiency. Information on space availability can enhance efficiency in using existing capacity, while strengthening the economics of parking operations.

Parking availability – or its scarcity – in specific locations influences the mode travelers use to commute and make other trips. Where parking is restricted intentionally as a demand management tool to encourage public transit use, knowledge of space availability can help strengthen the link between policy goals and an informed public response.

Status: An effort known as SFpark is underway in San Francisco to deploy a smart automobile parking system that employs dynamic pricing. The project is part of USDOT’s Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA). An evaluation of this large-scale effort is being conducted throughout San Francisco as part of the UPA.

Financing: Smart parking capability creates market-based systems that have the potential to pay for themselves by increasing utilization rates, and thus improving the economics of operating parking facilities. By optimizing use of existing capacity, smart parking can also reduce the need to add new parking infrastructure.

Contact: Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Caroline Rodier, Senior Researcher Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3524 [email protected]

Concept: Transit Smart Parking

Description: Parking is scarce at heavily used public transit stations, and adding parking spaces is resisted as an added cost for transit operations which require a public subsidy. Transit Smart Parking can expand effective parking capacity, transit rider-ship, and revenues.

24 Specifics: In 2004 researchers at UC Berkeley, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District, California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH) and private partners launched a field test of Smart Parking at the Rockbridge BART station in Oakland, where parking demand is high. Observational research revealed that the free lot would fill by 7:30 a.m., after which more than 30 cars would cycle through the lot looking for parking and then leave.

Traffic sensors were impeded in the station’s reserved lot to relay real-time information to message signs on the major in-bound route to alert drivers to parking availability. The same information was provided by phone and Internet so drivers could either make an advance reservation or drive directly to the space and phone in a reservation.

Status: Before-and-after surveys and focus groups evaluated travel effects, economics, and technology in the field test. A key finding: commuters are particularly receptive to smart parking systems linked to transit, where real-time information can be critical to meeting a departure schedule. Survey analyses indicated a potential market for a daily paid parking service to attract new riders with relatively high incomes, high auto availability, and variable work schedules or locations. Twenty-eight percent of survey respondents said they would use BART more often is this service were available.

The next phase of this research is a pilot program in San Diego that will deploy smart parking along five COASTER rail transit stations in the region.

This three-year pilot applies concepts from the smart parking field operational test at the Rockridge BART station for the San Diego COASTER commuter rail system. These concepts include variable message signs alongside highways approaching COASTER stations to alert drivers of traffic conditions ahead and available parking spots at each station, smart cards or vehicle-based transponders to expedite payment transaction time for parking, and a shuttle service between privately and publicly-owned parking structures around COASTER stations. A commercial deployment strategy will follow implementation and evaluation of the pilot project.

Financing: The Rockbridge and COASTER projects will evaluate the assumption that the cost of sensors and data transmission and the cost of additions to capacity would be offset by parking revenues and increased transit ridership.

Contact: Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Caroline Rodier, Senior Researcher Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3524 [email protected]

25 Concept: Public transit EasyConnect

Description: This effort focused on providing bicycles, electric bicycles and Segway Human Transporters (self-balancing electric vehicles) for shared use at public transit stations to bridge the “last mile” between public transit stations and employers. The low- speed modes were used for commuting and day use throughout the workday.

The project team included the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District, California PATH, Contra Costa Centre, Contra Costa County, 511 Contra Costa, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (AQMD), and private partners – Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., Millennium Partners, Segway LLC, Giant Bicycle, and eLock Technologies.

Specifics: EasyConnect was field tested at the Pleasant Hill BART station between 2005 and 2007. This location was chosen because of its proximity to Contra Costa Centre, a planned business and residential development and a “transit village.”

Fifteen businesses paid $150 per vehicle per month to join EasyConnect. Employees could use their choice of personal transport vehicle after a short training course. Conventional and electric bicycles and Human Transporters were donated to the program. Users could park them at work and use for travel to off-site meetings, for errands or lunch, and return them to the BART station or an employer storage facility at night.

Status: Contra Costa Centre has assumed management of the program, which is now called “Green Fleet.”

Financing: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) coordinators, together with area employers, typically fund such programs. In some cases, advertising generates additional revenue.

Contact: Susan Shahen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Caroline Rodier, Senior Researcher Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3524 [email protected]

26

III. Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure (ITI)

Concept: Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) a.k.a. IntelliDrive

Specifics: VII is a flow of information and a roadway infrastructure that enables transportation to function as an integrated system. A key attribute is the widespread availability of data collection by vehicles as traffic data probes. This creates the potential for continuous and ubiquitous information on traffic conditions, roadway conditions, incidents (including hazards) and accidents, pinch-points and choke-points.

Such information provides the basis for comprehensive diagnoses of system performance that could be of major assistance in transportation planning, including management architecture to develop infrastructure and schedule maintenance on the basis of real-time information of highway conditions.

At the individual level, the same capability translates into trip planning capacity. VII also has important safety applications in collision avoidance through inter-vehicle cooperation at intersections and in general traffic flow. On-board VII can provide downstream traffic information to automatically enable timely vehicle deceleration prior to arriving at a point of reduced traffic flow. Related to this is traffic smoothing through merge assistance, Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control, and transit signal priority. Computer simulations using vehicle probe data can determine the optimal “set speeds” for smoothest traffic flow.

VII can also shorten the gap between vehicles to increase throughput and save fuel. VII- equipped vehicles – cars, buses and trucks – could be clustered in managed lanes and truckways. A recent test of truck platooning on a dedicated truckway used DSRC-based communication combined with sensors and automatic control of engine, brakes and transmission to shorten separations between trucks to as close as 3 meters. The following truck achieved 10-15% fuel savings while the lead truck saved 5-10% due to reduced aerodynamic drag. With passenger vehicles enabled by adaptive cruise control, a current experiment is measuring how comfortable drivers will feel with reduced gaps in vehicle spacing enabled by cooperative adaptive cruise control, which has the potential to significantly increase vehicle throughput.

Generally, safety is seen as the critical application of VII, followed by improved mobility based on communication between vehicles and between the vehicle and the roadside.

Status: VII was initiated by USDOT in 2004. there are several similar programs in Europe and Japan. The 2005 ITS World Congress in San Francisco showcased these capabilities including a collision avoidance demonstration. In 2007 Cal-Trans met with USDOT to see how to accelerate VII nationally. Five layers are required for successful VII: ITS services, information management, a communications network, communication nodes, and a transportation system. VII is based on the interactions among them.

27 Recent progress on smart phones combines a computer, GPS and telephone “shrunk” into a small package. Since May 2008 a device has been available as an after-market product that enables VII, and privacy safeguards are being put in place for cell phones that can be tracked locationally.

Along with smart phones, the other major VII technology is DSRC – Dedicated Short- Range Communications. A national DSRC spectrum was adopted in 1999 due to lobbying by ITS America. DSRC is based on a network of roadside boxes that have instantaneous connectivity of the kind required for collision avoidance. Research is underway on the best strategy for deploying DSRC – performance and network design, density variations required by transmission range, integration with other systems such as wi-fi in delivering information to fast-moving cars.

Technology, commercial considerations of deployment, and politics are all involved. Capability, marketability and acceptability must all be there. A key requirement is to achieve consensus on wireless communications technology and standards. Implementation is a major challenge due to multiple levels of government and diverse priorities among public and private sector entities. Yet implementation delivers the largest benefits at high levels of market penetration where “network effects” are achieved.

Cell phones support VII services that relate to slowly changing situations like traffic conditions but not to safety features like collision avoidance and green light enabling at intersections. DSCR technology is required for such time-critical functions.

Caltrans has partnered with Savari, which built a DSRC interface between the car and the roadside using Bluetooth and the mobile phone as aftermarket devices that consumers could buy without waiting for auto manufacturers to install. On-board DSRC is a desirable approach and Savari is working on meeting the national standard.

Financing: The broad-scale questions about VII are how it will be deployed and how it will be financed, including the kind of connection fees cell phone and wi-fi service providers would charge, and who would pay for the integration of DSRC roadside and on-board units with traffic management centers (TMCs).

Contact: Steven Shladover, Research Engineer PATH (Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 665-3514 [email protected]

Concept: IntelliDrive safety applications – USDOT / NHTSA project

Description: Roadway transportation activity experiences 6 million crashes per year, 41,000 fatalities in 2007 and associated economic costs of about $250 billion. In addition to fatalities and injuries, traffic crashes account for 25 percent of all congestion, creating

28 nearly $20 billion per year in related cost.

Environmental costs in unproductive fuel consumption and carbon emissions of motor vehicle in accident-related congestion have not been calculated but are significant.

These impacts suggest a stark and compelling need to develop and implement new, more aggressive safety solutions for the U.S. transportation system. Among the most promising approaches is Intellidrive, formerly known as Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII).

IntelliDrive combines advanced technologies in wireless communications, on-board computer processing, vehicle-sensors, GPS navigation, smart infrastructure, and others— that enable vehicles to identify threats and hazards on the roadway and communicate this information to give other drivers alerts and warnings.

At the core of IntelliDrive is a networked environment supporting very high speed transactions among vehicles (V2V), and between vehicles and infrastructure components (V2I) or hand held devices (V2D) to enable numerous safety and mobility applications.

This capability to identify, collect, process, exchange, and transmit real-time data provides drivers with a greater situational awareness of the events, potential, threats, and imminent hazards within the vehicle’s environment. Supported by technologies that intuitively and clearly present alerts, advice, and warnings, drivers can make better and safer decisions. When further combined with automated vehicle-safety applications, IntelliDrive enables the vehicle to respond and react when the driver does not.

Potential applications of IntelliDrive include:

• Vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V). When a vehicle brakes suddenly, a notice is transmitted to the surrounding vehicles, enabling them to either warn drivers to stop or automatically apply the brakes if a crash is imminent.

• Vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I). A vehicle in an accident could transmit incident data—time of incident, type of crash, severity— through a roadside infrastructure device to system operators who then broadcast regional warning that alerts to drivers to slow down. Simultaneously, incident data could be transmitted directly to emergency dispatchers for emergency response.

• Vehicle-to-others (V2D). A car turning right may be able to send an alert to a bicyclist’s cell phone or device on the bike and avoid a potential collision.

Status: The USDOT has conducted extensive research on the effectiveness of vehicle- based collision countermeasures for rear-end, road departure, and lane change crashes. Field operational tests (FOT’s) of collision warning systems have shown measurable benefits in reduction of crashes. However, the systems have inherent shortcomings that reduce their effectiveness such as misidentification of stopped cars and out of path

29 obstacles for rear-end collision warning systems, and map errors and misidentified lane markings for road departure crash warning systems.

The U.S. DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Research and Innovative Technology Administration are exploring enhancements in vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications that could improve collision-warning systems over the next four to six years and beyond. This research is intended to enhance current and future automotive safety systems such as adaptive cruise control, Emergency Electronic Brake Lights (EEBL) and intersection collision avoidance.

Many of these applications are being developed today without V2V communications. The potential for improved performance over the existing autonomous systems could enhance current safety systems and enable new safety applications to save lives and reduce injuries.

The primary objective of this joint initiative between U.S. DOT and members of the automobile industry is to determine if certain applications that utilize Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) can improve upon and/or enable the performance of vehicle-based systems.

Financing: USDOT, NHTSA and automobile manufacturers (name)

Contact: Greg Larson, Chief, Office of Traffic Operations Research Division of Research and Innovation, Caltrans (916) 657-4369 [email protected]

Concept: IntelliDrive Safety and Mobility Applications – SafeTrip-21

Description: SafeTrip-21 is a USDOT initiative to find transformative ways of using existing technology to enhance safety and mobility. The initiative seeks to explore the potential of extending this capability as far as possible in ways that do not require deployment of DSRC (dedicated short-range communication), which requires major hardware investment along roadways. The intent of SafeTrip-21 is to take the wireless communication revolution on the road and into the car to provide the traveler with more route options, modal choices and a safer trip, and to enable pedestrians and bicyclists to send out information about their location and position.

The "connected traveler" would be enabled to access information before and during a trip so the trip may be taken efficiently and safely. Safety, speed, predictability, green footprint – all these can be the focus of “best route” advisories customized into the information profile each driver wants. Such travel information would be provided through a cell phone or other consumer handheld device, such as an aftermarket navigation unit.

Specifics: SafeTrip-21 is leveraging existing technologies to empower people who use

30 the system and those who manage the system. Smart phones will have GPS chips that will provide congestion information on routes that have sensors – and those that don’t.

Among possible applications is dynamic route guidance. The consumer information device would "tell" the traveler about road conditions, route alternatives and modal choices (car, bus, rail transit). The device would also send and receive signals regarding vehicle positions (V2V communication) to enhance travel safety.

Under SafeTrip-21, California PATH is combining its existing research test-bed with the San Francisco Bay Area’s roadway infrastructure and Silicon Valley's ongoing revolution in wireless and personal computing. The goal is to develop applications - tell me about my trip, tell me about my road, watch out for me – that PATH will implement and evaluate.

SafeTrip-21 project partners include the USDOT, Caltrans, private industry (primarily Nokia, NAVTEQ and Nissan), centers at the Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California Berkeley – California Center for Innovative Transportation (CCIT) and California PATH – and the American driver.

One project premise is that the multi-band, multi-applications environment that underpins SafeTrip-21 will create in consumers the desire and in the United States market the penetration to widely deploy SafeTrip-21 devices.

Status: In the next year or so in Bay Area, a series of applications known as "Group- Enabled Mobility and Safety" (GEMS) will be tested. One aim of GEMS is to provide a gateway device – a cell phone with web browser – that can bring multiple communications frequencies to match with the "correct" application, be it safety or mobility, that enables the “connected traveler.”

The “GE” in GEMS means vehicles are engaged in a cooperative use of communications with other vehicles and pedestrians. GEMS supports the connected traveler by providing mobility and safety information. PATH research will determine what information to provide and by what enabling hardware applications in a system for drivers.

In one GEMS application the UC Berkeley, California PATH and University of Utah research teams are working with NAVTEQ to develop an Internet-based dynamic routing system delivered on a consumer handheld device such as a cell phone. The system aims to provide travelers with alternative routes that can avoid traffic jams and reduce commuting delays. Based on the Map24 interactive map platform provided by NAVTEQ, the screen shot shows a web page with five alternative routes from downtown Mountain View to the Oakland International Airport, ranking them on real-time traffic information.

Modal shift is enabled through providing transit and parking information through mobile phones and electronic signs and by allowing travelers on the San Francisco Peninsula to access transit information in real time while they are in motion.

31 Financing: US Department of Transportation

Contact: James Misener, Executive Director PATH (Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 665-3612 [email protected]

JD Margulici, Associate Director CCIT (California Center for Innovative Transportation) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 642-5929 [email protected]

Concept: IntelliDrive mobility applications – Mobile Millennium project

Description: Volunteers are invited to participate in the Mobile Millennium traffic pilot, a free public traffic-information system that uses the power of communication to provide the public with real-time traffic conditions.

Avoiding traffic congestion can save time, gasoline, greenhouse gas emissions, and stress. Mobile Millennium is a public-private research partnership that aims to address these key societal issues by providing drivers with current traffic information where and when they can use it to make informed travel decisions that keep traffic flowing.

Status: Researchers use anonymous speed and position information gathered by GPS- equipped cell phones, fuse it with data from static traffic sensors, and broadcast traffic information back to the phones. Data is gathered only from locations that are statistically significant for traffic information. This careful targeting minimizes bandwidth usage by collecting only traffic-relevant data, and equally important, is privacy-aware.

The larger the number of people using it, the better the system will work. Mobile Millennium encourages potential participants to “become an Early Adopter of this cutting-edge, developing technology. Download the free software to your phone and tell your friends. Be a Part of Next-Gen Technology?”

This is an active research project that will be updated regularly based on participant feedback on product-specific issues people are having with the software, including:

• Will it work on my phone? • How can I install it on my phone? • How do I look at traffic on my phone? • How can I get audio traffic reports on my phone in real time? • When will arterial (side street) information become available?

Mobile Millennium is trying to provide drivers with intelligent choices based on information that is “out there” but not currently available to consumers. It does this by

32 combining Navteq/Nokia-based detection, commercial (taxi cab, etc.) vehicle tracking, and cell phone reports from “virtual lines.”

Financing: The Mobile Millennium traffic information system is provided to users for free jointly by Nokia, Navteq, and UC Berkeley, in partnership with the California and U.S. Departments of Transportation.

Contact: JD Margulici, Associate Director CCIT (California Center for Innovative Transportation) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 642-5929 [email protected]

Website: http://traffic.education.edu

Concept: Strategic framework for new technology adoption

Description: VII / IntelliDrive and alternative fuel vehicles are outstanding current examples of promising innovations that require a strategic approach to technology development and user acceptance. Innovation deployment will be impacted by the extent to which this approach is utilized.

Specifics: Experience has shown that the following principles should be followed to support widespread adoption of innovative technologies:

Design in response to need: Technology developers are often tempted to create all- purpose “problem-solvers” that maximize the number of functions and applications. But this can create devices so complex that they impede user access to critical functions. Developers should instead focus on the key function and simplify the user interface that provides access to that function.

For example, mobile phone users seeking route information for a “smart and safe” trip must page through several screens to reach the navigation system with traffic information. This may be too complicated and slow for users seeking accurate, reliable real-time information. Far preferable would be a single safety-relevant icon and/or a voice interface “pushed” to the driver that addresses the upcoming situation.

Provide trustworthy information: Technology does not automatically change behavior. People must be willing to make the behavioral changes required to use a new technology. They need to know what is available and how they can access it, or it will not be adopted. A transportation technology must make a difference in the “quality of trip” – or travelers will not bother to learn how to use the system.

For example, public willingness to make trips in alternative fuel vehicles is crucially dependent on information about travel distances versus vehicle range, refueling station locations and the cost and availability of refueling. When people leave their homes they need to have certainty if they are to make decisions about new types of driving

33 experiences. This requires clear, easy-to-access information developed through the deliberate networking of multiple participants who are building facilities and capacity.

Work through partnerships of government, universities, business, and consumers to connect missing links in technology deployment: The private sector will move rapidly when it sees a business case; for example, the pace of mobile phone development since 2007. When this happens, a ubiquitous infrastructure can be deployed without taxpayer costs. Government doesn’t move this fast but has the power to set standards and create requirements. Another partner is university centers that cooperate and coordinate to combine research and experience.

CCIT (California Center on Innovative Transportation) is a deployment entity that bridges the private sector, public agencies and academia. CCIT seeks to be an “early identifier” of promising technologies and of agencies willing to champion innovations. It also focuses on technologies to enable capabilities that exist but are not connected. CCIT works through the “push” of project assistance for new technology that can be developed by universities and adopted by the private sector, and by the “pull” of encouraging vendors to propose innovative demonstration projects that put technologies on the map for government agencies.

An outstanding example of CCIT strategy is the Cal-France project, a major advance that used mobile phones as data probes and created the algorithms to convert complex data into tools that generated results for VII / IntelliDrive. The work done by CCIT and UC Berkeley researchers has advanced the technologies to a new level, helping to create an innovation that has a high potential for deployment.

California PATH (Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways) focuses on bridging the “last mile” from research to deployment. PATH’s mission is to accelerate the rate of new technology implementation and adoption. PATH conducts applied prototype-oriented research and serves as a “knowledge champion” for technical experts in overcoming institutional hurdles such as intellectual property (IP) licensing, sole source contracting, and lack of an interface between the public sector and private users in developing performance standards for technology.

TSRC (Transportation Sustainability Research Center) focuses on alternative fuels and vehicles, and sustainable solutions including those based on intelligent transportation systems. TSRC conducts behavioral, economic, and technical studies as well as deploying technology applications in the field to develop “green” market pathways for promising new technologies that connect transportation system users with innovative products and services beneficial to both society and the environment.

CCIT, PATH, and TSRC are part of the Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Caltrans is supporting the activities of these entities through a model based on field tests, prototypes, pilots, and deployment of research results.

34 Contact: Larry Orcutt, Chief, Division of Research and Innovation California Department of Transportation (916) 654-8877 [email protected]

JD Margulici, Associate Director CCIT (California Center for Innovative Transportation) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 642-5929 [email protected]

James Misener, Executive Director PATH (Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways) UC Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies (510) 665-3612 [email protected]

Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Concept: Active Traffic Management (ATM)

Description: Active Traffic Management is the use of multiple aspects of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) in real-time applications. ITS in turn is the application of information technology to transportation.

Specifics: Any situation in which the transportation system is characterized by variable conditions is a candidate for Active Traffic Management. Prime examples include: ramp metering, tolls adjusted for traffic conditions (congestion pricing), variable speed limits to ease the impact of congestion or incident response, and signal synchronization to enhance throughput and traffic flow.

Ramp metering adjusts green light intervals for congestion levels. Congestion pricing adjusts tolls for peak-hour and off-hour capacity. Variable speed limits mitigate the disruptive compaction of traffic as it approaches congestion or incidents. Signal synchronization can be adjusted on a time-related basis or with electronic detection of actual traffic.

While each of these applications occurs on a site-specific basis, system-wide coordination is required for optimal results from the combination of ramp metering, congestion pricing, variable speed limits and signal synchronization.

The last-named of these is a particular challenge because, unlike the others, it is arterial and street-based, requiring the cooperation of a large number of separate municipalities. Metropolitan planning organizations are the natural entities to take the lead. Synchronization of traffic signals will become more important as the federal stimulus

35 package funds highway projects whose construction can be mitigated in part by better signal coordination.

Status: Transportation Northwest (TransNow) at the University of Washington and the Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium (OTREC) at Portland State are among the entities developing field-data based algorithms to design and refine traffic models. In Seattle, the Puget Sound Regional Council is taking the lead in arterial signal synchronization, which requires cooperation among many municipalities.

