Expert Group 2: Vehicle Classification: Overview of the work

1. Expert Group 2: Vehicle Classification: Overview of the work Working for DGTREN in support of the Comité Télépéage October 2004

2. Overview • Scope of the work • Background • Guiding Principles • A cost effective solution for operators and users • Applying the parameters to appropriate vehicles • Collection, maintenance and certification of the classification data Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

3. Scope - 1 • Context • EFC Directive 2004/52/EC on interoperability of electronic road toll systems in the Community • European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) to be defined - target July 2006 • Group established by the European Commission • Task • To provide recommendations on vehicle parameters to be stored in OBUs designed to support the EETS • Output: Recommendations to the Commission for presentation and discussion at the EFC Expert Group • Seven experts involved, selected by the European Commission from the former project ADVICE and from comments provided by EFC Expert Group in early 2004 Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

4. Scope - 2 • Must have no impact on national tarification schemes • Must be independent of OBU technology • Group restricted to vehicle characteristics • Does not cover any parameters required for variations in tariff of a contractual nature:- • Use being made of the vehicle (e.g. emergency vehicles) • Load carried by the vehicle (e.g. local industry) • Characteristics of the driver (e.g. disabled person) • Characteristics of the journey (e.g. origin/destination) • Group concerned with characteristics which are required by some road toll systems to be declared • Not concerned with characteristics which are always measured at the point of charging • Seeking a cost effective solution • Bearing in mind that most schemes use measured characteristics • All issuers of OBUs intended for use with the EETS will be expected to enter the required parameters. Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

5. Background - current situation • Countries define their own classes and tariffs for charging • Directive 2004/52/CE • does not modify anything in the charging schemes of the Member States; and • does not restrict their freedom • Wide variations in vehicle classes used • Methods of classification • Measured • manual observation • automatic measurement • Declared • parameters/vehicle class stored in the OBU • parameters/vehicle class stored in the central system • Most operators use measured characteristics Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

6. Background - Future situation • Existing systems are evolving • e.g. impact of vehicle design on “height above first axle” • Trend towards free-flow systems creates difficulties for some existing classification schemes • New charging systems are being introduced • e.g. Switzerland, Germany, UK • New charging policies being encouraged • e.g. Draft Eurovignette directive refers to “road friendly suspension”. • Involves the use of new classification criteria • e.g. Weight of the vehicle • OBUs will increasingly be designed to be used in several countries • They will need all the information required for systems in these countries • Operators will need to be confident that the declared classification parameters are correct Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

7. Consequence for interoperability • The OBUs for the EETS needs to contain all the information required by operators using declared parameters • Not feasible to harmonise the tariff classes across Europe • Therefore focus on common vehicle characteristics • Two step process • Derive the characteristics • Assign the vehicle to a tariff class • Focus on agreement of characteristics Glossary of terms Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

8. Guiding Principles • Subsidiarity • the operator remains free to define tariff classes • the operator remains free to define the method of classification • The EETS will be an additional service to that provided locally • All users must be treated equally in a Member State • Users are free to take advantage of the local or European service • The vehicle characteristics must be cost-effective to collect, protect and maintain • Aim for a minimum common set of vehicle characteristics • Recognise that not all local tariff classes can be supported • Provide some features for local use Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

9. A cost effective solution for operators and users • Conflicting requirements • Inclusion of all potential parameters gives flexibility, but means that the OBU needs to be configured for every vehicle. • Difficulty and cost for existing operators is unacceptable • Pre-configured OBUs are cheaper to distribute and maintain • But, they do not offer adequate assurance of characteristics for heavy vehicles • Need to define a minimum set of parameters • To reduce the administrative burden • Criteria for selecting parameters (ISO 14906) • Already in use by some operators • Stable - in terms of the value of the parameter during the operation of the vehicle • Feasible to collect and verify in a cost-effective manner Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

10. Applying the parameters to appropriate vehicles - 1 • Leads to two situations • Light vehicles • Pre-configured OBUs • Minimal vehicle information • Heavy vehicles • Personalised OBUs • Full set of selected parameters Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

11. Definition of appropriate vehicles • Defined vehicle groups according to the need for personalisation • Used UNECE vehicle categories • Internationally recognised • Included in vehicle registration documents • Defines passenger and goods vehicles • Used 3.5 tonne weight limit • Lower limit for charging HGVs in the EFC Directive • Stored in “Vehicle class” attribute for use by operators in determining whether the full set of parameters is available • This is a data element formally defined in ISO 14906 - it is not used here as a Tariff Class Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

12. Vehicles in use (EU15) in 2001 97.5% of vehicles would have a pre-configured OBU Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

13. Vehicle groups Do not try to match against your tariff classes! Note 1: Assumed to be ≤3.5 tonnes, otherwise assigned to group 7 Note 2: Assumed to have 2 axles, otherwise the vehicle is assigned to group 7 Note 3: Note that a few of these vehicles may be ≤3.5 tonnes Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

14. Proposal for parameters • Light vehicles • Vehicle class • Trailer switch (0-1) • European vehicle group (1-7) • Local vehicle group (1-15) • Heavy vehicles • Vehicle class • Trailer switch (0-1) • European vehicle group (1-7) • Local vehicle group (1-15) • Number of axles on the tractor unit (fixed) and trailer (declared) • Maximum laden weight of the drive unit • Maximum laden weight of the vehicle train • Euro value • Vehicle Licence Plate • Vehicle suspension type Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

15. Optional parameters • We recognise that the minimum set may not cover all national services • Optional parameters are intended to support services which exceed the basic EETS service • We recommend that OBUs for the EETS are able to support the use of these parameters. • Appropriate where operators offer variations in tariff based on these parameters • Agreement of operators and issuers involved is required. • Enables contract issuers to offer the inclusion of these parameters where this will offer benefits. • to the user • to the operator Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

16. Parameters (according to ISO 14906) Note 1: Means that the trailer presence has to be correctly declared. For vehicles which may have different configurations, it will be necessary to dynamically declare the trailer by means of a HMI functionality, automatic device or other means. Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

17. Collection, maintenance and certification of the classification data Data lifecycle Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

18. Crucial questions to be answered • Who is authorised to store data in the OBU? • How is the classification parameter data in the OBU protected? • How should the EFC operator certify the data he wants to use in case he does not trust the holder of the OBU, e.g. the driver. • The results will be passed to CESARE III for confirmation and inclusion in the proposed contractual arrangements Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

19. Two types of classification data • Permanent classification data • Very seldom changed • Loaded by authorised (trusted) entity • Protected by different security measures • Certified by measurement or other methods, e.g. electronic signatures • Dynamic classification data • May often be changed • Loaded by anyone with access to the OBU • Will not be protected • Certified by measurement Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

20. Additional material • Practical examples • Justification for choice of parameters • Response to comments received from Member States Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

21. The end

22. Vehicles characteristics defined in ISO 14906 Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

23. Members of Expert Group 2: Vehicle Classification Expert Group on Vehicle Classification

24. Glossary of terms Expert Group on Vehicle Classification