150 likes | 161 Vues
Wireless Roadside Safety Inspection (WRI) Research Program. Arkansas Trucking Association Maintenance & Technology Council Meeting March 11, 2008 Springdale, AR. Jeff Loftus Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 202-385-2363 jeff.loftus@dot.gov. Steve Keppler
E N D
Wireless Roadside Safety Inspection (WRI)Research Program Arkansas Trucking Association Maintenance & Technology Council Meeting March 11, 2008 Springdale, AR Jeff Loftus Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 202-385-2363 jeff.loftus@dot.gov Steve Keppler Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance 202-775-1623, x106 SteveK@cvsa.org
The Problem • 64 percent of all fatal truck crashes have the “Critical Reason” linked to the truck* • Drivers with reckless driving violations are 325% more likely to have a future crash than drivers without violations • Truck numbers & mileage grow each year while roadside safety inspection resources remain constant • The likelihood of a roadside inspection is far less than a truck being weighed • 3 million annual truck inspections with a 73% Violation rate (25% OOS rate) • 177 million weigh inspections (staffed & WIM) with 515,587 citations – a 0.29% violation rate • 82 million weigh inspections (staffed) • 95 million weigh inspections (WIM) * Includes both single and multiple-vehicle fatal truck crashes (Source: LTTCS)
Driver Violations % Driver OOS Violations Vehicle Violations % Vehicle OOS Violations Logbook 40.0% Brakes 41.2% Lighting 16.6% HOS 28.7% Tires 9.4% CDL 19.4% Load Securement 15.7% Total 88.1% Total 82.9% Opportunities for Technology • Analysis of historical inspection data reveals that a large portion of significant “defects” are limited to a few items • With the exception of load-securement, most of the key vehicle and operator condition criteria lend themselves to onboard electronic monitoring and diagnostic assessment
WRI Program Vision & Goal (The Solution) • Vision • Motor Carrier safety could be improved through dramatic increases in roadside safety inspections due to wireless inspections using proven technologies and processes. • Driver and vehicle safety assessments occur frequently enough to ensure compliance while minimizing disruptions to safe and legal motor carrier transportation. • Goal • Demonstrate and measure government and industry benefits and costs of a Wireless Roadside Inspection network across a multi-state region to enable a “go/no go” decision for nationwide deployment.
Estimated Costs & Benefits* • Costs • Public sector annual costs of $45M – $76M • Private sector annual costs of $224M – $395M • $533 – $940/vehicle • 420,000 new vehicles equipped per year * Development and Evaluation of Alternative Concepts for Wireless Roadside Truck and Bus Safety Inspections, FMCSA, 2007. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/wireless-inspection-report.pdf
ANNUAL BENEFITS Annual Lives Saved 253 Annual Injuries Prevented 6,192 Total Annual Benefits ($) $1.7B ANNUALIZED COSTS Government—Facility, Equipment, IT, Communications Capital Costs (Amortized over 10 years) $22M – $34M Government—Facility, Equipment, IT, Communications O&M Costs $23M – 42M Industry—Annual Incremental CMV Costs (Based on 420,000 units/yr) ($533 - $940/CMV) $224M – $395M Total Annualized Cost $269M – $471M BENEFIT/COST RATIO High – Low 6.17:1 – 3.51:1 Average 4.84 : 1 Estimated Benefit-Cost Ratio
Additional Motor Carrier Benefits* • PrePass Pre-clearance Weigh Station bypass system benefits (1997-2007) • Fleets enrolled in PrePass saved over 10 years • 20 million hours in avoided delay • 120 million gallons of fuel • $1.1 billion in operational cost savings (assuming $5 per stop) * Source: Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate (HELP), Inc., www.cvo.com
Program Details • Demonstration of real-time and automated safety compliance checks • Driver data (ID, license status, log info) • Truck & bus data (lights, brakes, tires) • Slow & highway speeds • Fixed & mobile inspection units • Program Status • 2005-6: Proof-of-concept test: successful • 2007-9: Pilot test phase • Multiple comm. paths • Back office integration • Interface refinement • Draft performance specifications
Conceptual Safety Data Message Set (SDMS) Contents Electronic On-Board Recorder (EOBR) Data Driver’s Log (Duty Status + Location of Duty Status Change over time) Identifiers Driver license jurisdiction and ID Vehicle identification number (VIN) Vehicle state and plate Motor carrier/coach USDOT number Shipping document ID Vehicle Status Lighting Safety belt Vehicle Measures Brakes Tire pressure Vehicle position Weight Data Bus: SAEJ1708/SAEJ1587, SAEJ1939 Additional Vehicle Measures or Status Cargo (incl. Hazmat) Collision warning Container Coupling Driver performance Emissions Exhaust system Fuel system Steering Suspension Trailer Wheels Wipers Other
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Phase I: Concept Development & Verification Phase II: System & Strategy Definition POC Test • One Location • One Vehicle • Vehicle to Roadside Pilot Test • Corridor • Several Vehicles • Alternate Technologies • Multiple communication technologies • Roadside to Safety Data Field Operational Test WRI Phase & Schedule Phase III: Finalize Deployment Strategies & Impacts Deploy WRI Program • Multi-Corridor/Jurisdiction Fleet • Selected Technologies • Full Network Go / No Go Decision Point
WRI Program Next Steps • Carry out pilot test(s) • Feasibility and capacity of technologies & communications options • User Interfaces and back office processes • Connections to state/federal databases • SDMS creation and use • Refine Concept of Operations / Architectures • Explore and understand interdiction strategies • Update analyses (cost benefit, business case, regulatory impact) • Outreach and collaborate with stakeholders/partners • Coordinate/collaborate with other efforts & programs (Compass, CSA 2010, Customs, Homeland Security, etc.)
Questions-Discussion • What diagnostic/fleet management elements should be included in the Safety Data Message Set (SDMS) to give it dual use? • Are any elements in the SDMS problematic? • Are there other communication paths / technologies that should be investigated? • What incentives would help voluntary participation? • Why should fleets provide driver/vehicle-specific data to gov’t? • What should they receive in return?
Questions-Discussion • Are there any barriers/issues that you see to WRI? • What are key measures you are looking for when determining ROI? • When you invest in technology/capital expenditures, what is the expected payback period?
Thank you! Steve Keppler Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance 1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 803Washington, DC 20036Ph: (202) 775-1623 x106Cell: (443) 812-1298Fx: (202) 775-1624E-mail: SteveK@cvsa.orgUrl: www.cvsa.org Jeff Loftus Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, D.C. 20590 202-385-2363 phone 202-385-2433 fax jeff.loftus@dot.gov, e-mail www.fmcsa.dot.gov, URL