Funding: Improved signalization requires sustained funding. An example is Kansas City, Missouri, which makes $1.5 million per year available for this purpose. In California, Proposition 1B (goods movement investment) includes signalization among activities qualified for funding.

Contact: Nancy Nihan, Director, Transportation Northwest University of Washington (206) 543-8255 [email protected]

Peter Briglia, Associate Director, Transportation Northwest University of Washington (206) 685-1795 [email protected],edu

Yinhai Wang, Assistant Professor Civil & Environmental Engineering, UW (206) 616-2696 [email protected]

Hau Hagedorn, Research Program Manager, Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium (OTREC) Portland State University (503) 725-2833 [email protected]

Concept: Adaptive Transit Signal Priority (ATSP)

Description: Transit signal priority (TSP) is an operational strategy that facilitates the movement of buses through signalized intersections. It has been identified as a critical technology for deployment of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and improvement of traditional transit services by reducing total travel time, enhancing the reliability of transit service and thus increased ridership. Despite these advantages, TSP has not seen widespread deployment for two reasons: the concern of traffic operation authorities that frequent TSP operations will deteriorate the performance of signal control optimized for traffic flow, and the capital cost for outfitting buses with the TSP system.

California PATH Program, in partnership with Caltrans and San Mateo Transit Authority (Samtrans), are conducting a research program to investigate an Adaptive Transit Signal Priority (ATSP) concept that uses real-time GPS position, bus movement information and

36 historical bus travel behavior data to predict bus arrival time at an intersection. This provides much longer lead time to allow the traffic controller to be 'adaptive' to the bus arrival as well as the traffic situations, making it possible to distribute the impact over several control cycles.

In order to allow the signal priority system to better accommodate bus signal priority calls while minimizing the impact to the other traffic and maintaining the coordination among signals, a signal priority algorithm that is based adjustable cycle length signal control scheme must be explored.

Status: PATH, in collaboration with Caltrans and San Mateo Transit District (Samtrans), have coordinated research and developed ATSP by equipping buses with Global Positioning Systems (GPS) that monitor bus movements and predict bus arrival times. This will be tested in this two-year research project.

First-year research seeks to improve and refine the ATSP system to make it suitable for large-scale implementation. The second year is dedicated to field tests, installing the system at multiple intersections along El Camino Real and on several buses. From these tests, the impacts of the system will be evaluated through data analysis and interviews with personnel from Samtrans and city traffic authorities.

Financing: Caltrans, PATH and Samtrans

Contact: Alex Skabardonis Director, PATH

Hamid Rifaat Project Manager, Caltrans

Wei-Bin Zhang Research Engineer, PATH

37 IV. Alternative Propulsion Technologies

Concept: Zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs)

Description: Awareness of the connection between use of petroleum-based motor fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, and global climate change has led to the concept of zero- emission vehicles as a technology and policy goal.

Climate is a huge and complex system with enormous momentum. Some climate change will continue regardless of how fast we act. This change will be expressed in the increasing frequency of extreme weather events that are more variable and more unpredictable.

The global human population is getting ‘richer’ in the sense of using more technology. At the same time, human subsistence populations need more energy for basics such as food and water. We will inevitably need to consume more energy. We are gaining in our technology but not in environmental impacts because of ever-rising demand, especially for transportation equipment and use.

The auto industry is experiencing tremendous growth in China, India and Russia. An additional 180 million vehicles are forecast to be added by 2020, bring the world total to 1 billion. Oil provides 96% of transportation energy.

For the U.S., there is also the issue of energy security. We produce 10% of world oil and consume 25% of it, resulting in the outflow of $500 million to $1 billion a day, reliance on unstable foreign sources, and the prospect of “peak oil” in the face of surging oil demand from developing nations,

This suggests the U.S. has come to what Intel CEO Emeritus Andy Grove calls a Strategic Inflection Point (SIP). He says, “We can move to new heights if we recognize we are at a SIP on oil – or toward decline if we do not. We need a sense of urgency and a World War II level of industrial response.”

Today the U.S. in a ”great race” on transportation technology. The national goal is to move our entire society toward energy efficiency for quality of life. The organizational goal is to be an eco-innovator who contributes to a sustainable mobile society.

While the goal is “Zero Emission Vehicles,” there is in fact no technology that is truly zero in emissions. It is important to realize that all the energy we use on earth came from the sun in the form of extraction of carbon from the atmosphere. The variable is a matter of cycle time. Fossil fuels may require 100 million years or more to take form, while bio- fuels require one to five years. If we could power our vehicles by solar electricity and wind, the cycle time for transportation energy could be reduced to a single day.

38 The objective is to achieve this short energy cycle with a transportation system that maintains access, mobility and flexibility while costing no more, and ultimately less. This can be done if we begin to electrify our ground transportation system.

Electricity as fuel for transportation is a disruptive change. We have never developed an alternative fuel for vehicles – but this time there is no turning back. Global climate change is the driving factor in policy change. The transition is inevitable and urgent. It involves huge challenges. We are blazing new ground in a perfect storm.

Specifics: Movement toward ZEVs as a dominant part of the U.S. vehicle fleet depends on a combination of requirements and incentives:

• Carbon reduction targets are being widely adopted at the national and state level. Experts including Dan Sperling, Director of the UC Davis Center for Transportation and a CARB member, believe greenhouse gas reduction mandates should be written so they are narrow, targeted and specific, with firm target dates.

• Carbon content of fuels. A widely cited goal is to reduce CO2 output 70% by 2050. Improvements in internal combustion engine (ICE) technology have the potential to contribute 30% of this 70% through a strategy that engineers label “reduce, reuse, recycle” of CO2 and other pollutants. In the U.S., individual vehicle performance is crucial because our dispersed pattern of development means reduced CO2 from transportation will not come primarily from using transit.

Another strategy to reduce carbon content and oil dependency is “energy diversity,” including bio-fuels to the extent they result in CO2 reduction.

California has 10,000 gas stations, 120-130 compressed natural gas stations that are public, and six E85 ethanol stations. The greatest problem in constructing alternative fuel stations is local and state regulation by fire marshals, air quality districts, and the water resources board.

Fire marshals approval would continue to be a challenge for electric vehicle recharging stations, especially if they require high power levels. If charging can be done at 110 volts and 1.5 kwh, fire safety is enhanced. Moreover, that level of power is the preferred charging level for cars.

• De-carbonized electricity generation. Of the 70% reduction sought in CO2 output, 40% depends on “clean” electricity production. Electricity is significantly reliant on a 19th century fuel – coal. Today, 70% of electric power generation is carbon-based, 20% is nuclear and 10% is hydro. The goal is to de-carbonize through using renewable energy sources including wind and solar to the greatest extent possible.

A July 2007 study by the National Resources Defense Council and the Electric Power Research Institute estimated that if the U.S. vehicle fleet were electric and powered

39 entirely by coal-fired plants, CO2 output would be 25% lower than for a fleet of gas- powered autos.

Further gains rely on de-carbonizing electricity generation by integrating solar, wind and other renewables and using the electricity they generate to power for zero-emission capable vehicles.

A low-carbon fuel mix is a major goal at Southern California Edison, which purchases one-sixth of the nation’s wind power and 90% of its solar power. Solar is the perfect partner with a home “battery” that stores energy for domestic use. This technology ties in with auto-related developments to create scalable market conditions for both power and vehicles.

The problem of solar and wind is that energy generation is dependent on weather conditions and thus intermittent. As a result, current technology requires a fossil fuel (NG/Diesel ) backup. This could be ameliorated by the availability of widely distributed electrical energy storage.

Quebec Hydro, hydropower generates 97% of its 41 million megawatts. The utility is developing wind power as the complement and is moving toward mandatory carbon reductions. The reason for this strategy is that hydropower is a perfect complement to wind, since under windless conditions hydro can be used to fill in the deficit in real time.

• Financing: Electric vehicles – hybrids, plug-ins, and extended range – are popular when energy costs for internal combustion engines are high. Cost drives the search for energy efficiency. When gas is expensive, companies take a close look at fleet management and initial deployment of alternative-fuel vehicles.

Gas prices of $4 a gallon reduce the hybrid payback period from 70-10 years to 5-7 years. Will the electric vehicle market go from zero to something enormous? Not without policy and direction and incentives. An current example comes from the Energy Administration and Toyota:

As economic slowdown dropped average gas prices in the U.S. from $4.10 in July 2008 to $1.90 in March 2009, the average length of time to sell a Toyota Prius rose from 1.6 days to 76.6 days (48 times longer). The increase for a Camry hybrid was from 4.6 days to 156.2 days (34 times longer) – compared to an increase from 28.1 days to 84.1 days (3 times longer) for a gas powered Camry

In response to this impact, experts including Dan Sperling and Andy Grove advocate a tough form of regulatory intervention: Put a price floor under gasoline to eliminate the risk that price drops will dislocate the market for hybrid and electric vehicles. Others emphasize making clean energy vehicles competitive by technology advances that bring down clean energy costs rather than seeking to make dirty energy expensive.

40 Contact: Daniel Sperling, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis (530) 752-7434 [email protected]

Mark Duvall, Transportation Program Director Electrical Power Research Institute (650) 855-2591

Concept: California Clean Mobility Partnership (CCMP)

Description: The CCMP is a three-year (2007-2010) public-private collaboration to promote research and development of advanced vehicle technologies, alternative fuels, and intelligent transport systems.

Specifics: UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, and Toyota have joined in collaboration with key strategic partners to establish and implement a unique capability that: 1) incorporates the social and technical research required to address California goals for alternative fuels and vehicles; and 2) represents populations and trends in both southern and northern California.

The project is supported by: 1) grant funds made available under state legislation through the California Air Resources Board’s “Alternative Fuel Incentive Program”; and 2) the provision of vehicles, vehicle monitoring and data mining, emission testing facilities, and technical support by Toyota.

The CCMP Phase I research will analyze, assess, and inform the technical and market challenges and opportunities for plug-in (PHEV) and fuel-cell (FCHV) hybrids. Research elements include:

1) Placing the vehicles in real-world settings and studying various aspects of their performance, usage, and driver response; 2) developing test certification procedures for the next generation of dual-fuel vehicles; 3) quantifying the grid impacts associated with extensive deployment of electric-drive vehicles; and 4) modeling the impact of PHEV and FCHV deployment on future-year air quality.

The CCMP program has six key elements: Household Placements Analysis, PHEV Certification, Energy and Economic Analysis, Urban Air Quality Assessment, Utility Grid Interaction, and Education and Outreach Message Development.

The methodology for the social research involves placing conventional hybrid vehicles, PHEVs, and FCHVs into households in northern and southern California on a rotating basis of four weeks for each of the three vehicles. The behavioral response to the vehicles and fueling will be surveyed via questionnaires and interviews.

41 Status: At present, the social research effort has cleared all major contractual and human- subject requirements, project vehicles are being tested and equipped with GPS and telematics technology, and the initial group of drivers are being screened for participation. First placements of vehicles are expected to begin in April 2009 and to continue for a minimum of one year in both northern and southern California.

For the, the following elements of technical research have been completed: 1) two rounds of test certification research in collaboration with the ARB El Monte Laboratory, Toyota, Horiba, and the Japan National Traffic Safety and Environmental Laboratory; 2) compilation of the initial analysis of grid impacts, in collaboration with Southern California Edison; and 3) initial results from the air quality simulation performed in collaboration with the California Energy Commission, the ARB, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Financing: State of California funds authorized by the Legislature through AB 1118.

Contact: Susan Shaheen Co-Director, Transportation Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Tim Lipman Co-Director, Transportation Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 642-4501 [email protected]

Concept: High-performance batteries

Description: Batteries are in many ways the technology that will make or break the effort to produce ZEVs. Advances in battery capability have been described as the “holy grail” on which all else depends in determining the pace and degree of movement toward electric vehicles. “The battery is the key to technological and commercial success of plug-in electric hybrids (PHEVs). Today we can say the necessary requirements will be met,” believes Fritz Kalhammer of Kalhammer Electrochemical and Energy Technology. Those involved in the EV effort closely monitor progress on battery technology.

Specifics: EPRI – The Electric Power Research Institute – is the major source of battery performance parameters. Batteries must be durable to handle charge-depleting and charge-sustaining modes. Each involves its own electrochemical impacts and configurations.

Nickel plate batteries, the most mature technology, are high-energy but have safety problems with deep discharge, which can cause “thermal runaway” on cathodes.

Lithium-ion batteries can meet medium-range power density and energy density requirements, with a 15-year battery life. Expect lithium ion installation first in

42 conventional hybrids and then in plug-in vehicles. Lithium titanate offers even higher performance at high cycles.

Iron phosphate batteries are the safest and have excellent power but low voltage that could impede their use in plug-in vehicles. A possible solution is to use another phosphate such as manganese.

It is difficult and costly to design 300-400 miles of electric vehicle range to compete with the internal combustion engine (ICE). Each key capability – cost. life, power, range – have different “best” answers, so trade-offs are required to optimize total performance.

Status: The current research direction is to de-emphasize high storage capacity for hybrid vehicles and focus on plug-in vehicle requirements, which are evolving from high-power systems to high-energy systems,

The key criteria for a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle battery are: the power/energy density tradeoff, the packaging of usable energy, and cost/affordability. Batteries can be compared on a cell, module, or pack basis.

Installing the largest possible battery in a car puts less stress on it. This makes sense for long use life. Shorter time frames favor smaller batteries due to lower initial cost. The type of vehicle that is built largely is a function of battery weight, which ranges between 60 and 120 kilograms (130 – 260 lbs.). Battery integration into vehicles is a relatively neglected area.

Lithium ion has advanced so rapidly it has become the technology of choice due to high energy density compared to alternatives such as lead acid nickel cyanide. At the same time, its price has dropped due to 15 years of commercialization in personal electronics. Other promising technologies are further out.

There are issues with lithium ion. Life-cycle performance is not well understood. One criterion of technology selection is how well the cells function together. To this point, battery power has depended on bundling small cells but future development must take a path toward larger cells. Prismatic or rectangular cells may pack better and cool better than today’s cylindrical cells.

Nissan’s focus is advanced battery development. Its engineers believe the key to packing power, energy and density into a lithium ion battery half the size of a conventional battery is “lamination,” a thin structure that facilitates layout flexibility in the vehicle. Technical tasks remain, including insulation of the lamination film.

Large-format cell development is crucial to bringing down costs. As size is scaled up, there will be a manufacturing issue. Storage of concentrated energy is unstable, and getting the heat out of larger cells is a safety issue. Lithium ion is efficient in charging and discharging but is very sensitive to over- and under-charging. It generates heat that

43 must be dealt with as part of cost-effective thermal management to assure safety at a system level.

The latest major development in lithium-ion batteries comes from research by Gerbrand Ceder and Byongwoo Kang at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They focused on the speed with which the ions are able to enter and leave the electrodes, which governs how fast a battery can be charged and recharged.

By finding a way to make the surface of the electrodes glassy rather than crystalline the researchers created a medium that acts as a super-capacitor, conducting ions swiftly to the battery core. The result is a material that, in experimental batteries, was able to charge and discharge in a few seconds.

Lithium ion is the current technology of choice, but there may be future evolutions beyond it. In the words of Dan Sperling, Director of the UC Davis Center for transportation, “Keep pressing forward on battery research. Recognize that lithium ion is just one step.” Emerging battery technologies involve advanced materials.

Financing: In February 2009, the Obama administration announced $2 billion in grants from the Recovery and Reinvestment Act for development of advanced batteries, to support the goal of putting 1 million American-made plug-in hybrid vehicles on the road by 2015.

Nations such as China and Japan view batteries as a critical technology, and their governments are making investments based on this. Most battery capability is in Asia because that is where personal mobile devices are made. Battery costs follow a less steep Moore’s Law decline than transistors but greater technical efforts could accelerate the rate of decline.

OEM’s (original equipment manufacturers) learned during the 1990s that batteries are expensive and may require subsidies. There are cost and volume “thresholds of production” for economies of scale. The R&D business case doesn’t always pencil out when gas prices are low.

The key ingredient in consumer affordability is that fuel savings are larger than battery costs at mass production price levels. A new plant with a 500,000 unit annual capacity for hybrid auto (HEV) batteries can be constructed in about two years. Not as much is known about plug-in (PHEV) battery production but the timeline should be similar. None of the big manufacturers are currently developing pure electric vehicle (EV) batteries.

Contact: Mark Duvall, Transportation Program Director Electrical Power Research Institute (650) 855-2591

Andrew Frank, Professor, Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, UC Davis,

44 and CTO, Efficient Drivetrains, Inc. (530) 752-8120 / (707) 678-2700 [email protected]

Concept: Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs)

Description: A robust and resilient energy system requires sources of energy to be substitutable for each other in generating power. This is the case in stationary grids, which can utilize electricity generated from many different sources. But it has not been the case in transportation. The dual-fuel car that uses electricity first and gasoline when needed would change this.

80% of US motorists drive an average of less than 40 miles a day. This means they could use hybrids with a 40-mile electric capability. The electric power infrastructure can handle 50 million dual-use vehicles that charge in the off-peak. Use of such vehicles would cut US gasoline use in half. This would not only slash our oil imports but change the dynamics of world oil markets.

Given the role of transportation in generating CO2 emissions, no serious carbon reduction strategy is possible without clean vehicle technology, and the automobile is perhaps the most amenable type of vehicle to “go electric.”

Specifics: New enabling technologies are timely, notably the advent of the hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) which is neither an internal combustion engine (ICE) nor an all-electric vehicle (EV). It may be some time before we have a pure EV. The technology time sequence is likely to be ICE – HEV – PHEV – EV.

Status: HEV offerings from major manufacturers are burgeoning. Notable examples in a wide-ranging field include:

Toyota. The Prius arriving in dealer showrooms during spring 2009 is the third- generation of this best-selling electric-gas hybrid. Officially it is rated at 50 mpg, up from 46 mpg on the previous model. But at a recent Toyota press event, journalists were invited to compete for achieving the best mileage on a 33.8-mile course. Using common- sense techniques the winners like avoiding jackrabbit starts and using full electric power for a mile at a time, the winning team logged an amazing 94.6 mpg.

Nissan. In July 2007, Nissan introduced the hybrid Altima in California and other ZEV states. Fuel consumption and acceleration are better than in a standard Altima. Nissan’s long-term goal is to start globally massive sales of ZEVs in 2010-2012. Nissan will also sell advanced batteries to other OEMs.

Honda. Dubbed the Prius-fighter due to its similar appearance, the Honda Insight is aimed at a different market. It is “targeted toward thrifty eco-sensitive types,” says Alex Taylor of Fortune magazine. The Insight scores in the low 40s in miles per gallon and prices start just under $20,000.

45

Ford. The Ford Escape, celebrating the sale of over 100,000 vehicles, shares with the Toyota Prius the distinction of being among the early generation hybrids. It has participated in numerous test projects including plug-in conversion (see below) and has a 30 mile blended electric range with 120 mpg. The Escape has been a valuable test bed for battery development and the discovery that it’s not just a matter of putting a larger battery in a conventional car; all systems on the vehicle must be designed around the electric power train.

The new 41-mpg Ford Fusion hybrid is getting rave reviews for its gas-electric output of 191 horsepower, its 52-mpg rating on mixed city-highway driving, and its price of about $25,000 with applicable federal tax credit. After driving the Fusion, auto reviewer Dan Neil of the Los Angeles Times wrote, “So, somebody invented the car of the future and didn’t tell us?”

The Fusion’s Sanyo-supplied battery is 30% smaller and 23% lighter than the Escape battery and supplies enough power to propel the Fusion at speeds up to 47 mph all- electric – key to the car’s high in-city mileage. One technical advance in the Fusion is a variable-voltage converter that reduces heat loss during high-output.

Ford intends to follow the Fusion and Mercury Milan hybrids with a by battery-powered van in 2010 and a “family” of hybrids by 2012.

GM. The Chevy Volt is designed around the 40 mile per day average for U.S. motorists. It is capable of providing pollution-free commuting while consuming about $1 worth of electricity to plug in a wall socket at 110/120 volts for eight hours or 220/240 volts for three hours. When a trip exceeds 40 miles, a 1.4 litre four-cylinder gas engine fires up to power a 53-kw AC generator that relieves the battery pack as the source of electricity. The generator doesn’t fully recharge the pack, since that can be done at one-sixth the cost by plugging in. But the hybrid mode does provide extended capability to relieve “range anxiety.”

In addition to the Chevy Volt due next year, GM, which already sells eight hybrids, said 26 of the 33 cars it will market in 2015 won’t run on gasoline alone.

Chrysler. In September 2008 Chrysler unveiled a Town & Country minivan and a Jeep Wrangler based on an electric motor, a battery and a 1-liter gasoline generator installed in an existing vehicle platform. The vehicles can travel 40 miles on battery power before the generator kicks in to add another 360 miles of range. They come with front-wheel, rear- wheel, and all-wheel drive. Eight new hybrids or electric vehicles have been promised by 2015.

Financing: Hybrid development must surmount two major hurdles. The first is the basic challenge of putting a new and somewhat more expensive platform on the market in competition with conventional ICE vehicles.

46 Toyota said last year that it was finally making money on the Prius after nearly a decade of production – this despite the fact that the car was scarce relative to demand and commanded a premium price during much of its sales history. Executives at other automakers acknowledge that they lose money on every hybrid sold. The market economics are hugely affected by the pump price of gasoline (see above, the Financing section on Zero-Emission Vehicles).

The next hurdle is huge uncertainty surrounding the future of major auto manufacturers, especially but not only in the U.S. Indeed, most major nations subsidized parts of their auto industry long before recent assistance to GM and Chrysler by the U.S. government. But with state intervention comes state control. Soon after GM’s CEO was displaced by an administration-selected manager, talk was heard in Washington, D.C. that the Chevy Volt was “too expensive” to compete in the marketplace.

The root problem is that government bailout money may not be patient money due to taxpayer and political demands for quick results, This works against the ability to make long-term investments. But a countervailing force is that government is more sensitive than industry to climate change impacts and therefore more committed to responses that address this issue. Sensing the situation, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm in Newsweek magazine for April 13, 2009 made a strong case for the proposition that “Even as automobiles go electric, Michigan wants to build them.”

Contact: James Boyd, Vice-Chair, California Energy Commission (916)

Daniel Sperling, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis (530) 752-7434 [email protected]

Felix Kramer, Founder, CalCars (650) 599-9992 [email protected]

Bill Reinert, National Manager, Advanced Technology Group Toyota Motor Company [email protected]

Jonathan Lauchner, Vice President, Global Program Management, General Motors Corporation

Nancy Gioia, Director, Sustainable Mobility Technologies & Hybrid Vehicle Programs, Ford Motor Company

Concept: Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)

47 Description: PHEVs (plug-in hybrid electrics) are coming along at the same time as HEV (hybrid electrics). HEVs can be re-engineered to become PHEVs.

Plug-ins could cost less to build than conventional hybrids because it is possible to downsize the liquid-fuel engine and simplify the transmission. Recharging permits a smaller, lighter, cheaper electrical unit and reduces CO2 emissions 25% below a conventional hybrid.

All-electric vehicles (EVs) require a high-powered charge – but not PHEVs, which can use 110-volt power straight from the wall. On average, vehicles are parked 21+ hours a day. They can be recharged with 10-15 kwh, which can be done in 6-10 hours. Charging time is not an issue because the PHEV is a dual-fuel vehicle that can be operational if either fuel is available.

Specifics: According to knowledgeable sources, a reduction in annual output of CO2 of up to 1 billion tons can be achieved by a shift to EVs. To get there will require execution by vehicle manufacturers, electric utilities and other players. This will take innovation and collaboration.

Remaining challenges for a PHEV include the cost of a high-capacity battery versus an internal combustion engine, user access to recharging, and the CO2 intensity of electricity generation. To put the matter in perspective, PHEVs can use batteries one-third to one- fourth the size of batteries in a pure EV. Thus the same world battery production capacity would serve up to four times as many PHEVs as EVs, displacing a proportionally greater amount of gas and oil consumption.

Status: PHEVs can become zero-emission vehicles if three areas are addressed: use of gasoline and /or bio-fuels in auto technology, smart grid development using solar and wind, and a widely distributed 110 volt plug-in infrastructure.

Auto technology: PHEVs are dual-fuel as a back-up but they allow movement toward zero emissions by use of solar, wind, renewables and non-corn ethanol, in a 90/10 ratio between electricity and liquid fuel. The full benefit requires a smaller ICE so there is room for a large electric battery. This combination should deliver performance equal or superior to a conventional car. A key hardware technology is a mchanical, continuously variable transmission that is lighter and more efficient than an electric motor.

In 2010, major Japanese, European and American and car companies will be offering PHEVs. “Urban EVs” that meet short-range travel needs should also be developed. Smaller, neighborhood vehicles can be made by a variety of manufacturers while only a few can build full size EVs.

California’s energy plan commits the state to PHEV development. In 2005, the state’s Energy Commission took the unprecedented step of endorsing a specific technology – PHEVs – and establishing a research and public education center at UC Davis with an annual appropriation of $120 million from utility taxes.

48

Professor Andy Frank of UC Davis has been working on the PHEV for 35 years. Batteries, electric motors, a reliable mechanical Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT), and computers were the “missing links” when he began in 1972. Frank built the first PHEV in 1993. In the years that followed he made PHEVs out of mainline Detroit SUVs and passenger cars. All the cars Frank modified perform better than stock, providing 60 miles of all-electric range and, when sustaining the battery charge in hybrid mode, double the fuel economy of a conventional vehicle.

Google launched an initiative in 2007 to convert HEVs to PHEVs. The company found a “compelling interest” in PHEVs due to improvement in gas mileage and reduction in greenhouse gases. At the Google campus, a parking structure with 1.5 megawatts of solar panels on the roof and plug-ins enables employees to charge their cars during the workday.

Google employees’ 74-124 mpg experience is a real-world test. The company has had professional drivers cover a 2,000-mile segment of unique situations in a PHEV Prius conversion that achieved up to 93.5 mpg, and major car companies say they can do even better.

Smart grid: PHEVs can be seamlessly integrated with utilities and the power grid. A coalition to accelerate use of electricity and replace gasoline covers 37 states and three Canadian provinces. It involves collaboration among manufacturers, national labs and research institutes.

The eastern part of Canada has the electrical infrastructure needed for PHEVs. Every parking space is equipped with a 110 volt, 1.5 kw waterproof outlet used for engine block heating in the winter time. This plug can also serve as a battery charger for PHEVs. The cost of this infrastructure is obviously modest since it was installed simply for the convenience of the general public.

In moving toward an all-electric ground transportation system, efficiency has the highest near-term leverage because of the amount of time needed to build clean generation facilities.

A recent event organized in Washington, D.C. by Plug-In America revealed a high level of bipartisan interest in questions such as: How much demand will PHEVs place on the grid? Will it be ready? How can PHEVs make the grid smarter? What policies are required to make this happen?

A study by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratories concluded that the existing grid can support 80% of the current fleet of light-duty autos in if they became PHEVs today. This use level would require giving increasing attention to plugging into a greener grid. Car companies are talking to electric utilities just as they have talked to the oil companies over the years.

49 To do their part, utilities need to make changes that are as profound as those for automakers. Today’s grid works but is not smart. As a result it is a product that utilities can’t inventory. Ways to store electricity haven’t been developed, and so power is unidirectional – sent to the consumer on demand, on a real-time basis. But the PHEV is not only a transportation vehicle, it is also a device that can store energy and feed it back to the grid. This technology is not expensive, especially if the power level required is held to 1.5 kwh 110 volts.

The smart grid will be a “switch yard” based on two-way sensors, advanced metering and distributed computing, connected to end-use devices that communicate with each other to optimize electricity use and draw power from the most available source in short real-time intervals.

Plug-in infrastructure: Connecting electric cars to a charging grid is essential. This can be simple and easy to use. But it will not be simple to build if it is required to support fast-charging, battery-swapping, and home / business recharging, all of which are being considered.

As the transportation system moves “beyond oil” to electricity, vehicle recharging capability needs to be part of new building design in cities, including residential high- rises and commercial office buildings as well as private residences. Retrofitting of recharge capability, especially in homes, will also be widely required.

There is need to integrate support facilities for electric vehicles as a design element in urban development. People who can recharge their cars at work as well as home will be more efficient if they don’t have to waste time and mental energy on the next recharge and such access will cause EV adoption rates to accelerate, helping to meet greenhouse gas reduction targets.

The City of San Jose is planning to install a large number of “smartlets” for charging electric vehicles. These will be attached to “smart” street-light poles with sensors that regulate the required light intensity.

In the 1990s Southern California Edison (SCE) installed a large number of 240-volt outlets for inductive charging that can now be used by PHEVs with the right infrastructure. Today’s technology developed by the solar industry allows two-way transfer and storage of energy between the battery and the grid. This relates to “net zero energy” homes – a California standard for 2020. Thus PHEVs and EVs can become the energy storage system that has been the dream of electricity suppliers for the last century, without the utility having to pay for the storage capacity.

SCE estimates that if PHEVs are charged at night, there is currently enough capacity for 4 million such vehicles in Southern California. In Northern California, smart cars can follow the energy profile of wind farms. These applications will be enabled in part by “smart meters”- computer systems that manage as well as record energy use

50 It is even possible PHEV owners could save money by selling power back to the grid. When the PHEV user allows his battery to be used at times of grid peaking, rather than a cash payment it may be “smart” for the grid manager to simply exchange expensive energy for lower-cost energy. This approach would allow the PHEV battery to be charged essentially for free while the utility saves peaking charges and, ultimately, additions to peak capacity.

Smart charging using a “smart garage” allows the ultimate application of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) power exchange. V2G creates the “cash-back” vehicle as a source of energy to the grid through “smart charging” based on grid response. V2G combined with improved efficiency in the grid could remove peak pricing power and neutralize fuel costs for the PHEV user. Phase I is to use the existing grid. Phase II is to integrate renewable sources.

In the 1990s Southern California Edison (SCE) installed a large number of 240-volt outlets for inductive/deductive charging that can now be used by PHEVs. Today’s technology allows two-way transfer and storage of energy between the battery and the grid. This relates to “net zero energy” homes – a California standard for 2020.

SCE estimates that if PHEVs are charged at night, there is currently enough capacity for 4 million such vehicles in Southern California. In Northern California, smart cars can follow the energy profile of wind farms. These applications will be enabled in part by “smart meters”- computer systems that manage as well as record energy use

It is even possible PHEV owners could make money by selling power back to the grid. Smart charging using a “smart garage” allows the ultimate application: vehicle-to-grid (V2G) power exchange. V2G creates the “cash-back” vehicle as a source of energy to the grid through “smart charging” based on grid response. V2G combined with improved efficiency in the grid could remove peak pricing power and neutralize fuel costs for the PHEV user. Phase I is to use the existing grid. Phase II is to integrate renewable sources.

Google’s PHEV fleet has demonstrated vehicle-to-grid power exchange with PG&E. “We have demonstrated the swing in taking a charge from the grid and giving it back,” says Dan Reicher, Director of Climate Change and energy initiatives for Google.

If you can store energy in your car, the electric utility can store energy in your garage as part of a distributed energy system. The grid must become smarter to balance supply and demand, in a two-way interaction with consumers who become part of the smart grid.

A PHEV and home energy charging can minimize cost and maximize control for customers by giving them “intelligent charging.” Related to this is “roaming charging.” Wherever the vehicle goes it has a “charging identity.” The smart grid and smart meters vary around the country but plug-in technology should be standardized so PEVs are able to charge even if communication with a utility fails due to remote location or other cause.

Financing: Government subsidies could help in adding plug-in locations at parking lot spaces, parking meters and elsewhere to provide both conventional deductive or special

51 inductive charging. Similar incentives could be provided by utilities to subsidize or provide charging outlets in residential garages.

Contact: Tom Turrentine, Director, PHEV Center, UC Davis (530) 752-6500 [email protected]

Felix Kramer, Founder, CalCars (650) 599-9992 [email protected]

James Boyd, Vice-Chair, California Energy Commission (916)

Daniel Sperling, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis (530) 752-7434 [email protected]

Ed Kjaer, Director of Electric Transportation, Southern California Edison ( [email protected]

Andrew Frank, Professor, Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, UC Davis (530) 752-8120 / (707) 678-2700 [email protected]

Concept: Hybrid conversions / retrofits

Description: The goal is to convert the world vehicle fleet as fast as possible, using the full range of tools. There are currently about 100 PHEVs in the world. How might we build 10 million PHEVs in four years? The car companies are finally getting to it but there are ways to move faster by working on the entire existing fleet, replacing 10-15% a year through retrofit and a smaller fraction through new vehicles.

Specifics: The challenge of achieving a meaningful volume of dual-fuel vehicles can be met by unleashing the distributed infrastructure of auto repair shops to perform conversions. Andy Frank of UC Davis and Hamid Arasto of Illinois Institute of Technology have shown this can be done.

An inter-industry task force of electric utility, automobile, high-tech and academic research could be assigned the goal of putting 10 million dual-fuel vehicles on the road in four years.

This goal requires a balancing act of bringing installers on line in proportion to conversions. The future of conversions involves a “greening up” of cars that will use technology not yet available from OEM’s (original vehicle manufacturers). It is in part a cost game that is currently expensive but coming down.

52

There is a spectrum of conversions from low-end and high-end. The variable is the level of electricity use vs. gasoline use, from 90/10 to 10/90. How do you determine the level of conversion? How much gasoline do you want to save? How much electricity do you want to use? There is an economic case for every one of these ratios. To reach the upper end of the ratio, a pure electric range of 40 to 60 miles is required.

Status: In a 20,000-mile test of a large Chevy pickup, Andy Frank has had no failures of any system components and plans beta tests beginning with fleets. The goal is a 50% improvement on mileage, with a 100-mile range as a hybrid. “We are at 33% and expect getting to 40% soon.” Frank reports.

Manitoba Hydro used Hymotion 5 with a lithium ion 5kwh battery to turn Prius into a PHEV operating at temperatures down to -44F with the norm between -13F and +5F. Cold conditions make the engine kick in far more frequently, and more fuel is used to operate the emission systems than the engine.

Performance held up but fuel consumption was high – 40 - 45 mpg versus 150-200 mpg in June. Gas mileage of the Prius PHEV is like normal Prius mileage at low temperatures and like a PHEV conversion at higher temperatures because the electric unit operates more as it gets warmer.

Financing: Government could provide a 50% tax credit for conversion costs. The SBA can help guarantee loans to retrofitters. What is the cost of doing conversions? How does it compare to the total the cost of not doing conversions? Government needs to help get front-end costs down. After that, many experts believe the market viability of conversions will carry itself.

There is a “black hole” at US EPA, California EPA, and California ARB with regard to retrofits. This shouldn’t be the case given that reduction in fuel consumption means a proportional reduction in CO2 emissions.

Contact: Andrew Frank, Professor, Mechanical & Aeronautical Engineering, UC Davis (530) 752-4069 [email protected]

Concept: Public awareness / acceptance / adoption of green vehicles

Description: In the adoption of green vehicles, a crucial part of the challenge is on the market and consumer side rather than on the technology side. A precondition for movement toward a new transportation technology is satisfying real-world customer expectations and patterns of usage. The customer will make a rational choice on both economics (payback periods) and patterns of use (driving habits) before purchasing an electric vehicle or alternative fuel vehicle.

53 Specifics: The internal combustion engine has been central to our lifestyle since the 1920s. Self-expression and individual freedom have unfolded as a central theme crucially linked to the auto. Giving up the car is the last change people will make – but they may be willing to change how their car operates.

We are witnessing a convergence of forces that creates a paradigm shift and enables the world to move forward. From a consumer standpoint, the new technologies need to work “just like the old ones.” Electricity and the automobile are partnered to shape American life over the last century. Now, they are partnering to shape the future.

“We are at a remarkable moment when all factors have come into play for the first time and have caught public attention,” says Dan Reicher of Google. Jim Boyd, Vice-Chair and lead commissioner for fuels policy on the California Energy Commission, believes “there is a convergence in California of government policy and public attitudes. This is the right issue at the right time.”

Steve Specker, CEO of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) says: “Looking into the far future, I am an optimist. Looking at the next decade, I am a realist. There are tough issues to tackle. Looking at today, I am an activist. We need to continue to move consumer awareness and acceptance of EVs ahead.”

Lessons learned about market deployment of hybrids and electrics tell us that research on travel behavior is relevant. Consumer research tells us niche markets (i.e., the Prius) provide strong customer identity. Other key ingredients to EV and alternative fuel vehicle adoption include regulatory initiatives, financial incentives, retail practices, and infrastructure.

Electric cars can either be seen as an adjustment people avoid making, or an opportunity for consumer involvement. Ed Kjaer, Director of Transportation for Southern California Edison (SCE), sees a shift underway from the “passive customer” to the “informed customer” who understands cause and effect in the energy system, to the “empowered customer” who is an active player in a distributed energy system.

Kjaer envisions a time when the smart grid links to a smart meter, a connected home, and a PHEV. “Customers will be able to control their energy load through a rich menu of information and technology devices that tell them how much they are using and strategies to reduce it.”

One important tool to help “make a market” is through economies of scale that drive prices down and make EVs competitive is fleet purchases by government and major companies. Fleets are a key enabler. They drive market solutions that will support mass solutions.

Status: SCE has the largest EV fleet in the nation – 260 vehicles, with 12 million miles of travel. The State of California’s ZEV mandate has resulted in much cleaner vehicles

54 across its fleet, validating the boldness of the law. The City of San Jose is committed to replace its fleet with alternative fuel vehicles.

Government has a role to play – in this case to support technologies that enable consumers to “go green.” In the corporate sector, decision-making on fleet purchases by FedEx, UPS, USPS is the subject of a dissertation by Kevin Nesbit at UC Davis.

The Transportation Sustainability Research Center (TSRC) at UC Berkeley has examined response to EVs, gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles from a behavioral perspective. The research has been done in close collaboration with Toyota, Nissan, and Mercedes Benz. Studies have focused on behavioral response to these vehicles over time and in fleet settings (e.g., carsharing).

Financing: A widely varied mix of government, university, and auto industry and electric utility sources.

Contact: Tom Turrentine, Director, PHEV Center, UC Davis (530) 752-6500 [email protected]

Ed Kjaer, Director of Transportation Programs, Southern California Edison

Susan Shaheen, Co-Director, Transportation Sustainability Research Center, UC Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Tim Lipman, Co-Director, Transportation Sustainability Research Center, UC Berkeley (510) 642-4501 [email protected]

Concept: Cleaner diesel – West Coast Collaborative

Description: A variety of tools can be utilized to reduce diesel emissions relative to goods movement needs. While not strictly an “alternative propulsion technology,” cleaner diesel can significantly change the way these power systems operate and perform.

Specifics: Diesel engine emissions contribute to ozone (“smog”), air toxics, and fine particulates that are associated with heart and lung disease, asthma, and other adverse health effects including lung-cancer from long-term exposure. A particular concern is asthma in children, who are more susceptible due to their more rapid breathing rate. Because of these effects, most Western states have made diesel emission reduction a public health priority.

The West Coast Collaborative is a partnership among al levels of government, the private sector, and environmental groups along the West Coast whose goal is to strategically

55 reduce diesel emissions by focusing on the most polluting engines and applying the most cost-effective use of funds to reduce air pollution and improve public health.

Status: Collaborative partners are implementing specific programs for large-scale, regional diesel emission reduction focused on locomotive and truck engine idling; port shoreline engine retrofits, on-shore power (cold ironing), and ship-based emission reduction; cleaner fueling infrastructure for ports, rail and trucks; and construction equipment retrofits and cleaner fuels for large-scale highway projects (in partnership with Federal highways’ congestion mitigation and air quality program.

Financing: Since June 2004, US EPA has granted over $14 million in funding, leveraging more than $40 million from Collaborative partners to implement over 90 projects along the West Coast. The Collaborative has over 1,000 partners and has reached out to Canada and Mexico to address reduction of diesel emissions.

The health benefits from diesel emission reduction outweigh program costs by an estimated 13-to-1 ratio. For every federal dollar the Collaborative spends on the effort, partners contribute one to ten times that amount.

The 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes $300 million in grant funding for cleaner diesel programs. Each state will be awarded about $1.75 million, or 30% of total funding, to create work plans for the program. The remaining 70% - $156 million – will be distributed through a competition whose categories include deployment of EPA-certified clean diesel technologies, emerging clean-diesel technologies, and clean diesel financing programs based on low-cost revolving loans or other tools to finance fleet reductions of diesel emissions.

Contact: Peter Murchie, US EPA (503) 326-6654 [email protected] Website : www.westcoastcollaborative.org

Concept: Cleaner diesel – Cascade Sierra Solutions

Description: Cascade Sierra Solutions (CSS) is a non-profit organization that works in partnership with the West Coast Collaborative to reduce fuel use and emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines. CSS operates in Washington, Oregon and California with a primary focus on the Interstate 5 corridor.

Specifics: Diesel engine emission control technologies include:

• Oxidation catalyst – converts pollutants into harmless gases by means of oxidation. • Particulate filters – permit gases to pass through but trap particulates. • Exhaust gas recirculation, catalytic reduction, and traps – reduces or converts NOx. • Fuel additives – serve as catalysts for reductions in particulates and hydrocarbons. • Low-viscosity lubricants – reduce engine, transmission and drive train friction.

56 • Alternative diesel fuels – can reduce emissions, used solely or in combination.

Apart from power train technologies, a variety of proven tools for saving fuel and reducing emissions exist. At its outreach centers, CSS display products and strategies that address the following aspects of truck operation:

• Idle reduction. On-board systems such as APU’s (auxiliary power units) provide heating, cooling, and electricity to the cab without requiring the diesel engine to idle at rest stops or overnight. Truck plazas with a ground source can allow trucks to draw power for these purposes.

• Improved aerodynamics. An entire range of retrofits can reduce drag on both the tractor and trailer by a variety of fairings and other add-ons that cut air resistance and air turbulence. These features are built into newer trucks.

• Tire inflation and configuration. An automatic tire inflation (ATI) systems on drive and trailer wheels can generally pay for itself in just over two years by decreasing fuel consumption and the risk of tire failure due to under-inflation. Also, single wide-base tires save fuel by reducing vehicle weight, rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag.

Status: Through partnerships including the West Coast Collaborative and the National Diesel Emissions Reduction Program, and through its Outreach Centers, Cascade Sierra Solutions helps raise awareness in the trucking industry of technologies that reduce emissions and fuel consumption, and save money. CSS also takes an active role in helping the industry make the capital investments required to apply these technologies (see next section).

Financing: Many trucking fleets and truck owners do not have the initial capital to invest in upgrades. CSS seeks to overcome this barrier by coordinating available incentives, assisting with grant and tax credit applications, offering federally funded rebates and other incentives, and offering affordable leasing and financing options. Use of each tool is based on demonstrating an attractive return on investment to the trucking company owner.

Contact: Sharon Banks, President Cascade Sierra Solutions (503) 302-0900 [email protected] Website: www. cascadesierrasolutions.org

Concept: “Bridge to a Better Future” vehicle exchange program

Description: Cascade Sierra Solutions (CSS) proposes to take recent-vintage used trucks that no longer meet California’s stricter emission requirements, recondition them for improved fuel economy and exhaust control, and sell them at reasonable prices to Northwest operators so they can retire older trucks. The exchange will reduce diesel

57 pollution by 80%, greenhouse gas emissions by 16 tons, and fuel consumption by 1,200 gallons per truck per year.

Specifics: By national law, all diesel truck engines built before 2007 need to be upgraded or replaced by 2016. Port drayage is a special concern because it typically relies on older trucks to make short hauls in dense urban areas. By state law, Southern California ports must retire pre-2004 trucks immediately. Prior to this exchange program, these trucks were simply being destroyed. The program enables Northwest ports to get 500 of their most polluting (pre-1994) trucks off the road and replace them with refurbished California trucks leased to currently eligible Washington operators.

Status: CSS has applied to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for a policy ruling that authorizes the program. CARB has held off until at least May 2009 in setting guidelines due to a lack of state funding for purchase of older trucks.

Financing: A public-private partnership coordinated by Cascade Sierra Solutions includes US EPA; the West Coast Collaborative; Washington state, municipal and port agencies; and private financing. The intent is to offer qualified applicants operating leases at $350-450 per month, $100 of which will be invested in an interest-bearing account to be used for down-payment by the lessee on purchase of a 2007 or newer truck when required.

Contact: Sharon Banks, President Cascade Sierra Solutions (503) 302-0900 [email protected] Website: www. cascadesierrasolutions.org

Concept: Cleaner diesel - American Trucking Association

Description: The ATA recognizes and endorses the following steps to reducing diesel emissions per ton-mile of goods movement:

1) Engine upgrades and retrofits (for specifics, see Cascade Sierra Solutions, above).

2) Setting fuel economy standards and limiting maximum speeds. The ATA supports national fuel economy standards for trucks. A truck traveling at 75 mph consumes 27 percent more fuel than at 65 mph. The ATA has endorsed setting a national speed limit of 65 mph and installing speed governors on new trucks that limit speeds to 68 mph.

3) Utilizing more productive truck configurations and combinations. Because of a truck’s frontal mass and rear eddies of air, aerodynamic refinements significantly affect fuel use, as does proper tire inflation, especially on rear axles where more than half of fuel consumption is required.

58 4) A more controversial strategy is focused on the fact that a smaller number of large trucks moves a given cargo volume with less fuel than a larger number of small trucks. Constraints on this shift include weight limitations and safety concerns.

5) “Smart driver” skills related to fuel efficiency begin with selecting an engine that has the proper torque – more important than horsepower to get the truck moving. Other skills include proper shifting between gears without going to a higher rpm, and gearing to maintain a given speed with minimal fuel use or even by coasting, avoiding overuse of compression brakes and the resulting need to accelerate to regain speed, and reducing idling time through use of alternative power units (APUs) and automatic engine shut-off.

6) Truck rest area and parking design is not mentioned by the ATA but could help. During rest periods, drivers often idle their engines to provide heat or air conditioning for the sleeper compartment, to keep the engine warm in cold weather, or to provide electrical power for vehicle appliances. Reducing or eliminating engine idling would be enabled by providing alternative power, ideally by plug-in electrical outlets.

Status: The American Trucking Association has recommended the above steps to its members – operators and drivers – through its website and other communications.

Financing: Funding for engine upgrades is limited (see example below). Fuel saving and the efficiencies will actually save operator and driver expenses.

Contact: American Trucking Association

Concept: Cleaner diesel – freight rail locomotives

Description: Recent improvements in diesel engine design approach breakthrough levels with 90 percent less particulate emissions and 50 percent less nitrogen oxides (NOx) than 20 years ago. New regulations will take NOx to a 90 percent reduction. Related to this are cleaner fuels, including ultra-low sulfur and bio-diesel that sharply reduces CO2 emissions.

Specifics: Advances in diesel technology apply to railroad locomotives as fully as to trucks. Indeed, in two regards, the importance of “greening” freight rail power may be even greater than for road vehicles.

First, the larger the platform, the more flexibility exists in installing new propulsion systems. Just as large trucks can accommodate power train and fuel system options not easily installed in light-duty vehicles, so railroad locomotives have the most flexible space layouts for new systems.

59 Next, rail is recognized as the most efficient and least polluting mode for moving long- haul freight, with a substantial advantage per ton-mile over highway freight movement. The economics have been recognized by large trucking firms, which have become freight railroads’ best customers. Freight is shipped to regional centers by rail and delivery within the regions is made by truck.

To fully capture the inherent cost and environmental advantage of rail requires applying the full range of advanced diesel engine technology to freight locomotives.

Status: The two dominant builders of heavy freight rail engines are Electro-Motive and GE. BNSF railroad recently purchased 200 GE engines that burn 20% less fuel than their predecessors. Electro-Motive cites advances in its latest-generation 4500 horsepower road engines of 25-45% reduction in NOx and 40-60% reduction in particulates. ElectroMotive also offers a midrange power unit with claimed fuel savings up to 25% and emission levels below current federal guidelines.

Railpower Hybrid Technologies builds EcoMotive, a selection of yard-and-road switching engines with up to 2800 horsepower based on “battery-dominant” and “genset” technologies. The latter includes liquid-cooled “choppers” that provide higher tractive effort in lower speed ranges. In 2007, EcoMotive received a EPA Clean Air excellence award.

Railpower also offers EcoCrane, the first container cargo handling technology based on use of “plug-and-play” hybrid power at ports. The crane uses battery pack energy to life container freight and reclaims the energy as the container is lowered.

Financing: Acquisition of cleaner diesel locomotives is primarily a business decision by long-haul, short-line, and site-specific (ports, rail yards) freight railroads negotiating purchase agreements with manufacturers.

Contact: ElectroMotive (800) 255-5355 website: www.EMDiesels.com

GE Locomotive

EcoMotive by Railpower Hybrid Technologies Corp. (814) 835-2212 website: railpower,com

Concept: Hybrid electric and natural gas trucks

Description: There is a high level of interest in green technology for vehicles, and none I potentially greener than large vehicles. Trucks and SUVs should be a top priority because they use more fuel, and they can accommodate larger batteries. Further, the success at ports with “cold ironing” makes truck stops early candidates for plug-in recharging capability.

60

Most hybrid vehicles combine an internal combustion engine (ICE) as the main power source and various secondary power and energy storage modes, including electric and hydraulic systems. Dual power systems enable the capture of energy otherwise lost during braking and use it to boost the main engine, enabling more efficient operation. Because of their larger size and more flexible layout capacity, truck platforms are more amenable than autos to dual-source hybrid power systems and to storage capacity for alternative fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), compressed natural gas (CNG) and hydrogen.

Specifics: Offerings in this field are burgeoning. Among notable examples:

Cummins Westport offers an LNG system for heavy trucks to combine the advantages of low-carbon, low-emission fuel and a price advantage of up to 25% - $1.97 per DEG vs. $1.62 per gallon in a March 2009 example. LNG fuel capacity is equivalent to 33 to 112 diesel equivalent gallons.

Natural gas is composed primarily of methane, which burns more cleanly than gasoline because it has more hydrogen and less carbon. Use of natural gas reduces NOx emissions 33% and greenhouse gases 20% below the same engine in a gas-powered mode, according to a 2007 US EPA and California ARB certification. Cummins plansd to meet new 2101 EPA standards by combining exhaust gas recirculation, particulate filters, selective catalytic reduction (SCR) and high pressure direct injection.

Kenworth is installing the 450 hp Westport ISX-G 15-litre engine as a factory-installed option in its “time-proven workhorse,” the T800 heavy truck. Kenworth says the result is lower fuel costs and reduced emissions without sacrificing horsepower or torque.

Kenworth also offers the T270 Class 6 and T370 Class 7 hybrids. These medium-duty trucks combine a PACCAR PX-6 300 hp gas engine with a 340-volt battery pack. The hybrid system includes an integral transmission-mounted motor-generator and a dedicated power management system to switch between the two modes of operation.

In slower traffic the parallel hybrid power system, developed with Eaton, acts as an electric motor utilizing power from the battery pack. “Regenerative braking” is used to generate and store electricity, which provides almost 60 horsepower with 310 ft/lbs of torque. Electrical power is then used to assist the diesel engine during acceleration. An electric power “take-off” option allows energy to be drawn from the batteries for off- engine operation.

Coca-Cola Corp. bought 120 of the initial run of hybrids in April 2008 and reported the vehicles increased fuel efficiency by 32 percent while reducing emissions by 37 percent.

Freightliner offers a hydraulic hybrid walk-in van chassis, a hybrid electric motor home chassis, and a hybrid electric commercial bus chassis. They combine a diesel ICE and an electric motor driven by lithium ion batteries. An “energy management system” selects

61 the most efficient mode at each point of operation. Freightliner notes that constant battery recharging through operation of the diesel engine and by regenerative braking results in “no need to plug into an electrical source to recharge batteries.”

Preliminary test results on the van chassis showed a 50-70% improvement in fuel economy in stop-and-go traffic, compared to all-diesel power with an automatic transmission. The vehicle can operate as a hybrid or in an engine-off, all-electric mode. Options including idle-off and air brakes provide 8 -9% of the fuel economy gains. The platform is certified for EPA 2010 emission requirements.

EVI offers a light truck with 170 – 240 horsepower based on an LNG / CNG / gas powered ICE plus lithium phosphate or lead acid batteries. It also offers a 2-person all- electric utility vehicle with a 40-mile range, 35 mph maximum speed and 1500 kg (3300 lb) cargo capacity on a flatbed.

EV Power Systems is focusing on trucks, which consume more power than autos. Their basic rule is, don’t change the power train or emission controls. Design the retrofit so it is transferable. EV’s equipment fits behind the transmission and looks like a GM dual-kit system with the casing removed. It is based on intercepting a signal from the pedal to the control panel.

Balqon in 2007 began work on the prototype of the world’s most powerful short-range heavy-duty electric truck. Funded by the and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the truck is now in use at the Port and is capable of hauling a fully loaded 40-foot container with zero emissions. Performance includes a top speed of 40 mph, a maximum range of 60 miles empty and 40 miles loaded, and a full-charging time of 3-4 hours. In 2009, the Port placed an order with Balqon for five on-road electric drayage trucks and 20 electric container terminal tractors.

UPS is beginning to test a new technology for its delivery trucks. An assembly of pumps, tanks and high-pressure hydraulic fluids replace the transmission so that during acceleration the truck burns no gas. Instead, hydraulic fluid stored in a high-pressure tank powers a pump motor that turns the truck’s axle. When the truck is running at steady speed, the diesel engine re-pressurizes the fluid, as does the capture of kinetic energy when the truck is braking.

The Northwest Hybrid Truck Consortium is a project of the West Coast Collaborative to purchase 10 of the cleanest hybrid diesel-electric utility trucks available. These trucks will produce nearly 40% fewer greenhouse gas emissions and up to one-third fewer soot and smog related emissions by shutting off their engines and using battery power in the field. The new hybrid technology could also add up to 60% in fuel economy. The project is among the first to apply this technology to utility fleet vehicles.

The consortium was formed by King County (Seattle), Washington in 2005 and now includes the entire Central Puget Sound region. The Consortium is working with

62 WestStart-CALSTART, a non-profit that has developed a hybrid truck commercialization strategy with truck manufacturers, technology companies and fleet operators.

Financing: The following are examples of hybrid economics drawn from above sources:

Kenworth. The company estimates that a hybrid truck can cost $40,000 more than a conventional unit with similar specifications, but that premium will be paid off in four to five years by reduced fuel consumption of up to 50% in the utility version. Estimates are based on gas mileage of 10 mpg for its medium-duty hybrids versus 6 mpg for a gas-only counterpart.

Balqon. The drayage model is priced at $208,000 while the yard hostler is $189,000. Purchase of these vehicles is funded as part of a $15 million, five-year Technology Advancement Program (TAP) as part of the Clean Air Action Plan of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

UPS. The UPS technology was developed by US EPA scientist Charles Gray. After studying his work, UPS concluded the technology would add about $7,000 to the $40,000-50,000 base cost per truck. But EPA said savings could be as much as $50,000, with CO2 reductions of 30% or more. After reviewing this analysis, UPS decided to proceed with test deployment.

The Northwest Hybrid Truck Consortium project leverages $250,000 from US EPA with $1.5 million from members of the Consortium.

Contact: Wayne Elson, US EPA (206) 553-1463 [email protected]

Tony Brown, EPA (206) 553-1203 [email protected]

Cummins Westport (604) 264-4734 [email protected] website: LNGtrucks.westport.com

[email protected] (213) 324-6498

Kenworth Truck Co. (425) 828-5000

[email protected] (323) 278-4103

Freightliner Custom Chassis Corp. (800) 545-8831 website: freightlinerchassis.com

63

EVI Art Robins, VP – Operations (877) 435-1999 [email protected]

Concept: Sustainable Transportation Energy Pathways (STEP)

Description: An almost total reliance of the U.S. transportation system on oil is increasingly at odds with considerations of energy security, long-term energy supply, national balance-of-payments, and greenhouse gas impacts on global climate change. Alternative forms of energy appear to be an inevitable element in sustainable transportation. Yet, each potential alternative involves technology development, vehicle and infrastructure deployment, and consumer acceptance.

Status: STEP is a four-year outreach and research program intended to address the logistical, operational, and technical problems associated with an alternative fuel-based economy.

The main objectives are to develop methods, theories, and tools for consistent, and transparent comparisons of alternative energy and vehicle pathways, and to apply these tools to compare four pathways based on hydrogen, electricity, bio-fuels and fossil fuels,

The hydrogen pathway is the most advanced, due to a research and outreach and research program (2003-2006) that addressed logistical, operational, and technical issues associated with the transition to a hydrogen-based system. Four research tracks were covered: analysis and design of fuel distribution infrastructure; economic and environmental analyses; market analyses and forecasts for infrastructure and vehicles; and pathways and scenarios. To achieve results in each track, there were five tasks completed.

The first task was vehicle demand analysis – purchasing behavior, regional characteristics, response to vehicle fueling schemes, timing, and potential niche markets for hydrogen fuel cells in auxiliary power units (APUs), heavy duty transit, internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, and fleet purchases.

The second task was a design analysis of hydrogen fuel distribution infrastructure (cost, operational issues, technology) This was the principal activity of the whole program. Key research areas included infrastructure network, interaction with electricity systems, real- life capacity, logistics, transport constraints (right of way and sitting).

Based on this analysis, a hydrogen business and policy strategy was adopted by major stakeholders as the basis for transition to a hydrogen economy. Reports were published describing this strategy.

64 The fourth task was estimating the cost, energy requirements, and environmental impacts of hydrogen pathways. Air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions and lifecycle costs characterize this analysis. The goal was to study the policy implications and value propositions of a hydrogen economy.

The fifth task included potential special projects such as hydrogen production technologies and infrastructure sitting technologies. Research conducted under the Hydrogen Pathways Program summarizes the hydrogen tract including investigation of electricity/hydrogen systems, the impact of alternative policies, infrastructure development strategies, and regional transition case studies.

The bio-fuels pathway will explore the work of California Biomass Collective at the University of California, Davis, including the analysis of bio-refinery production systems, environmental and land-use impacts, infrastructure strategies, and vehicle analysis.

The electricity track includes production methods, time-of-day charging impacts, and total grid capacity. Research will also be done on consumer behavior and preferences for electric drive attributes, including all-electric vehicle range and charging times.

The fossil fuels track addresses petroleum-based fuels as the dominant form of transportation energy, and the potential for sources, including coal with carbon sequestration, oil shale, and tar sands.

In a separate but related research project, Caltrans, PATH and Mercedes-Benz Research and Development North America, Inc. are studing the processes involved in operating hybrid fuel-cell electric vehicles in a fleet setting, including support for a fueling infrastructure.

The study will use Mercedes-Benz's "F-Cell" vehicle equipped with a hybridized fuel cell and a battery power system coupled with an electronic motor/power controller propulsion system.

The project will include "ride-n'-drive" clinics in Sacramento and Richmond, California with approximately 100 participants at each site. Caltrans and PATH will arrange focus groups to assess the response to hydrogen cars and infrastructure. Additional focus groups will be arranged with carsharing participants and a plan for a next phase "pilot program" will be developed.

Financing: The hydrogen pathway program was funded by auto companies (General Motors, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Subaru), Caltrans, government agencies (USDOT, EPA, DOE, Natural Resources Canada), and energy companies (BP, Chevron, Shell Hydrogen, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, PG&E, TOTAL, Sempra Energy, Indian Oil, Air Products, and Petrabras). The ongoing program is funded by the same group of companies and agencies.

65

Contact: Joan Ogden, Director, Sustainable Transportation Energy Pathways (STEP), UC Davis (530) 752-2768 [email protected]

Daniel Sperling, Director Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Davis (530) 752-7434 [email protected]

Susan Shaheen, Co-Director Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley (510) 665-3483 [email protected]

Timothy Lipman, Assistant Research Engineer Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley [email protected]

Concept: Algae as a bio-fuel

Description: A group of researchers and investors believe fast-growing strains of algae could hold the key to the future of the bio-fuel industry.

Specifics: Algae multiplies rapidly, contains large amounts of vegetable oil, can be grown in brackish and saline environments that support almost no other commercial activity, and does not have a competing use as a foodstuff when used as a fuel.

Status: Allied Minds, a Boston-based private investment firm that specializes in licensing university research, has teamed with University of Washington biology professor Rose Ann Cattolico to launch start-up company AXI to create fast-growing strains of algae for use as a bio-fuel.

A number of operators in the bio-fuels industry think algae reactors could produce far higher yields than soybeans or corn, making bio-fuels commercially viable while avoiding the economic and moral issues involved in “food for fuel” uses.

Allied Minds Vice President Erik Rabins says the intent is for AXI to become the primary supplier of algae strains for the algae-to-biofuel industry, using Cattolico’s method to improve the growth rate and energy productivity of virtually any strain of algae. AXI, formerly Voltan Biofuel, won thew award for the best clean-tech idea at UW’s Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2008 competition.

Other Seattle-area firms are pursuing related breakthroughs. Bionvitas is focused on producing micro-algae in high volumes; Indenture, on algae-to-fuel conversion; Blue

66 Marble Industry on marine algae harvest methods. The region’s largest firm, the Boeing Company, says algae could become one of the most promising sources of jet bio-fuel for the aviation industry.

Financing: University research and private funds.

Contact: Rose Ann Cattolico, Professor of Biology, University of Washington, and Director, Cattolico Laboratories (206) 9363 / (206) 543-1627

Concept: Interstate 5 alternative fuels corridor

Description: About 95% of U.S. transport relies on petroleum-based fuels. Hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles are being developed but a limited retail market for purchasing the fuels they require is a constraint on the purchase of these vehicles.

In 2008, Washington, Oregon and California launched a three-state effort to explore the possibility of developing state-owned land at highway rest areas in the Interstate 5 corridor as sites that would offer incentives for service station operators to sell alternative fuels. Knowledge of this intent was a factor in the USDOT designation of I-5 as a “Corridor of the Future” in 2007.

Specifics: In August 2008, the three state DOTs filed an application with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to qualify the I-5 alternative fuels corridor as Special Experimental Project (SEP) Number 15 in the category, “Explore Alternative and Innovative Approaches to Overall Project Development Process.”

As part of the application, a waiver was requested to remove a prohibition on the use of land within the right-of-way of a federal highway for “automotive service stations” or other private commercial operations and lift certain restrictions on the use of safety rest areas (SRAs). SEP-15 approval would have been the most direct course to obtaining the waiver.

The National Association of Truck Stop Operators (NATSO) saw the pilot project as a competitive threat and urged FHWA to deny the waiver. A well-organized interest group, NATSO had successfully lobbied Congress to repeal part of the previous transportation appropriations bill that contained the authority and program to allow truck electrification projects.

In November 2008, the states filed a project description with FHWA that emphasized the intent to minimize competitive issues. The filing said the proposal would exclude conventional fuel sales in all locations, and would not provide sites in areas that already had “an established retail distribution network” for alternative fuels. It excluded motor vehicle repair, lodging, and sale of alcoholic beverages from co-located commercial services. It promised full input from local businesses near each site. It stressed that the

67 project was transitional to a new fuels era rather than a permanent presence in the marketplace.

Status: In January 2009, the states were informed by USDOT of a compromise solution to approve the project as part of the Interstate Oasis Program, whose guidance principles can be amended through the Federal Register. A 30-60 day public comment period was set for February and March. USDOT stated its intention to make the revisions in the Oasis program necessary to approve the project after this process was complete.

Financing:

Contact: Jeff Doyle, Director, Public/Private Partnerships, Washington Department of Transportation (360) 705-7023 [email protected]

James Whitty, Director Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding Oregon Department of Transportation (503) 986-4284 [email protected]

Barbara Lewis, Office Chief, Innovative Finance Division of Budgets, California Department of Transportation (916) 653-8344 [email protected]

Concept: Alternative fuels corridor economic feasibility

Description: In support of the tri-state effort, the Office of Public/Private Partnerships of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) commissioned PB Consultants to evaluate the economic feasibility of an alternative fuel corridor in the Washington portion of I-5. PB delivered its final report to WSDOT on January 23, 2009.

Specifics: Using data based on industry experience for 2007, the consultants developed an economic model of the typical gas station. They found that a typical station annually sold $4.1 million in gasoline at a 6% profit margin ($233,000) while the convenience store at the station generated $1.4 million in revenue at a 31% margin (440,000). Average annual operating costs for the combined facility were $533,000 including credit card fees. Thus, net revenues averaged $230,000. The cost to open a retail gas station averaged $2.0 – 2.4 million depending on location.

These costs and cash flows were used to model a lease-based transaction between the operator and the state, based on cost-sharing of site development and risk-sharing on cash flow outcomes. Financial models were also adjusted for specific types of alternative fuels including ethanol, bio-diesel, electricity, and hydrogen (compressed natural gas was not part of the analysis). The analysis evaluated the degree to which supply chain constraints on each fuel type would affect cost competitiveness and availability of product.

68

A crucial factor impacting consumer willingness to rely on a network of alternative fueling stations is spacing – the ability of the I-5 corridor to provide a sufficient number of stations to ensure that drivers can use the corridor for extended trips outside urban areas. The study’s “station spacing analysis” used 350 miles as a reference point for gasoline-powered vehicles and set bio-diesel at 400 miles, ethanol at 250 miles, hydrogen at 120 – 300 miles, and electric vehicles at 60 – 200 miles.

I-5 in Washington State spans 275 miles, which means in most cases an alternative fuel vehicle could traverse the state with one fueling event. The need for some redundancy is counterbalanced by the fact that “the stations contemplated in this study are not meant to compete with existing or future stations on non-state owned land. As such, a limited number of stations in more rural locations is preferable” – assuming a larger concentration of wholly private stations in urban areas.

The study found specific rest area sites based on a “conservative” limit of 120 miles between facilities. Then the study described the infrastructure features of each type of fueling and its relation to other on-site retail services, which were deliberately constrained to minimize direct competition with commercial gas stations and truck stops.

Status: The Washington State study will be combined with parallel research efforts in California to create a comprehensive picture of requirements and optimal design features on an alternative fuels corridor covering the entire length of Interstate 5.

Financing: The study examined the probable degree of required state and private participation in developing and operating the network. It assumed an alternative fuel station would need a 15% annual internal rate of return (IRR). Where modeling showed an IRR below this level, the state could make an up-front contribution to capital costs of station development. Where the IRR was projected above 15%, the state could collect a fixed percent of revenue as part of the rent paid by the operator for use of state land.

PB Consulting projected bio-fuels stations would reach positive cash flow in 5 – 6 years while electric and hydrogen stations would require 8 – 10 years to become profitable. The strongest profit performance for reaching an IRR above 15% was projected to be an “all- fuels” station that provided bio-diesel, ethanol, electric and hydrogen refueling. This finding especially fits the profile of a small network of stations located on state land.

The study concludes by reviewing the challenge of gaining a consensus from governments with permitting authority, service providers with profitability goals, and consumers with reliability needs.

Contact: Jeff Doyle, Director, Public/Private Partnerships, Washington Department of Transportation (360) 705-7023 [email protected]

69 V. Law & Regulation (L/R)

Concept: Seamless weigh station pre-clearance of trucks

Description: Create a national policy for truck transponders used in pre-clearance systems so any regulatory compliant truck can be weighed-in-motion and signaled to proceed past open weigh stations without stopping. Congress can act to mandate transponder interoperability across jurisdictions to allow for seamless freight movement on major highway and trade corridors such as Interstate 5.

Specifics: Many states operate weigh station pre-clearance systems utilizing high-speed weigh-in-motion scales, automatic vehicle identification equipment and on-board transponders that serve as two way communication devices between the roadside and the truck, providing the functional equivalent of an “electronic license plate” for trucks to transmit and receive signals as they approach weigh stations.

These systems save motor carriers time and the cost of fuel by eliminating millions of unnecessary stops. They save states money by increasing weigh station capacity without a need to expand static platform scales, allowing better management of the growing stream of truck traffic and help states enforce safety regulations by screening trucks to determine which need inspection. Pre-0clearance systems also contribute to reduced vehicle emissions affecting human health and climate change.

Some states see so much value in pre-clearance that they provide transponders at no cost to truck operators who regularly stop at weigh stations. But restrictive policies create interstate inefficiencies that force regulatory compliant trucks to stop at weigh stations because pre-clearance system providers in some states do not allow other states to read and interact with the transponders they have issued.

The PrePass pre-clearance program used in 28 states is run by a non-profit public-private partnership called HELP Inc. – Heavy Electronic License Plate. HELP has a restrictive policy that prevents its transponders from being enrolled in any other system, such as Oregon’s Green Light or the NORPASS system used in Washington, six other states and two provinces. This limitation is despite the fact that Green Light and NORPASS have both stated that they would freely allow Prepass transponders to freely enroll and operate in their respective systems.

As a result, regulatory compliant motor carriers with a PrePass transponder get a red light as they approach Oregon Green Light or Washington NORPASS weigh stations. Their only recourse is to turn in their Prepass transponder back to Prepass and obtain a free Green Light transponder that can be enrolled in any system including a Prepass.

Moreover, states including California that are under contract with PrePass are prohibited from accessing and sharing information for safety or other enforcement purposes with other states or with operators regarding pre-cleared trucks.

70

Despite some marketing claims, trucks with transponders in states that access the bypass event data are not subject to increased regulatory scrutiny? For example, through the Green Light system ODOT simply records the same license plate information it manually records each time a truck pulls into a weigh station. Transponder-equipped trucks actually get less scrutiny than other trucks. One of the main reasons ODOT uses the Green Light system is to identify safe and legal carriers, and allow them to continue uninterrupted. As a result, ODOT can concentrate on trucks that may need more attention.

Status: The USDOT’s Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks program (CVISN) was designed to ensure that states deploy interoperable systems. But the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has not addressed the impasse over transponders.

The June 26, 2000, edition of Transport Topics covered this issue. It quoted Mike Onder, Information Technology Systems Program Manager for USDOT: “They market to [trucking] that this information is private. When they sign up with a state, they agree [the state] won’t get access to the data. That goes against the CVISN architecture. PrePass is hurting inter-operability.”

The magazine also quoted Jeff Secrist, CVISN Coordinator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration: “(Truckers) want to be able to travel unencumbered nationwide without coping with different pre-clearance programs. From a safety perspective, there’s a major benefit in sharing information . . . so that unsafe vehicles can’t travel between states. HELP - PrePass doesn’t allow other systems to have access to its data. And that means it can’t be compliant.”

FMCSA has the ability to require that states comply with all legitimate data requests to support driver hours-of-service enforcement efforts and can make such compliance a condition of states continuing to be eligible to receive federal grant dollars from the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program.

Whether a state has made use of such data in regulatory enforcement is not the question. The question is whether state and federal investigators who have historically made legitimate use of such data should be increasingly denied such data.

Absent FMCSA exercising clear authority, there are two other alternative courses of action to achieve seamless pre-clearance for trucks.

Alternative I – Enactment by Congress of federal legislation with these provisions:

1) Declare that transponders must be freely interoperable among jurisdictions and pre- clearance systems that weigh and identify U.S, trucks should be integrated, consistent with the CVISN program.

71 2) Clarify that states may enroll any interoperable transponder for legitimate regulatory purposes and may allow their authorized employees to enroll and use transponders for such purposes, including the receipt of signals that link its unique identifier to a motor carrier’s records, at the request of the carrier.

3) Declare that weigh station records, whether collected electronically or manually, must be available for states’ legitimate regulatory enforcement purposes.

Alternative II – Utilize technology advancements to retire transponders as the basis of vehicle identification, replacing them with RFID identification chips and/or license plate readers. These would be used in combination with roadside reader boards to communicate weight station bypass decisions to drivers approaching an open scale, thus achieving the goals of seamless pre-clearance and authorized record-keeping. (Such an approach would retain provisions of the above legislation relating to these goals).

The vehicle license plate has long been a unique identifier. By shifting from manual to electronic license-plate readers (LPRs), states could utilize sophisticated optical character recognition plate-reading ability that can digitize alpha-numeric characters into a data base.

Another tool that can be used simultaneously is the RFID chip – a radio frequency identification device attached to the plate for verification. RFID is employed globally for cargo container identification. With RFID, the element of communication back to the driver necessary for pre-clearance operations would need to be addressed by addition of a roadside reader board.

Financing: The proposed legislation outlined above as Alternative 1 creates no significant cost issues. States and carriers are already paying for transponders. Moreover, inter-operability may bring down unit costs through standardization of transponder design.

Alternative number two would obsolete a substantial investment in transponders and AVI devices, and would require new investment in replacement technology. If pre-clearance is license plate based, motor carriers would have added costs but some states might achieve offsetting personnel cost savings and/or cost avoidance opportunities by replacing manual with electronic plate reading.

Contact: David McKane, Green Light Manager Motor Carrier Transportation Division Oregon Department of Transportation (503) 373-0884 [email protected]

Anne Ford, Administrator, Commercial Vehicle Services Washington State Department of Transportation (360) 705-7341 [email protected]

72 Stan Norikane, Data Weigh-in-Motion California Department of Transportation (916) 654-5651 [email protected]

Concept: Inductive signature-based commercial vehicle classification system

Description: This research study by the University of California - Irvine yielded (1) the development and prototype implementation of a new high-fidelity inductive loop sensor called the Blade; and (2) a ground-breaking commercial vehicle classification system based on vehicle “signatures” obtained from the Blade inductive sensor technology.

The Blade couples with advanced signature-based inductive loop detector cards to yield detailed vehicle signatures that show distinct wheel spikes that indicate the location of axle assemblies.

Using advanced numerical analysis methods, these signatures were used to provide accurate and comprehensive classification of commercial vehicles. The detail of classification is unprecedented, due to the system’s ability to profile individual components of multi-unit vehicles by their axle and, more importantly, body configuration. This detail provides the potential to yield useful insights on travel behavior and the impacts of different commercial vehicle types associated with various industrial activities.

The unique configuration of Blade inductive sensors also allows accurate inductive signature data to be recoverable even in stop-and-go situations where acceleration and deceleration effects can potentially distort signature data and affect surveillance accuracy.

Specifics: This study solved the problem of obtaining reliable inductive signature data under adverse traffic conditions, such as those found in peak freeway congestion periods and in arterial streets heavily influenced by intersection delays.

Where previously vehicle inductive signatures would be irreversibly distorted by acceleration or deceleration effects, they are now corrected and usable. This is essential in freeway applications, where there has been tremendous interest in obtaining accurate performance measures that have not been previously available under peak congestion periods when the vehicle signature quality degrades due to acceleration-deceleration distortion. Correction is achieved by applying the SPRINTS transformation model developed through Blade research, and paves the way for accurate traffic performance measurements to reveal accurately the severity of congestion and delay experienced on freeways as well as arterial networks.

Until now, the classification system that best combines reliability and detail is the axle- based FHWA scheme F using automated vehicle classifiers. However, this system still leaves a void in the comprehensive understanding of commercial vehicle travel behavior and impacts, due to their inherent heterogeneity. The newly developed classification

73 system yields a more detailed axle classification scheme with axle classification accuracy of ninety-nine percent shown on an independent test data set.

More importantly, the new system introduces body unit classification schemes consisting of nine drive-unit body configurations and ten trailer-unit body configurations, revealing detailed information regarding the function of the drive and trailer units of each commercial vehicle.

Status: In the study, many of the nine classes were under-represented in the model development data set. Hence, the real-world heterogeneity of vehicles within those classes may not be well represented, and could result in high rates of misclassification. This suggests that the commercial vehicle classification system will require further calibration with a larger and more comprehensive data set before implementation.

The results obtained from this study indicate remarkable potential for providing enhanced commercial vehicle profile analysis through the implementation of this system. Such information is critical to reveal exposure rates and travel behavior of specific commercial vehicle types to evaluate the multi-faceted impacts of commercial vehicle impacts.

The Blade inductive sensors used in this study are a prototype surface-mounted version, which has limited operational lifespan suitable only for research purposes. The specifications for a permanent version of the inductive sensors are currently being developed to allow Blade to be functionally deployed on the roadway to provide the benefits of enhanced commercial vehicle surveillance that were demonstrated in this research study.

Financing: California Department of Transportation, University of California Transportation Center

Contact: Stephen G. Ritchie, Director Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Irvine (949) 824-4214 [email protected]

Yeow Chern Andre Tok, Postdoctoral Scholar Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Irvine [email protected]

Concept: Highway user taxation based on miles driven (VMT)

Description: The total context of concern about basing highway financing on a motor fuel tax includes imported oil costs, energy security, greenhouse gases, and “peak oil,” with the implied need for conservation. Policy is conflicted, since it both relies on and

74 seeks to reduce the use of petroleum-based fuels. Thus there is national interest in a mileage-based tax.

Specifics: The transportation commission chairs of California, Oregon and Washington recently cosigned a letter to members of Congress urging that federal law encourage states to develop alternative methods of highway funding such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) fees.

"We ask Congress to confirm the feasibility of a VMT-based fee system by mandating the federal government to fully explore a transition from the gas tax to a funding system tied more directly to road use and impact on the road system," the chairs wrote. They noted that fluctuating fuel prices and reduced fuel consumption make fuel taxes an unreliable and unsuitable funding source.

The trio called upon Congress to “set an aggressive timetable” for completion of a new VMT-based fee system “through well funded research and development efforts to identify the best option for system design and technology."

The three transportation commission chairs are John Chalker of California, Gail Achterman of Oregon and Dan O'Neal of Washington. They are the top policymakers on transportation in the three states, and they collaborate as the West Coast Transportation Commission.

VMT fees are a centerpiece recommendation in a report just released by a bipartisan national transportation finance commission and U.S. transportation secretary Ray LaHood has said he favors VMT fees as a substitute for the gasoline tax, which is yielding insufficient to fund roads.

The day after LaHood spoke in favor of the road use tax, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said a VMT "is not and will not be the policy of the Obama administration." It is not clear whether the cause of this internal dispute can be resolved by treating VMT fees as a phased-in source of revenue rather than as an immediate replacement for the gas tax.

The chairs’ letter outlines the results of the Oregon pilot program in which nearly 300 vehicles driven by volunteer citizens were equipped with GPS based units and charged for miles traveled. "This test demonstrated the mileage fee raises substantial revenue in a way that is relatively simple to pay, collect and administer - without revenue erosion for fuel efficiency," they noted.

A similar project in the Puget Sound area that deducted fees from prepaid accounts showed that such a fee "directly impacts travel decisions and reduces congestion, while raising transportation revenue" the letter says.

They chairs believe a key conclusion from these two studies is that a VMT fee serves to advance several priorities simultaneously: reducing congestion, reducing emissions,

75 encouraging the use of alternate modes, and identifying a sustainable long-term funding methodology.

Status: The three states envisage a multi-state effort in the I-5 corridor to take the concept further towards implementation.

During 2006-07, a trial program in Portland equipped about 300 cars with passive receivers of satellite signals and a mileage reader, similar to a toll transponder reader that transmits a wireless communication to a database where mileage fees are applied. Drivers of these vehicles were taxed 1.2 ¢ per mile driven – equivalent to the state’s 24¢ gas tax on a car averaging 20 miles per gallon.

In addition to national concerns, the Oregon experiment is motivated in part by an intention to “be aggressive in terms of looking at electric cars and hybrids and plug-ins and all these options, and at the same time continue to invest in our roads and infrastructure,” according to Governor’s office spokesman Rem Nivens. Governor Kulongowski proposes expansion to $5,000 of Oregon’s already substantial tax credit for purchase of electric vehicles. Combined with federal subsidies, this would allow Oregonians to save up to $12,500 on the purchase of an all-electric car. Success of these incentives would accelerate declines in gas tax revenue.

The governor has proposed requiring installation of mileage-counting devices only in new vehicles and charging mileage only on Oregon roads. Drivers from outside the state would be charged the gas tax. However, the interstate aspect (especially given that Portland is a bi-state metro area) immediately raises the question of a federal policy that would affect manufacturers nationally. This prospect is increased by the fact that the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Rhode Island, Minnesota and Texas have also expressed interest in phasing out the gas tax and replacing it with a tax on miles driven.

Financing: Oregon has acknowledged that it would not be able to make the change without assistance from the federal government or a consortium of states. Oregon DOT has made a proposal to Congress that the next federal transportation authorization bill should set a six-year timetable to complete development of a mileage-based highway user tax system that would be implemented in the following six-year cycle.

This commitment would include funding to identify and design the best system and operating technology. The ODOT proposal calls for working groups within USDOT and an independent oversight body. The proposal also would give the USDOT Secretary authority to require on-board equipment in new vehicles to speed the transition to the new tax.

A sensitive political issue, notwithstanding apparent technical solutions, is assuring the privacy of trip information. Another important issue, as noted above, is whether the new tax would entirely replace or partly supplement motor fuel taxes for freight and/or personal vehicles.

76 Contact: John Chalker, Chair California Transportation Commission (916)

Gail Achterman, Chair, Oregon Transportation Commission (503)

Dan O'Neal, Chair Washington State Transportation Commission (360)

Jim Whitty, Manager, Transportation Operations Office of Innovative Partnerships & Alternative Funding Oregon Department of Transportation (503) 986-4284 [email protected]

Lynn Averbeck, Project Director Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding Oregon Department of Transportation (503) 731-4663 [email protected]

Concept: Distance and congestion-based dynamic pricing

Description: Vary highway user toll by a combined calculation based on distance traveled and level of congestion measured on a real-time basis.

Specifics: The San Diego Association of Governments has developed a nationally recognized application of variable tolling / value pricing on Interstate 15. Every few minutes, the automated system recalculates the toll rate based on the level of traffic in the I-15 corridor to make sure traffic flows freely in the Express Lanes.

Status: When another 8 miles of Express Lanes opened recently on I-15, a new distanced-based dynamic pricing system was also launched. Under this state-of-the-art system, transponder-equipped FasTrak customers accessing the Express Lanes pay a toll based on the distance they travel in the lanes and a rate per mile for their entry location, adjusted for level of congestion.

The toll rate posted on signs located just before each of the entrances to the Express Lanes will state the minimum toll drivers can expect to pay if they enter the facility, regardless of their eventual exit location. The signs also will advise on one or more possible fares for longer trips to upcoming freeway interchanges.

If traveling to a destination somewhere between the first possible exit point and the next major freeway interchange, the traveler can expect to pay a toll that falls between the

77 minimum and the toll to go all the way to the interchange.

The new FasTrak system is the most advanced in the world. A sophisticated identification system based on individual transponders tracks where and when each vehicle enters and exits the lanes, automatically calculates the toll, and flags violators for enforcement by the California Highway Patrol.

The eight miles of added Express Lanes on I-15 will have new conveniences including multiple entrances and exits, and an upgraded “dynamic tolling” system. Direct access ramps – another new feature – allow users to enter and exit the Express Lanes from the transit stations along I-15. The transit stations provide parking for carpoolers/vanpoolers and transit riders.

San Diego built strong support for the toll lanes by using part of the revenue for improved transit service, creating a win-win for three constituencies: drivers willing to pay a toll to save time in an express lane, drivers using general-purpose lanes that became less crowded, and transit riders who gained service improvements paid for by auto tolls.

Contact: Derek Toups, Project Manager Associate Regional Planner, San Diego Association of Governments Phone: (619) 699-1907 [email protected]

78 Conclusion

It is axiomatic that if the best of what is being done anywhere were being done everywhere, the system it serves would function well. The findings offered here describe best practices and best concepts. At the moment, they are far from universally applied.

The "Clean, Green and Smart" project is about the power of connection - not only connection among technologies, strategies and policies but connection among people who believe in an open-source environment to identify, develop and implement innovations.

A network such as this, with its vast range of content, can only be held together by the intelligence, energy and commitment of its participants. Working separately in specific areas of effort, we are united by an intention to make a major contribution that will help reconcile human mobility with environmental survival. The goal is to create a partnership between the planet and its people, applied through the unique West Coast spirit that combines high technology with high quality of life.

The intent of this document is to describe a specific path by which each of us may participate in building such a legacy. In the words of Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., "Each of us must be part of the great issues of our time, at the peril of being judged not to have lived." Thus the legacy is not only for the collective future but is personal history for each of us.

In our time, perhaps the greatest service we can perform is to connect large and complex bodies of knowledge with the sense of possibility about a preferred future – and then to provide a critical path for moving in that direction.

By combining creativity with discipline, the intent is to offer a "Clean, Green and Smart" Best Practices Manual structured for effectiveness and impact so that its contribution to our individual and collective legacy is solid and secure. If so, we will have done part of the necessary work.

79

80 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Wednesday, April 22, 2009 8:30 am Gary Gallegos, Chair

Agenda

ITEM # ACTION

1. WELCOME (Gary Gallegos, Chair)

2. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA

+3. MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 11, 2009, MEETING APPROVE

The minutes from the WCCC March 11, 2009, meeting are attached.

+4. MEETING DATES AND LOCATIONS FOR 2009 APPROVE (Jim Gosnell, WCCC)

The Board of Directors is asked to reconsider the dates and locations for the remaining 2009 meetings.

5. WCCC BUDGET UPDATE (Elissa Hicks, WSDOT) INFORMATION

Any issues pertaining to the Coalition budget will be discussed at the meeting.

+6. BUSINESS PLAN REVIEW APPROVE

The Executive Consultant recommends the Board review, modify as appropriate, and approve the final draft Business Plan to set direction for the Coalition.

7. GOODS MOVEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT (Richard Nordahl, INFORMATION Acting Chair)

+7A. TRANSPONDER INTEROPERABILITY (Michele Fell, Caltrans)

At their March 11, 2009, meeting, the Committee directed the establishment of a working group to address this issue. In advance of the first working group meeting, Caltrans will prepare a short report with an assessment of the transponder program in California.

94 ITEM # ACTION

+7B. CORRIDORS OF THE FUTURE FOLLOW-UP (Michele Fell, Caltrans)

Caltrans will provide an update on the status of the I-10 and I-15 corridors.

+7C. MARINE HIGHWAYS UPDATE (Jim Gosnell, WCCC)

At their March 11, 2009, meeting, the Committee requested additional feedback from the Coalition’s port representatives on the marine highways proposal. The Executive Consultant will report on comments received to date.

8. FEDERAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE REPORT (Ken De Crescenzo, Chair)

8A. UPDATE ON FEDERAL LEGISLATION (Ken De Crescenzo) DISCUSSION

8B. FOLLOW-UP ON APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST (Jim Gosnell, WCCC) INFORMATION

The Executive Consultant will provide a status on the FY 2010 appropriations request made to Senator Boxer (CA) in February, 2009.

+8C. HOUSE TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE DISCUSSION REQUEST FOR HIGH-PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR REAUTHORIZATION BILL (Jim Gosnell, WCCC)

House T&I leadership has requested earmark proposals from House members for SAFETEA-LU reauthorization. The Coalition should consider submitting a request and identify members of our federal delegation to ask.

9. ITS, OPERATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT INFORMATION (Bruce Agnew, Rex Burkholder, Co-Chairs)

9A. ALTERNATIVE FUEL CORRIDOR APPROVE

ODOT is proposing an I-5 alternative fuel program that includes the placement of fueling stations at rest stops or other locations. The Committee considered the proposal at their April 21, 2009, meeting and will provide an update to the Board of Directors (The attachment is included as Committee Agenda Item #2B.)

95 ITEM # ACTION

9B. BEST PRACTICES MANUAL APPROVE

As part of the Clean, Green, and Smart Program, the draft best practices manual was introduced and reviewed at last month’s Committee meeting with a 30-day comment period. The Committee will present a recommendation to the Board of Directors. This project also calls for a Peer Review Group to be established that would assist in keeping the Best Practices Manual up to date. The Board of Directors is asked to approve the establishment of this group and its participants. (The attachment is included as Committee Agenda Item #5.)

+10. MARAD PORT AND INTERMODAL SYSTEM REPORT (Randy Rogers) INFORMATION

This recent report presents an overview of this system and its needs. It makes national recommendations for the future. It recognizes the role and importance of the west coast system. The report is under review by the Office of the Secretary.

+11. GOODS MOVEMENT IN ALASKA INFORMATION

Local Coalition members will provide updates on goods movement via rail, truck, water, air, pipelines, and a proposed Alaska port study by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: ƒ Frank Richards, Deputy Commissioner for Highways and Public Facilities, Alaska DOT ƒ Bruce Carr, Alaska Railroad ƒ Craig Dobson and Gus Gustafson, Denali Pipeline LLC ƒ Steve Boardman, Chief, Civil Project Management Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ƒ Steve Ribuffo, Port of Anchorage ƒ Jimmy Shaw, FEDEX

+ indicates attachment

96

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3

Action Requested: APPROVE

MINUTES FROM THE MARCH 11, 2009, MEETING

The meeting was convened at approximately 9:30 AM at Caltrans offices in San Diego.

1. Welcome Chair Gallegos welcomed all of the participants and asked for self introductions from the participants. He then asked Pedro Orso Delgado, Caltrans District Director, to welcome the Coalition to his offices. The chair thanked the Director for his hospitality and technical staff assistance.

2. Changes to the Agenda There were no changes to the agenda

CONSENT CALENDAR Items 3-6 were approved in one motion after discussion and modification of item 5 as noted below

3. Minutes of the November 13, 2008 meeting

4. Review and approval of Executive Committee actions

4a. Cascade Sierra Truck Diversion Project Support 4b. Letters of Support for Federal Stimulus Program 4c. Joining the Coalition for Americas Gateways and Trade Corridors 4d. Revised meeting schedule for 2009

5. Appointment of Elissa Hicks, WSDOT as fiscal agent for 2009 WSDOT asked that this item be clarified to stipulate the term of this appointment would be until September 30, 2009 when WSDOT believes the Coalition’s federal funding will lapse. There was some discussion about whether the funds would lapse but it was agreed to include the September 30, 2009 end date for the appointment.

6. Response to Board request regarding expansion of the Coalition to additional states The Board approved Mr. Gosnell’s recommendation to consider expansion consistent with the business plan.

97

7. Election of Officers The following individuals were elected as the officers of the Coalition: Gary Gallegos of SANDAG as Chair, Gary noted that this would be his last year as chair and that a normal rotation should follow; Jim Miller of WCOG (First Vice Chair); Jeff Ottesen of Alaska DOT (Second Vice Chair), and George Kloeppel of the Lane Council of Governments (Third Vice Chair). The Coalition has one officer from each participating state.

8. WCCC Budget Update Elissa Hicks provided an overview of the current budget noting that WSDOT had received the entire Oregon match funding and all that remained were to obtain the remaining funds from Washington. The group congratulated Linda Modrell and George Kloeppel for getting their Oregon colleagues to support the Coalition. Elisa noted that WSDOT would fund $16,916 of the needed match in Washington but would like to work with the other Washington participants to raise the other $8,000. Jim Miller, WCOG, said he would help facilitate the Washington funding discussion.

WSDOT also had noted that they believe that the WCCC federal funding will lapse September 30. Jim Miller and others said their experience with High Priority funded projects (the source of the Coalition’s federal support) was that funds would continue to be available if expenditure had begun and progress was being made. The Executive Consultant recommended the Board approve his working with WSDOT and others as necessary to ensure that any unspent monies remain available for the Coalition. It was approved to take those actions as necessary to protect the funding.

9. Coalition support for Members travel expenses The Board discussed some of the issues that would be involved with support for member travel expenses and Elissa noted that WSDOT travel requirement would have to be met if this was done. The Executive Consultant noted that if the Board wanted to do this there would be questions about committee meetings that would have to be addressed as well. Several members noted that the Board had previously considered this and had rejected the idea at that time. It was agreed that the Coalition did not have the funds available to consider this now and confirmed the Coalition would not support funding for travel expenses. The Executive Consultant also noted that every attempt would be made to have Coalition meetings be video and audio accessible and that we would be trying the web for the video accessibility at the next meeting.

10. Budget Amendment for the Clean Green and Smart Contract The Executive Consultant presented a proposed $25,000 amendment for the existing contract with the Cascadia Group. This amendment would support implementation efforts for the best practices manual through the development of a Climate Change conference/workshop later in 2009 and the drafting of several proposals for additional funding on environmental improvement strategies.

The Chair raised a concern about whether the Coalition had sufficient funding to support this and preserve the funding support for the Coalitions basic activities. The Executive Consultant indicated, after reviewing the budget situation and some cost savings that we could expect in items the Board had previously said they were interested in doing, there would be adequate funds to do both. It was moved, seconded and approved to execute the $25,000 amendment.

11. Federal Relations Committee Report This Committee met earlier in the day. The Executive Consultant gave the report. There had been a successful trip to Washington D.C. in February. The delegation of the board included Gary Gallegos, Jim Miller, George Kloeppel, Bruce Agnew, Travis Brouwer, Jim Gosnell and the Mayor of Cottage

98

Grove, Gary Williams, who joined George Kloeppel from his region. They met with nine congressional offices and committee staff. The work of the coalition was explained with the fact sheets and summary of the Trade and Transportation given to them. There was general support from the Congressional offices for the Coalition and its work. Additional funding for the Coalition and the status of the reauthorization legislation was also discussed. While there will be progress on the bill this year it seemed that the timing would be in 2010 for passage. There seemed to be solid support for an additional appropriation for the Coalitions continuation. Due to congressional deadlines, a $250,000 request was submitted to Senator Boxer, for which the committee took a position of support. The Board moved, seconded and approved support of that submittal.

The Committee also reviewed and supported a proposal from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for a study of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) fees by the Federal DOT which should be done within the time frame of the next reauthorization. Jim Whitty, ODOT, noted that they had tested the technology successfully in a pilot program in the state. Jim Gosnell recommended the Coalition support the ODOT proposal for the federal DOT to undertake the evaluation and to support pilot VMT programs where the member organization supported it. The Board moved, seconded and approved supporting this recommendation with Alaska DOT abstaining.

Finally, the Committee supported the Coalition for America’s Gateways and Trade Corridors proposal for a new freight program in the next reauthorization with the understanding that funding for this program would be with new funding and not from the existing programs. The Board supported this program with that stipulation.

12. Goods Movement Committee Richard Nordahl, acting Chair, reported on the morning meeting of the committee. The Committee received an overview of informal interviews that WSDOT had with the California, Oregon and Washington trucking associations. The associations noted interest in better information on road conditions, construction, parking availability and weather in one place for the whole corridor. The associations said that they would also consider the idea of a reservation system for rest areas/truck stops.

Richard reviewed an upcoming Freight Roundtable meeting between WAASHTO and the Western Governors Association and noted he had arranged for the Executive Consultant to attend with his expenses covered by the Roundtable.

There was a brief overview on the status of the three Corridors for the Future programs in the Coalition’s region. Brian Smith, WSDOT, reviewed the status of the I-5 corridor and described where the Columbia River Bridge project was in its process. This is the only project identified for that corridor. Coalition members noted that the WCCC’s committees could assist in the I-5 Advisory committee process. Richard Nordahl and Michele Fell of Caltrans noted the status of the I-10 and I- 15 Corridors. It appears that the I-10 may move forward and the I-15 is somewhat questionable. Caltrans will give a further report at the next meeting on those corridors.

David McCain (ODOT) reviewed a proposal from ODOT for federal legislation on supporting the interoperability of truck transponders between the states. The ensuing discussion noted there were such issues between California and other states. One of the key issues is the availability and use of data that is collected and the process of collecting that data. The committee recommended a small working group of members (Gallegos, Brown and Nordahl) look at the California issue to see if it

99

could be resolved within the state. It also supported the ODOT federal legislative proposal for a national policy supporting interoperability.

The Committee also heard a presentation of a Concept Paper drafted by Wilson Lacey, Port of Humboldt Bay, proposing a Marine Highway program for the west coast that focused on the smaller ports. Comments sent in by WSDOT were also available. It was noted that MARAD was in the process of rulemaking on the process for designating corridors and criteria for project selection in Marine Highways around the country.

Randy Rogers made a few comments about MARAD’s program. There were several questions about the concept including timelines for designation, funding availability, other funding and project implications of such designations, and environmental issues. It was also noted that Alaska has an active marine transportation system. The committee wanted to seek the ports input and have more research done on the issue before taking any position. The committee did not have time to address the issue of unsolicited proposals at this meeting. The Board moved, seconded and approved supporting the committee’s actions noted above.

13. ITS/Environment Committee Bruce Agnew highlighted what the committee was going to be discussing at its meeting the next day.

14. Business Plan Jim Gosnell gave an overview of the draft plan noting the process he used to gather information and the key areas he is making recommendations for action. There were a number of comments by several members. It was suggested that it needed to contain a stronger statement of the vision for the corridor and that the Clean, Green, and Smart program might provide a good foundation for that vision.

It was agreed that goods movement should be a priority but other mobility issues were important. There was some support for the organizational recommendations the draft proposed. There was a concern that it seemed like the draft was searching for a project instead of advancing the vision for the corridor. It was agreed that the business plan would be discussed further at the next meeting and the comments made today should be considered in revisions to the draft.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:04 P.M.

100

ATTENDEES (Includes Committees as well as Board)

Jeff Ottesen Alaska DOT Adrienne Gregory CAGTC Jeff Brown California Senate Richard Nordahl Caltrans Michele Fell Caltrans Ken DeCresenzo Caltrans Christine Altoine Caltrans Bill Figge Caltrans Jose Marquez Caltrans Glenn Pascal Cascadia Center Bruce Agnew Cascadia Center Steve Marshall Cascadia Center George Kloeppel Lane COG Randy Rogers MARAD Carolyn Clevenger MTC Jim Whitty ODOT David McCain ODOT Jerri Bohard ODOT Jerry Pfeiffer ODOT Jack Lee ODOT Wilson Lacy Port of Humboldt Bay Paul Brown Charlie Howard Puget Sound Regional Council Gary Gallegos SANDAG Tina Casgar SANDAG Linda Culp SANDAG Andrea Hoff SANDAG Kyle Goedert SANDAG Jim Miller Whatcom COG Larry Ehl WSDOT Dillon Auyoung WSDOT Elissa Hicks WSDOT Scott Witt WSDOT Brian Smith WSDOT

101

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4

Action Requested: APPROVE

MEETING DATES AND LOCATIONS FOR 2009

Last month the Board of Directors approved two additional meetings for the year--the first in September in Seattle and the second on November 4/5 in Portland. While doing that it was also suggested that we try and have the Seattle meeting coordinated with the next Microsoft conference. The date for that conference has been set for Friday, October 23. In order for us to handle that you need to consider changing the dates and locations of our last two meetings.

The Executive Consultant suggests having the last meeting be held in concert with the Microsoft event which should be beneficial to the Coalition. This would mean however, that we would meet on a Wednesday/Thursday in order to attend the Microsoft conference on Friday. The meeting we were going to have in Portland in November would be moved to August or September. Inquiries have been sent to both the Port of Portland and Metro regarding hosting our event. The Port has indicated willingness but suggests it be in September due to heavy vacation schedules in August. I’m sure that Metro would assist us if needed but I haven’t heard back from them to date.

I recommend you adjust the meeting schedule accordingly and meet in Portland in early September and Seattle on October 22/23 adjacent to the Microsoft conference.

102

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6

Action Requested: APPROVE

BUSINESS PLAN REVIEW

The Executive Consultant has made revisions to the draft document to reflect the discussion last month in San Diego (Attachment 1). No additional comments have been received from others who were not at the meeting. The thrust of the revisions are to move the document away from an appearance of being too project oriented in its direction and toward being broader and more policy oriented. Even though it was in the previous draft, the revision places a greater emphasis on the “Clean, Green and Smart” program and that it is the vision for the corridor. All Coalition activity can be carrying out that vision.

This plan offers an implementation plan for organizational change. It does get into some of the mechanics of how we operate as what as discuss what we could do in the future. It appears there are some fundamentals that we can improve while we seek to implement the vision you have already created.

Seeking additional funding remains the primary priority but as we have learned the primary target for this may be one to even two years away. In the interim the Coalition needs to assist its membership with specific activity beyond seeking additional funding in Washington. I continue to recommend we go beyond that by addressing more specific issues that are chosen by the membership. This is much like I see the Best Practices Manual which will hopefully provide useful information to the membership. I think you will find the revision places less emphasis on the specific possibilities but still urges that it be a part of the Coalition business plan. I have also placed more emphasis on improving the communications about Coalition activities.

I have made other, relative minor, changes in other parts of the document.

I look forward to this being further discussed and considered for approval at the next meeting.

103 Attachment 1

REVISED DRAFT WEST COAST CORRIDOR COALITION BUSINESS PLAN April 22, 2009

Introduction

The emergence of the mega-region concept and the globalization of the economy and environmental issues reinforces the opportunities, for and the necessity of, interstate cooperation among the transportation stakeholders along the west coast. There are a plethora of mobility-related issues which present significant opportunities for a multi- state west coast coalition to thrive through a willing and proactive membership. These issues need to be considered on a broader geographic and institutional basis more now than ever before as programs and strategies are implemented by Coalition members. The genesis of the Coalition was based on the I-5 north/south corridor but it has evolved. The “west coast corridor” should be considered emblematic of the complex transportation network that supports the movement of people and goods within and through the west coast area. It encompasses all modes of transportation that can help these three mega- regions address their mobility issues.

The primary objective of this plan is to define strategies that will position the West Coast Corridor Coalition to support its members in meeting their responsibilities and to gain continued support and funding for the Coalition. The best way for this to occur is for the membership to find the Coalition useful in helping them have collaborative discussions to address common issues and to achieve their respective goals in this context. The past work of the Coalition is a good foundation upon which to begin. The consensus approach to decision making should continued to be followed.

The Coalition has created a vision of creating the Clean, Green and Smart corridor.

There are three objectives that the Coalition will pursue towards this vision. The first is the pursuit of additional funding from all sources for infrastructure and environmental improvements sought by the Coalition’s membership. Second, the Coalition will continue its efforts to bring Best Practices to the attention of its members with an aim to assist its members to address significant regional, national, or global issues such as climate change that impact mobility and that advance the vision of Clean, Green and Smart. Third, the Coalition will help the membership coordinate and collaborate on issues of mutual concern and interest to promote Clean, Green and Smart cost savings, efficiencies and effectiveness throughout the corridor for both the public and private sectors. The Coalition has decided that it will focus on goods movement related issues as its top priority but it is open to dealing with other mobility related issues as the membership desires and the budget allows.

104 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 2

History

The West Coast Corridor Coalition’s evolution began in the late 90’s and early 2000’s to pursue the issue of mounting common concern about the movement of freight and other mobility issues from the Mexican border northward to the Canadian border amongst state departments of transportation, metropolitan planning organizations, ports, public policy groups and private transport providers. More recently the state of Alaska joined the Coalition. It has held numerous workshops on issues of interest, received special funding to conduct its activities, completed the West Coast trade and transportation study, initiated the development of a Best Practices Manual for Clean Green and Smart projects and formulated key principles for the next federal transportation legislation.

Mission of the Coalition

The Coalition’s mission is to advocate collaborative solutions to the transportation system challenges on the West Coast Corridor.

To accomplish that mission it has established the following objectives:

ƒ Develop and mutually support a roster of projects of corridor significance; ƒ Share best practices to optimize the capacity and performance of the system; ƒ Encourage joint efforts and effective cooperation among West Coast state, regional and local governments and the private sector; and, ƒ Advocate for financing options to fund transportation improvements serving the interest of the Coalition, including additional funding and regulatory changes.

Strategy

In order to accomplish the three objectives of this business plan there are five strategic action areas for the Coalition to accomplish: Organizational, External relations, Initiatives, Communications and Staffing.

Organizational Actions

Some of the actions included in this plan would require changes in the bylaws.

Ensure the Board of the Coalition includes senior management/policy makers of the member organization. As the Coalition takes positions on key policy issues, allocating a budget, or helping to fund mutually important projects, it is imperative that it have representation from its members that can “speak” for its organization.

Adjust the Board meeting schedule to once or twice a year for approval of budget, work program and significant changes in the organization

105 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 3

Expand the Executive Committee to have a broader representation of the membership. Each state should continue to have at least one representative. The Executive Committee would make policy decisions and oversee the Coalition’s program as necessary. The Executive Committee would meet quarterly or as needed.

Reconsider the need for the Chairs of the Committees to be a member of the Board. Currently the by-laws indicate this. While there are good reasons for this requirement, the success of the coalition depends on the time commitments that individuals can make and the more we can separate functions, maintain coordination and accomplish agreed upon projects the better the Coalition will be. Having the chair required to be participating in both their committee and the Board might inhibit more senior management participation on the Board. Expertise and recognized leadership on a specific issue is what is needed at the working group/committee level and it offers the opportunity to “spread the workload” among the membership.

Focus the efforts on three of its committees in the near term and have each committee working towards a specific, agreed upon, issue. The issues would be identified and budgets established through a biennial work program approved by the board. The Coalition has already agreed that freight should be its focus. Therefore, a premier committee should be the Freight Committee. A starting point might be the Cambridge study or other identified common issues brought through the committee itself. The other premier committee is the ITS/Environment Committee. The search by public and private members for environmental solutions to problems including green house gases reduction is an issue that is corridor and world wide. The Federal Relations committee is also crucial particularly through this period of federal reauthorization.

The committees should not necessarily meet at the same time period as the Board or Executive Committee meetings. Recommendations for actions by the Coalition should come through the Committees unless there is an urgency involved that would prevent such a process. In this event the Chair of the committee should be consulted prior to the Coalition acting.

The Coalition needs to strengthen the participation of the private sector. The Plan envisions this occurring through several actions. First, clarification of who the private sector’s participants are on the Coalition’s Board and potentially the Executive Committee. Second, and of utmost importance, is to advance projects of mutual interest, conduct activities and take positions that are of interest and concern to the private sector. Other recommendations and strategies in the plan should support this effort.

External Relations Actions

There are numerous organizations, both public and private, that are addressing some aspect of either mobility or environmental issues along the west coast. These include international organizations along the Canadian and Mexican borders, international

106 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p.4

maritime associations, environmental groups and countless others. The Coalition should seek out those that have common interests or goals and create appropriate working partnerships. One of the key areas that the Coalition is already working on through the Clean, Green and Smart Project is reducing emissions. Many organizations, both public and private, are working on projects and programs in this issue area. Given the importance of the states in the Coalition, one such organization is the Western Governors Association. It already has its Climate Change Initiative and is exploring the start-up of a freight study.

While the Coalition needs to explore coordination and working relationships with all groups who have similar interest, a priority should be with the Western Governors Association and the Coalition should work to create a partnership or working relationship with them. This action might entail the enlargement of the WCCC‘s membership to other western states east-ward to the Rocky Mountains. At a minimum, the Coalition needs to establish a working relationship with the Governor’s Association.

Participate in appropriate national organizations that serve the Coalition’s interests. Distribute work products and policy positions to interested parties as quickly as possible including the use of the web and other electronic and conventional means. All materials should become branded with the Clean, Green and Smart phraseology. Making sure that both the membership and others know what the Coalition is accomplishing is essential to obtaining ongoing funding for the organization. Creating more awareness of the Coalition’s activities is crucial to the effectiveness of this plan.

Strategic Initiatives

The Coalition’s committees are vital in identifying initiatives and in carrying out the work program to address them. The preference and basic premise of this Business plan is to have initiatives come from the membership. The members have to agree that an activity is useful for the Coalition to be successful in the long run. This plan envisions the committees act more like working groups bringing experts together in their respective fields to collaborate, coordinate and communicate on specific issues that improve mobility in their area and in the corridor.

The work of the ITS/Environment committee has to be a showpiece of Coalition work. The Best Practices Manual is only the beginning of this effort. It has to be kept alive by an effective Peer Review Group which is constantly updating the manual. A second aspect of this work is to identify one or two Best Practices at a time that can be pursued by multiple entities, establish a task force, identify funding to support the effort and help implementation of the practice happen in a coordinated manner that enhances the benefits of the strategy. The Climate change issue is one that all entities, both public and private,

are facing which points toward this being a critical issue on which the Coalition ought to focus. The Coalition could augment this effort with another that could be helpful. That

107 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 5

is, the identification of “At Risk” infrastructure due to the global warming phenomenon. As climate change occurs additional costs will probably be incurred to repair, replace, remove infrastructure that is no longer viable under those changing circumstances.

The Freight Committee has to do a similar effort. They have accomplished a major effort with the completion of the West Coast Trade and Transportation Study. Establishing new initiatives for the Coalition is critical and urgent for Coalition success. This Plan proposes to jump start the effort with the following proposals for the Committee to pursue. These proposals should be reviewed and priorities established.

There are many opportunities for the Coalition to engage and provide assistance to the membership. These include a multistate truck traveler information system, truck parking, and alleviating bottlenecks on the system. The Coalition should also provide a broader, more strategic, look at significant national and international trends, issues or proposals for its members. Global economic trends, environmental issues, the development of new international facilities such as the Panama Canal, Prince Rupert and potential Mexican port development all could have significant impacts on the West Coast transportation system. These overarching types of issues could be evaluated by the Coalition instead of each member having to do such an evaluation saving the membership money.

There are key, strategic freight improvement projects throughout the Coalition’s area of interest. While the Coalition can make clear it supports the projects of its members it needs to also be able to highlight really crucial ones that need additional support without members feeling that “their project” isn’t identified. While there are numerous important projects throughout the Corridor the following are several examples of key projects: the I-5 Columbia River Crossing at the Oregon and Washington border, the Gerald Desmond Bridge in California, the Fast Corridor in the Seattle Tacoma region, and the 800 mile Alaskan Natural Gas Pipeline Corridor project.

Strengthen Communications

Establish a new website with an information sharing capability where members can post information and exchange ideas or issues through a bulletin board or blog approach or other means to provide a method for peer exchange of information, data and activities that is easy for the members to use. Having the Coalition thought of as a place to share and get information should be an important function for the Coalition.

There should be distribution of the actions and other activities of the Coalition on a regular basis. Members are inundated with emails and other material from many sources. The Coalition’s material needs to be considered useful to by the recipients. We can consider some type of electronic distribution method when we establish a good flow of information.

108 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 6

The Coalition can be useful to the membership by convening effective workshops, seminars, conferences, or organizing training sessions on topics of interest and priority with the membership.

When we are successful at getting the membership and others to share information through and with the Coalition we should consider distribution of a regular electronic piece highlighting key activities of the membership. Once something like this is started it is important to be able to maintain it.

Staffing Actions

Hire a permanent Executive Director, a half-time assistant and web administrator. All of these could be done through contract. The latter could be with a member, university or private vendor. The Executive Director should be independent from a member organization.

On a project by project basis, consider whether the project needs a project manager (through contract).

Phasing of the Plan

It is anticipated that a number of the plan’s strategies have to be taken on at the same time. Priority will be given to the following.

The Freight Committee should recommend to the Board 1-2 projects that it believes is worthwhile and can be initiated immediately. It also needs to develop a work plan for accomplishing the objective. Funding also needs to be secured to complete the effort.

The Coalition’s positions on Reauthorization should be refined in light of the Stimulus Program and the current fiscal realities that the public sector is facing. This should include support for additional funding for the Coalition. However, the timing of Reauthorization will probably require some other options to be pursued for the near term.

Completing the Best Practices Manual for the Clean, Green and Smart project. This program is of utmost importance to the Coalition. It offers a strong opportunity to help the membership address the very significant environmental issues that all of the members are facing. This should be coupled with initiating a dialogue with the Western Governors Association on Climate Change Issues to see how the two organizations can help each other.

The Coalition has to raise the senior management participation by its members on the Board. Several, but not all, of the Board’s member are from a senior management position, or policy board, at the respective member organization. It is desirable that the Board be comprised of policy members and CEOs (or their specifically delegated

109 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 7

alternate) who can clearly speak for their respective organization. Accomplishing this and providing clarity on the membership of each committee will enhance the effectiveness of the organization.

Each committee should have a core membership of organizations with all members be able to participate. For example, the Freight Committee should have core participation by the 4 state DOTs, any MPO that has an international border or large port or other shipping center, at least one large and small port, an airport with significant air cargo, at least one trucking association, one maritime private sector member, one railroad, and one shipper. The respective committees could have working groups of appropriate members when a specific project was initiated.

Financing

Obtaining adequate financing is often the most difficult part of an organization’s life. Funding requires the Coalition to have a good project that its members want. While there are some funds remaining from the prior federal appropriation and matching provided by some of the members; a new revenue stream needs to be created. These funds may lapse September 30 even if there is unspent money left. The Coalition should pursue efforts to ensure that available budgeted funds remain available after September 30. This plan envisions several possible sources of continuing revenue for the Coalition.

In the longer term the federal reauthorization legislation will likely have a reasonable national freight funding program that may provide for multistate organizations to carry out portions of that program. With AASHTO’s support and the recognition that freight can be a multistate, corridor type issue; the multistate approach has a real possibility of being included. Regardless of whether the multistate approach is in a final bill, the legislation will provide a strong vehicle for Coalition activities. However, it appears highly likely that this legislation will not get final passage until at least 2010. This probability necessitates the Coalition to have some short term funding options including the pursuit of other special funding requests from Congress.

Depending on the nature of the Coalition’s activities that the Board decides, there are funding opportunities in other federal funding programs (e.g. energy, homeland security, maritime). Exploration of these other departments is important and necessary.

Other multistate coalitions exist around the country and may offer models for funding. While some receive federal funds directly, others have funding from their members through “pooled resources” in planning and research. One coalition uses a matching program with a University to complete projects. This pooled financing approach offers an alternative but with the current financial situation of most of our members it may prove to be difficult to obtain. It would be substantially easier, the more members the cost is shared among. It depends on the importance of the project to those paying.

110 Revised draft WCCC Business Plan p. 8

This shared cost approach also extends to the private sector. Depending on the projects the Coalition undertakes it is entirely possible to obtain private or foundation funding. The Coalition may need to clarify its legal status vis a vis obtaining funding from the private sector so as to ensure the public sector members have no conflicts.

Creating a new website provides a vehicle for some funding, probably not enough for specific projects, through allowing others to showcase on the site. Sponsorship of events, conferences, workshops is also a possibility that should be explored.

While charging dues for membership is an obvious funding strategy it is, interestingly, not one followed by most multistate groups. Also, most of these have members that are exclusively state DOTs and that makes the West Coast Corridor Coalition somewhat unique in the country.

A few of the recommendations in the plan can be implemented within the existing budget. New initiatives will likely need additional resources.

The success of this business plan depends on the membership having its policy or senior management involvement in the Coalition, selecting key programs it wants to collectively work on to support its Clean, Green and Smart vision, and having a good external relations/communications program. The programs must be viewed as important to the membership and must address the needs of the constituents of the west coast.

111

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7A

Action Requested: INFORMATION

TRANSPONDER INTEROPERABILITY

At the March meeting, the Oregon Department of Transportation presented information on a legislative proposal that it will be presenting to Congress concerning requirements for transponder interoperability across jurisdictions.

California is one of 28 states that use a proprietary system called "PrePass", administered by a not- for-profit entity known as "HELP, Inc". Oregon is unable to collect preclearance data from this system (presumably without paying a fee) to use to manage system operations, and expressed a concern that this seems to contradict the goals and mission of the WCCC with respect to interjurisdictional cooperation and coordination.

The WCCC requested that Caltrans provide an update regarding the reasons for California's use of the proprietary system, and whether or not any changes are being considered. Caltrans Traffic Operations Division was contacted for information. Additional information will be forthcoming, but in general, a policy decision was made a number of years ago to contract with HELP, Inc to operate the PrePass system, using data supplied by the Department. The primary reasons for this were 1) the manpower and resources needed for the Department to operate the system were prohibitive, 2) running a commercial vehicle preclearance system is not part of the Department's core functions, and 3) the Department identified a system management/congestion relief benefit from having a preclearance system in place.

If additional information becomes available, it will be shared verbally during the meeting.

112

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7B

Action Requested: INFORMATION

CORRIDORS OF THE FUTURE FOLLOW-UP

California has three designated Corridors of the Future (COF): I-5, I-10and I-15. Each Corridor of the Future must enter into a Development Agreement with the Federal Highway Administration, to ensure that Corridor-based activities are carried out in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Corridor of the Future program. In general, these goals focus on maintaining, and enhancing where possible, interstate coordination with respect to project development and delivery; and reducing barrier (procedural, jurisdictional, administrative) to the maximum extent feasible.

In addition to the Development Agreement, each Corridor must also enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which defines how the states in a COF will work together to achieve goals and address issues which may arise. When signed, the MOU becomes part of the Development Agreement. To date, the only California Corridor that has completed the Development Agreement process is the I-5 COF (the I-5 COF MOU has not been completed). The I-15 Development Agreement is awaiting the signature of the Governor of . After this occurs, there are still two other states (Nevada and California) that have not yet signed.

The I-10 Agreement has been dormant since December due to some lingering concerns over the wording of Agreement and the signing process (at least two governors are required by their State policy to sign, which means that the Governor of California must also sign). The California representative to the I-10 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will convene a teleconference within the next two weeks to discuss changes in the membership of the TAC, and the need for a new Chair (the former Chair retired in February).

If available, additional information will be provided at the meeting.

113

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

April 22, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7C

Action Requested: INFORMATION

MARINE HIGHWAYS UPDATE

At the March meeting, the Board of Directors ask for follow up with the ports about their views of the Marine Highway Corridor program. I sent an inquiry to all ports on our existing mailing list which include San Diego, Los Angeles, Portland, Vancouver (US) and Seattle. We, of course know the position of Humboldt Bay. Portland, Vancouver, and Los Angeles responded. Portland and Vancouver noted that Portland was in the process of applying for a corridor designation for the Columbia/Snake/Willamette Rivers. Portland also noted that the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (they represent over 100 members in the public and private sectors in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Alaska and California including public ports, navigation, transportation, international trade, tourism, agriculture, forest products, energy and local government interests) had previously requested the entire west coast be designated by MARAD without an application due to the Corridor for Future designation of I-5. This request was denied but perhaps may be reconsider by MARAD. The Port noted that the association had been in touch with another group, the California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference (a consortium of California harbors, ports and marine interest groups), about submitting a proposed application. The Port of Los Angeles indicated they did not see any applicability in Southern California but if designation of a corridor brought funding then they could support that so that a real assessment could be made.

MARAD sent material that outlined what information was needed for an application for a corridor and it appears to be somewhat extensive. Humboldt Bay also received a summary of what is needed for an application in their response for the west coast to be designated. Humboldt Bay indicates they still believed the WCCC is the right entity to respond with an application for designation.

It also appears that the I-95 Corridor Coalition is pursuing a designation and actual projects for the east coast. .

114 Agenda Item #8C WCCC Board of Directors

115

Agenda Item #10 WCCC Board of Directors

EXCERPTS FROM MARAD’S AMERICAS PORTS AND INTERMODAL SYSTEM REPORT JANUARY, 2009

(This report presents a good overview of the system, its issues and MARAD recommendations but it must be noted the report is under review by the Department)

I. The Way Forward

The U.S. Marine Transportation System is clearly one of our greatest national assets. It has helped ensure our continuing leadership in international trade and is an engine of economic growth at home. It has served us with distinction in times of peace and war since before the founding of the Republic. There is growing concern, however, that our existing Marine Transportation System may not be able to meet the anticipated growth in international trade and the many challenges associated with that growth – from financing badly needed new infrastructure improvements across the different modes of transportation to dealing with environmental concerns in an emerging “green” society. By all indications, however, it appears that our North American trading partners – Canada, Mexico, and Panama – are preparing for current trade growth estimates. Their governments have recognized that marine infrastructure improvement projects are vitally important to their economies, and have significant improvement projects underway, or under preliminary development, to accommodate these growth projections. The most recent are Mexico’s efforts to develop the container port and rail line corridor to the U.S. Mexican President Felipe Calderon stated in August of last year, “The Punta Colonet container ship project will transform and revolutionize the productivity of the country.” When operational, Mexico’s Punta Colonet and Lazaro Cardenas port projects will provide over eight million 20-foot equivalent units or 20-foot-long cargo containers (TEUs) of capacity and accommodate the largest containerships afloat. Additionally, Canada’s Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative will provide five to eight million TEUs of port capacity and the deepest ship channel available in North America. These projects, combined with the Panama Canal expansion, new water routes through the Suez Canal, and the potential opening of an Arctic sea route, will provide shippers with greatly expanded alternatives for moving cargo -- opportunities that extend beyond our own national port system. Therefore, it is imperative that we acknowledge, as do our North American trading partners, that an efficient and modern Marine Transportation System is vital to our economic security. Clearly, as the volume of goods arriving at our port gateways continues to grow, so will system congestion and development costs, along with the very real possibility of cargo diversion to non- U.S. port facilities.

Findings

The U.S. Marine Transportation System is clearly one of our greatest national assets. It has helped ensure our continuing leadership in international trade and is an engine of economic

119 growth at home. It has served us with distinction in times of peace and war since before the founding of the Republic. There is growing concern, however, that our existing Marine Transportation System may not be able to meet the anticipated growth in international trade and the many challenges associated with that growth – from financing badly needed new infrastructure improvements across the different modes of transportation to dealing with environmental concerns in an emerging “green” society. By all indications, however, it appears that our North American trading partners – Canada, Mexico, and Panama – are preparing for current trade growth estimates. Their governments have recognized that marine infrastructure improvement projects are vitally important to their economies, and have significant improvement projects underway, or under preliminary development, to accommodate these growth projections. The most recent are Mexico’s efforts to develop the Punta Colonet container port and rail line corridor to the U.S. Mexican President Felipe Calderon stated in August of last year, “The Punta Colonet container ship project will transform and revolutionize the productivity of the country.” When operational, Mexico’s Punta Colonet and Lazaro Cardenas port projects will provide over eight million 20-foot equivalent units or 20-foot-long cargo containers (TEUs) of capacity and accommodate the largest containerships afloat. Additionally, Canada’s Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative will provide five to eight million TEUs of port capacity and the deepest ship channel available in North America. These projects, combined with the Panama Canal expansion, new water routes through the Suez Canal, and the potential opening of an Arctic sea route, will provide shippers with greatly expanded alternatives for moving cargo -- opportunities that extend beyond our own national port system.

The following findings are based on our outreach and investigation of port and Marine Transportation System requirements.

• America’s ports and Marine Transportation System are critical to the national economy. The importance of our port system will only grow as globalization continues and the American economy becomes more integrated into the world economy. Over 95 percent of cargo entering the United States comes by ship. Increasing world trade has resulted in record levels of cargo entering and leaving our ports. This cargo flow has become a large part of the U.S. economy. By 2006, foreign trade already accounted for nearly 22 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product.

• America’s Marine Transportation System faces growing congestion challenges. The U.S. Marine Transportation System has managed to accommodate our rising levels of international trade. Trade growth, however, has begun to strain our waterways, ports and key road and rail freight corridors. Our Nation’s gateway ports, typically located in some of our most populous urban areas, face serious capacity expansion challenges – such as congestion, community, environmental, and competing land use issues. • The Marine Transportation System is just one part of a “system of systems” within the Nation’s overall transportation network. The current transportation system statutory and regulatory framework is largely modal-based, providing our Nation with a patchwork of rules and regulations focused on singular modal solutions to the problems associated with a multi-modal transportation system.

120 • The development of America’s port system has been largely driven by an amalgam of state, local, and private stakeholders. At present, national transportation system planning activities do not uniformly consider the needs of the Marine Transportation System. Marine transportation and its supporting infrastructure have traditionally been the responsibility of state and local governments, and the private sector. Expanding and changing trade patterns require that Marine Transportation System planning be elevated to the national level with the appropriate incentives to integrate water transportation into the overall transportation system. • There is no dedicated Federal source of funding for our marine infrastructure. Various agencies have funding available to support the maritime industry; however, this funding is limited in amount and scope. Presently, there is no dedicated funding for shoreside marine infrastructure, hampering any coordinated Federal response to freight capacity and flow issues. • Fragmented Federal agency oversight and involvement. The Federal Government presence in marine transportation is strong – 18 Federal departments and agencies play some type of role in it, such as safety regulation, enforcement, licensing, dredging, and environmental protection. The sheer number of participants often makes decision-making unwieldy, and ultimately difficult for the both the government (Federal and state) and private industry to accommodate the rapidly changing needs of the system. • America’s commercial ports, especially those designated as Strategic Ports, are essential to our national defense. Accommodating military cargoes in times of emergency is in the national interest. Military cargoes are irregular in timing and have a ‘surge’ component that places an inordinate demand on our designated national strategic port system – often to the detriment of the ports’ regular commercial customers and stakeholders. It is vital to national security that our Strategic Ports be able to provide operational flexibility and possess sufficient redundancy to meet the needs of a wide range of missions and timelines. • Competing land-use issues adversely impact port expansion efforts. A limited amount of property exists for marine development purposes in and around existing port facilities. Port expansion plans face competing development issues and environmental concerns that further limit expansion activities. Property that may be suitable for port development is subject to constant pressures for non-port uses, such as office, residential, or recreational development. When a parcel of land is designated for non-port use, it is rarely returned. • Small and medium sized ports have an essential role in the development of our marine highway system. The Nation’s small and medium sized ports play a vital role by serving specific market niches, communities, or regions and, in many cases, are the sole source of commodities for isolated communities. They are the key to expanding the overall efficiency of America’s Marine Highways, and ultimately the entire transportation system. • Current environmental review and permitting processes inhibit the financing of public and private sector maritime infrastructure. Current multi-agency and multi- regulatory financing processes drive up costs and significantly increase the time needed to obtain a permit for construction or alteration of marine facilities. It is not unusual for the permitting process to take upwards of a decade, and even then obtaining a permit is not assured. Clearly this discourages investment in an expanded marine infrastructure. • Inland rail and road bottlenecks impede efficient port related cargo flows. Landside transportation chokepoints decrease the efficiency of the marine transportation system.

121 No matter how efficient or effective port operations may be “inside the gate,” that efficiency is lost if cargo is delayed due to road or rail congestion “outside the port gate.” • The Nation lacks an overall framework to finance port and Marine Transportation System expansion. While many port authorities already engage in successful public- private partnerships that facilitate the modernization and expansion of individual facilities, the very real need remains to create a mechanism to pursue expanded financing partnerships on a regional and even national basis. •Improved data on port cargo flows are needed to identify bottlenecks and changing trade patterns. There is an abundance of anecdotal evidence suggesting where and how cargo flows can become delayed or obstructed. However, the data are usually modal specific and do not follow the movement of cargo to and from port destinations. In addition, modal data currently collected use different selection criteria for each mode making comparison and integration of the data difficult. A uniformed cross-model data collection system needs to be developed to provide adequate and timely information to make informed development and funding decisions.

• Technology and modified work practices increase the speed and volume of cargo moving through America’s port and Marine Transportation System. Improvements in technology and work practices expand port productivity; however, at present there is no existing uniform set of port performance measures or best practices to increase efficiency. There are also no established programs to research and promote technologies intended to improve port efficiencies. • Environmental concerns impact every segment of the Marine Transportation System. Environmental sustainability is becoming more important as the maritime industry works to accommodate green transportation development and meet air and water quality standards. At present, there is no comprehensive “green” program to promote sustainability or best system development practices. • There is little outreach to shippers intended to encourage modal freight shifts. Transportation managers normally adjust to bottlenecks or congestion, seeking the most efficient means to get freight to the intended destination. However, many alternative transportation options, such as the Marine Highway, are currently underutilized by the shipping community because of lack of awareness or the proper incentives to encourage alternative freight movement. • There is unused capacity on America’s waterways that can relieve congested road and rail systems. Road and rail congestion cost an estimated $200 billion annually -- an amount only expected to grow each year. This unnecessary gridlock clogs our freight corridors, while we have thousands of miles of navigable coastal, intracoastal, river and inland waterways that have unused capacity. Ironically, water transportation, although sometimes slower, is more energy efficient, safer, and environmentally-friendly than other methods of land-based transportation. Moving cargoes to and from the port on maritime corridors can relieve congestion – especially in our urban areas and at border crossing chokepoints. • The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is not being used for dredging at many of the Nation’s port facilities. Over 90 percent of our nation’s top 50 channels require immediate maintenance dredging, and nearly 30 percent of vessel calls at U.S. ports are constrained by inadequate channel depths. As such, the importance of an effective dredging program is obvious. It is essential to our national prosperity that project channel depths be maintained, or freight departing from or arriving at U.S. ports will cost more.

122 • Channel deepening in our gateway ports is essential to accommodate the larger, more modern vessels currently serving the world’s trades. A new class of ocean going vessels will necessitate deeper and wider shipping channels, greater overhead clearance, and larger cranes and shore-side infrastructure to support the cargoes they carry. • Advanced navigation systems will increase the efficient and safe flow of vessels into and out of America’s ports. The level of international trade is growing and anticipated to further expand dramatically over the next 20 years. It is expected that the number and size of vessels will also continue to increase at a rate greater than the existing system can accommodate. Advanced navigation and safety systems can help the industry meet this increase, along with associated higher environmental and safety standards. Examples of such systems are marking channels, charting, notifying mariners of changes, meteorological warnings, vessel traffic management, and other capabilities that sustain throughput while increasing safety and security. • Investment and modernization of the Nation’s river lock system is needed to support the increased movement of commodities on America’s Marine Highways. Much of our lock and dam infrastructure is over 50 years old and unable to accommodate today’s modern vessels. Further, the collection of the Inland Waterway Users Fee discourages the use of our inland waterways, shifting congestion to the roads and railroads. The method in which the funding is apportioned is also inefficient, in some cases adding decades and hundreds of millions of dollars in cost to essential projects. As a result, funds are being depleted, costs are soaring, and projects are delayed – creating reliability and efficiency problems that will only worsen in coming years. • A skilled workforce is vital to the efficiency of our Marine Transportation System. A modernized and expanded marine infrastructure represents only one half of the Marine Transportation System improvement equation. The other equally important half is the further development of a highly-skilled workforce capable of managing a technologically improved and expanded system. • America’s ports face competition from an expanding Canadian, Mexican, Central American, and Caribbean port system. Canada and Mexico are investing in significant port and freight corridor improvements, threatening to ultimately divert cargo from U.S. ports to the ports of our North American trading partners. In the short term, these foreign ports and corridors could help the U.S. accommodate a projected increase in trade flows. In the long term, they will limit American job growth opportunities, negatively impact our economy, and reduce our own strategic port capacity.

For the United States to remain a leader in the global economy, it is imperative that the Federal Government, state and local authorities, and private industry support a strong national transportation system. We must start with a strong National Transportation Policy. It is clear that the Marine Transportation System is a shared enterprise. To ensure our continued prominence in international trade and the success of this and future generations, we must work together to address our fundamental transportation challenges.

Recommendations: The Way Forward

123 With projected freight volumes threatening to overwhelm our transportation infrastruc- ture, especially at our port facilities, it is imperative that the United States comprehen- sively address its national transportation system challenges. The following items are recommended for further consideration: • Develop a national freight policy to include a framework for planning, operations, and investment. • Establish through legislation a funding mechanism to support state-driven multistate, multimodal corridor planning and investments and organizations that focus on major transportation challenges, e.g., transportation chokepoints, intermodal corridors, and projects of national significance. • Establish an investment fund for freight-related projects on national freight corridors. The investment fund would be used for freight system infrastructure to fix a number of problems, including bottlenecks and intermodal access to ports and distribution centers, and transportation to international gateways, i.e., ports, airports and border crossings. • Establish Title 23 authorization as an intermodal planning mechanism for both freight and passenger infrastructure development. • Establish criteria that prioritize the selection of projects for Federal funding based on national system needs that support international trade and our global competitiveness. • Designate marine ports and terminals, i.e., surface intermodal transportation facilities, eligible for Title 23 funding. • Establish the Department of Transportation (through the Maritime Administration) as the lead Federal agency for commercial port and terminal infrastructure planning and development, similar to authority granted for the ongoing Port of Anchorage Expansion Project. • Expand freight infrastructure to accommodate trade growth through a variety of incentives, such as reduced policy and regulatory barriers, Federal funding where appropriate, and cooperative pubic-private efforts. • Create the “surface-to-water” shipper tax credit program to reward measurable movement of cargo from the land-based freight transportation system to the marine highway. • Fully fund surface transportation access projects with emphasis on projects of national significance specifically targeted to reduce surface freight congestion. • Reauthorize and fully fund all freight transportation programs established in SAFETEA-LU. • Augment freight terminal operating procedures and intermodal networks with increased use of information technology (e.g., PierPass, virtual container yard, chassis pooling) to enhance productivity. • Revise statutes and legislation to reduce or remove constraints and barriers to multi-modal and system-wide policies and funding. • Structure surface transportation programs and regulations to coordinate the individual modes. For example, legislation could address the entire transportation system instead of separate highway, rail, environmental and various individual maritime, freight waterway and dredging elements. • To maximize the use of waterborne transportation alternatives and expand capacity, state and local governments and transportation planners, including Metropolitan Planning Organizations, should incorporate national transportation system strategies and priorities in state, local and regional transportation planning and investment. Solutions to capacity challenges will require the public and private sectors to anticipate and address overall system requirements.

124 • Establish Federal, state, and local “land bank” incentives, including policy development, legislation, and rulemaking, to set aside property for port capacity. • Require ports receiving federal funds to provide zoning or land use protection at their facilities. • Establish Federal incentives to promote regional connectivity of the Nation’s freight system, through such means as the Corridor of the Future Program and Projects of National Significance that connect to international port and intermodal gateways. • Expand the development of ports and distribution centers outside urban centers through a system of incentives. • Incentives should be considered for nationally significant port expansion projects. One possible example is the Federal Aviation Administration. If an airport owner receives Federal funds, it is obligated to comply with FAA land use compatibility requirements around the airport. Another possibility is to tie certain Federal funding to states and Metropolitan Planning Organizations to similar obligations. • The Department of Transportation, the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency and other Federal agencies should accelerate the use of technologies and systems that serve to increase safety of navigation, as well as improve the efficiency and resiliency of marine transportation through our waterways. Authority is needed to develop the capacity of the Nation’s small and medium sized port facilities. • Balance freight flows through Federal assistance to small and medium ports that process significant strategic cargoes and directly provide congestion relief to major intermodal gateways. • Partner with the Department of Defense to expand strategic port capacity and cost-share the development and utilization of small and medium ports to both distribute risk, and add capacity and efficiencies. • Provide incentives to use small and medium ports as a key element of an efficient and expanded Marine Highway System. • Assist small and medium ports to develop critical infrastructure and capacity. For example, port-specific legislation has already been enacted to designate the Maritime Administration as a “one stop” lead agency in the management and allocation of Federal, state and local resources for specific port modernization projects. This legislative authority could serve as a template for a broader authorization to manage a mix of public and private port funding sources to benefit capacity development at the Nation’s smaller ports. Streamlining the national dredging process will greatly enhance port capacity and productivity. • Prioritize and expedite the permitting process through better Federal interagency coordination through such means as revisions to multi-agency policies, procedures, and guidelines -- to reduce the time, complexity, and expense required to undertake a major infrastructure development project. • Spend down the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund in a coordinated and accelerated effort to maintain, modernize, and expand port productivity. • Fully fund the restoration of the Inland Waterway infrastructure, i.e., locks, dams, navigation systems, to meet present and anticipated future capacity needs. Public and private sector cooperation is vital to port development. • Provide incentives for the use of a broad range of investment tools, including user fees, debt financing, tax-based revenues, and public-private partnerships.

125 • Provide incentives to the private sector to participate in capital funding of major infrastructure projects. • Provide a U.S. government Title XI styled Port Infrastructure Loan Program to guarantee private sector debt financing for port infrastructure and modernization of U.S. port facilities. • Develop a tax deferred capital construction fund for port earnings (an IRA-type account) to finance port expansion and modernization projects. • Remove Federal barriers to private investment (e.g., permitting and dredging delays, land use/availability uncertainty, etc.). • Fully establish and quantify the public benefit of providing financial incentives to the private sector in the development of major transportation projects. • The Department of Transportation should take a leadership role in developing systemic policies and mechanisms that facilitate and encourage public-private partnerships in road, rail, and marine highway projects. A simplified environmental permitting process will encourage system improvements. • Mandate accelerated air quality improvement through incentives, i.e., tax credits. • Explore coordinated policies and rulemaking for marine resource conservation (clean water, wildlife habitats, and reduction of invasive species). • Expand the use of incentives to reduce fuel consumption related to transportation, including the introduction of new technologies and alternative fuel use. • The Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Commerce, and other Federal agencies should provide leadership on improving policies impacting marine air emissions, invasive species, ballast water treatment, and other environmental issues. This includes international standard-setting through organizations such as the International Maritime Organization, as well as working with states, regions, and other environmental stakeholders to ensure national policy supports state and regional needs, and avoids vessel operators having to meet multiple, conflicting regulations as they move cargo through multiple jurisdictions. • The Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency should lead an effort to improve collaboration between industry stakeholders, government agencies, and the concerned public on how to effectively reduce the time it takes to complete environmental reviews and issue construction permits. This should include revising policies, procedures, and guidelines to streamline the environmental review and permitting process for maintenance, modernization, and expansion projects in and near ports and waterways. The goal should be to reduce the time, complexity and expense required and to establish a stable and predictable timeline to reduce risk for private investment. Integrated data collection will aid in the prioritization of freight planning. • Establish the collection of accurate freight volume data to develop a uniform system of measurement that tracks system performance. • Mandate a single Federal agency “one-stop shop” as the lead for the collection, analysis, and dissemination of comprehensive freight data. • Use accurate volume data to examine modal balancing in the system. • The Federal Government, states, local authorities (including ports) and private sector stakeholders should collaborate to develop a uniform system of measurement that tracks current and projected transportation system performance, and can model or predict future performance under circumstances of disruptions, emergencies, or changing trends

126 in transportation. A single Federal entity should be designated as lead agency and provided with the resources needed to develop this capability. Fully develop the capacity of America’s Marine Highways. • Fully implement the Short Sea Shipping Transportation Provisions mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. • Fully fund the America’s Marine Highway Initiative. • Incentivize marine highway start-up companies that measurably reduce surface congestion and air pollution, which result in energy savings and reduced highway repair costs. • Quantify the public benefits of increased waterway usage as a direct result of Marine Highway systems. • Invest in new vessel technology to improve productivity and system efficiency. • Remove/reduce impediments to Marine Highway systems, such as Harbor Maintenance Tax and the 24-hour rule. • Appropriate Federal agencies, in consultation with industry, should revise Inland Waterway Users Fund legislation in order to efficiently and equitably collect funds to modernize and replace critical inland waterway infrastructure. Information sharing across modes and intermodal networks will increase productivity. • Fund, test, and demonstrate innovative technologies and systems to improve Marine Transportation System performance. • Engage labor in developing a set of guidelines to establish uniform standards that measure port throughput efficiency (velocity), effectiveness and performance of infrastructure, technology and processes for enhancements as needed. • The Federal Government should develop, in close collaboration with ports and terminal operators, a set of guidelines aimed at establishing uniform standards that measure port throughput and efficiency (velocity) to identify bottlenecks and measure the effectiveness of infrastructure, technological or procedural enhancements. • The Department of Transportation, Department of Homeland Security, and other Federal agencies should, in close collaboration with state and local governments and private sector shippers, freight forwarders and third-party logistics providers, develop a communications and coordination network. This network should operate 24/7 to share information. Incentives, tax or fee waivers, or other appropriate mechanisms should be available, when appropriate, to reduce bottlenecks or shift freight flows to optimal modes. Address Federal governance issues to make policy, planning, funding, and implementation more effective and efficient. • The Department of Transportation, the Maritime Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others, in partnership with state and local governments and private sector stakeholders, should develop a means for planning Marine Transportation System infrastructure projects with the greatest national significance to focus limited public and private resources on those projects. This must be a systemic view, linking water access, ports and terminals, intermodal near-port connectors and primary interstate rail, road and Marine Highway corridors. Planning should address future trends in transportation, including infrastructure and use of technology and should exploit all existing capacity, and make maximum use of public and private resources. • The various functions provided by the Federal Government should be streamlined, including constructing, operating and maintaining the navigable channels; managing traffic on waterways; providing aids to navigation, charts and information on water and weather conditions; regulating safety and environmental compatibility of vessels; responding to

127 accidents; helping to identify resources for projects that link ports and terminals to key corridors; and ensuring the security of the Marine Transportation System and its components. This might be done by consolidating these functions in one Federal agency. • The Department of Defense and the Maritime Administration should lead the development of new and innovative mechanisms to give the military better access to Strategic Ports; support security training for mariners and short based maritime personnel; and, collaborate to identify and implement best practices Encourage worker recruitment and retention. • The Federal Government should continue to support the system of Federal and state merchant marine academies so they can attract, train and educate America’s future merchant marine officers. In addition, appropriate Federal agencies should review and revise certification and licensing requirements as necessary to ensure the knowledge, skills and abilities required of our workforce accurately reflect current industry needs. • The private sector should improve recruitment and retention of skilled workers for our domestic and international trades to reduce seagoing and shoreside workforce shortages. In addition, the private sector should implement programs to streamline the training necessary in order to meet workforce certification and licensing standards.

These recommendations are by no means a complete list or inventory of the many actions we must take to keep America competitive and our economy growing in the 21st century; they represent a framework of actions that the public and private sector must undertake to meet the demands of tomorrow’s Marine Transportation System. The primary focus is on containerized transportation, and more work must be done to address energy, liquid cargoes, dry bulk cargoes, breakbulk cargoes, and passenger trades, all essential components of the Marine Transportation System. The Maritime Administration will be studying these other elements of the system as well as issuing reports and recommendations. Further, we will be working with governmental, public, and private stakeholders to address the challenges we uncover and to take advantage of the opportunities ahead.

It should also be noted that the Report was prepared during a time of extreme volatility for the world’s economy. However, the current economic climate does in no way alter the need to meet the recommendations contained in the Report. In fact, the current slowdown should be seen as an opportunity to better prepare and coordinate our response to the many challenges facing our Nation’s ports and the intermodal system.

128 Agenda Item #11 WCCC Board of Directors

Alaska Forum on the Environment “Arctic Transportation: Central Hubs and Future Infrastructure”

Past and Present 9 42 Harbors Developed/Modified 9 14 Nav iga tion Channe ls Es ta blis he d 9 6 Harbors Under Construction or Modification 9 2 Harbors in Design 9 Many more in Planning ‰ Most support the fishing industry or local travel. ‰ All developed separately and independently of each other.

129 1 Past Systems Analyses 9 Western General Cargo Study 9 Minerals Development Study 9 Southeast Harbors of Refuge Study 9 Northern Sea Route Study

‰ Most did not result in further action due to lack of overall sponsorship or direction

Future Direction

9 Hurricane Katrina focused the need for Systems Analysis for future planning. Too many pieces of iftt(infrastructure (ex. L evees and seawall ll)s) connect tded without proper integration. 9 Future Corps studies to follow Systems Analysis. 9 Harbors are part of a system and not truly independent of each other. 9 Transportation of goods by water is and will be changing due to climate changes and changes in the markets.

‰ Hence, the Corps is proposing the Alaska Regional Ports Study

2 Alaska Regional Ports Study

Scope of Initiative 9 Traffic on future Arctic Sea Routes 9 Alaska Canada Rail Link & Anchorage Container Land Bridge 9 Port MacKenzie bulk cargo via Alaska Canada Rail Link ‰ Summary of Opportunities and Next Steps

3 Arctic Sea Routes

NorthernNorthern NorthwestNorthwest Sea RouteRouteSea PassagePassage (NSR)(NSR) (NWP)(NWP)

North Europe - North Asia Trade Route

ƒ One of the world’s largest trade routes ƒ Via Suez Canal • 11,070 nm ƒ Via NSR • 7,480 nm ƒ Savings • 3,590 nm (32%) • 8-11 days

4 North Europe - Pacific Northwest Trade Route

ƒ Niche route, forest products, bulks ƒ Via Panama Canal • 8,840 nm ƒ Via NSR • 7,100 nm ƒ Savings • 1,740 nm (20%) • 3-6 days

North Asia - East Coast Trade Route

ƒ Containers, autos, bulk cargoes ƒ Via Panama Canal • 9,800 nm ƒ Via NWP • 7,560 nm ƒ Savings • 2,240 nm (23%) • 4-7 days

Figure 2 . 13 - North Asia/East Coast Trade - NWP as Alternative to Panama Canal

5 Market Entry Analysis Trans-Arctic Trade Routes - 2050 ventional n Co

Breakbulk Liner Dry Bulk Charter Container Breakbulk Charter Liquid Bulk Charter Automobile Project/Heavy Lift Ice Strengthened VESSEL TYPE REQUIRED

Dry Bulk Contract Liquid Bulk Contract Breaking e Ic

60 DAYS 120-180 DAYS 365 DAYS High Year-to-Year High Year-to-Year Low Year-to-Year Variability Variability Variability

TRANS-ARCTIC NAVIGATION WINDOW

Probability of Conditions High Probability Medium Probability Low Probability Alaska Regional Ports VeryStudy Low Probability

Market Entry Analysis Arctic O/D Trade Routes - 2050 ventional n Co

Ocean Barge Project/Heavy Lift Dry Bulk Charter Liquid Bulk Charter Ice Strengthened

VESSEL TYPE REQUIRED Oil/Gas Exp/Ser/Sup Mineral Exp/Ser/Sup

Breaking Dry Bulk Contract e Liquid Bulk Contract Ic

60 DAYS 120-180 DAYS 365 DAYS High Year-to-Year High Year-to-Year Low Year-to-Year Variability Variability Variability

ORIGIN/DESTINATION NAVIGATION WINDOW*

Probability of Conditions High Probability Medium Probability Low Probability Alaska Regional Ports VeryStudy Low Probability

6 Potential Arctic Maritime Traffic

ƒ Arctic O/D - High Probability ƒ Trans-Arctic - Medium Probability during exploration & development • Handysize, Handymax dry bulk & • Drill shipp,s, barg es , su ppy,pply, tanker charter vessels construction, project/heavy lift • 20-50,000 dwt • Up to 20,000 dwt • 30-39 ft draft • 10-30 ft draft • Opportunistic, relatively infrequent • Frequent during expl. & const. ƒ Trans-Arctic - Lower Probability ƒ Arctic O/D - High Probability • Breakbulk liner assuming project is operational • Breakbulk charter • Handysize, Handymax, Panamax, possibly Capesize bulk & tankers • Projjyect/heavy lift • 20-130,000 dwt • Dry bulk contract • 30-60 ft draft • Liquid bulk contract • Each project: ~25-100 ships/yr

Hong Kong to with Containers Intermodal Mileage, Assumes Rail Link Built

7 Hong Kong to Chicago

Miles Days Cost/TEU Anchorage 9,680 17-18 $1,860

Prince Rupert 8,745 16 $1,571

LA/LB 9,544 20 $1,588

Sources: North Pacific Rim Trade Corridor Study, GHK, 2007 and Distances Between Ports (PUB. 151)

Capacity Options

ƒ Terminal productivity ƒ Rail capacity expansions improvements • Double & triple tracking • 30% increase in LA/LB • 10,000-ft. trains since 2004 breakdown • Alameda Corridor - East • Densification from 3-5K • $2.2B funding proposal TEU/acre/year to 10K ƒ New terminals & capacity ƒ New ports expansions • PRP, Mexico, Coos Bay • 2, 300 new acres planned • Wild card • Handles 50% more West ƒ All water routes Coast growth • Panama Canal expansion • +100% with densification • Suez Canal route

8 Super Post-Panamax Ships

ƒ Built - 10,050 TEU ƒ Planned - 12, 500 TEU ƒ ~1,150’ x 175’ x 49’ ƒ 18-22 boxes across ƒ Design vessel for Prince Rupert ƒ 35% lower cost/TEU than 6,800 TEU ship ƒ Will fit through the expanded Panama Canal & deepened Suez Canal

Port of Anchorage Intermodal Expansion ƒ Ship itinerary dilemma • Turn at Anchorage • Continue south ƒ Handles small-scale operation QuickTime™ and a decompressor • 400,000 TEU/yr are needed to see this picture. ƒ Major port & rail expansion needed for larger operation • 800,000 TEU/yr • 8,000 TEU ships

9 Potential Mineral Exports and Rail/Port Routes

Potential Export Tonnage Via Port MacKenzie •• 1212--28 MTPY w/o Iron Ore •• 3535--5151 MTPY w/ Iron Ore

Sources: Economic Analysis of Rail Link (Paul Metz) and ACRL Feasibility Study

Alaska Regional Ports Study

Rail and Port Costs Port MacKenzie v. Haines ƒ Full build-out of ACRL ƒ Initial phase option of w/o iron ore ACRL • PMK $127-133/ton • PMK $28/ton • Haines $152-158 • Haines $16 • PRP $132-139 • PRP $35 ƒ Full build-out of ACRL ƒ PMK slightly lower cost with iron ore with full build-out of ACRL • PMK $47-53/ton ƒ Haines much lower cost • Haines $50-54 with initial phase option

• PRP $52-58 Source: ACRL Feasibility Study

10 Summary of Strategic Opportunities for USACE Alaska District

Arctic Origin &

IGH Destination Trades E H

Port MacKenzie Trans-Arctic Bulks Trade Routes Haines/Skagway Bulks MEDIUM MEDIUM KELIHOOD OF OCCURRENC I

L Anchorage Container Land Bridge LOW

LOW MEDIUM HIGH

MAGNITUDE OF MARITIME IMPACT

Higher Priority Medium Priority Lower Priority

Shippin Routes Places of Interest

Barrow

DeLong Mt. Little Diomede Nome Savoonga Anchorage

St. Paul Kodiak

False Pass Sand Point Adak Dutch Harbor

11 Next Steps

¾ State of Alaska to sponsor a Planning Assistance to States Study to look at add ports and harbors to long range transportation plan ¾ Scope of work and draft Agreement under review ¾ NRNome Reques tdCtStdPtEifDDftVlted Corps to Study Port Expansion for Deep Draft Vessels – Funding Needed ¾ 2008 Ports Conference held because of perceived lack of planning for marine transportation; Conference validated this. ¾ Needs steering committees, lead agencies ¾ Need Regional plans that include ports and harbors ¾ What improvements are needed and where? ¾ Corps Port and Harbor development is a 15+ year process…requires CiltillthiitiiiiCongressional action, local cost sharing, positive economics, engineering standards, environmental analysis and acceptability

Questions?

Port of Nome, Alaska

12