Committee Meeting Minutes

U.S. Department of Transportation
ITS Program Advisory Committee (ITSPAC)

November 26-27, 2007
Conference Room 6, West Building Lobby
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20590

1. Committee Members Present

Steve Albert
Joseph Averkamp
Kenneth Button
Robert Denaro
Ann Flemer
Alfred Foxx
Randell Iwasaki
Thomas Lambert
Bryan Mistele
Michael Replogle
Tomiji Sugimoto
Joseph Sussman
Greer Woodruff
John Worthington

2. Committee Members Absent

Lawrence Burns
John Inglish
Adrian Lund
Granger Morgan
Iris Weinshall

3. Others Present

John Augustine, ITS Joint Program Office
Joyce Bader, Joyce Bader & Associates
Steven Bayles, Office of the Secretary of Transportation
Scott Belcher, ITS America
Jerome Bracken, Science and Technology Policy Institute
Paul Brubaker; Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration
Tom Bulger, G.R.I.
Paul Feenstra, Research and Innovative Technology Administration
Laurie Flaherty, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Stephen Godwin, Transportation Research Board
Camille Kamga, University Transportation Research Center Region 2
Jane Lappin, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Siva Narla, Institute of Transportation Engineers
Robert Paaswell, University Transportation Research Center Region 2
Andy Palanisamy, Citizant
Jeff Paniati, Federal Highway Administration
Joseph Peters, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center
Marcia Pincus, ITS Joint Program Office
James Pol, Federal Highway Administration
Amy Polk, Citizant
Shelley Row, ITS Joint Program Office
Ray Resendes, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Tom Schaffrit, Honda R&D America, Inc.
Mike Schagrin, ITS Joint Program Office
Rick Schuman, INRIX
Susan Slye, ITS Joint Program Office
Joseph Thomas, U. S. Department of Commerce
Richard Van Atta, Science and Technology Policy Institute
Carlos Vélez, Citizant

4. Access to ITSPAC Documents

  • Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the records, reports, transcripts, minutes, appendixes, working papers, drafts, studies, agenda, and other documents made available to or prepared for or by the ITSPAC are available for public inspection and copying in the ITSPAC Website at http://www.its.dot.gov/itspac/index.htm.
  • Two transcripts are available in the ITSPAC Website for the November 26-27, 2007, meeting: the Day 1 Transcript, for November 26 and the Day 2 Transcript, for November 27. Throughout this document, the text in brackets following agenda or other topic headings identifies the specific transcript and page number where the detailed transcription of the topic discussions can be found; e.g., [Day 1 Transcript, P. 3].

 

5. Agenda

Day 1, November 26, 2007

  • Welcome and Introductions [Day 1 Transcript, P. 3]
  • ITS Program Overview [Day 1 Transcript, P. 13]
  • Identifying Trends in ITS (Panel Discussion) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 101]
  • Advisory Committee Questions and Discussion [Day 1 Transcript, P. 146]
  • Opportunity for Public Comments [Day 1 Transcript, P. 163]
  • Wrap-up and Guidance for Day 2 Activities [Day 1 Transcript, P. 163]

Day 2, November 27, 2007

  • Introduction [Day 2 Transcript, P. 3]
  • Report on Results of ITSPAC and Other Interviews [Day 2 Transcript, P. 6]
  • Future Vision for ITS Program [Day 2 Transcript, P. 7]
  • Trends [Day 2 Transcript, P. 7]
  • Vision: What Does Success Look Like? [Day 2 Transcript, P. 49]
  • Opportunities and Barriers [Day 2 Transcript, P. 104]
  • Implications for the Future ITS Program [Day 2 Transcript, P. 137]
  • Summary of Outcomes [Day 2 Transcript, P. 203]
  • Next Steps in Strategic Planning Activities [Day 2 Transcript, P. 203]

6. Summary of Proceedings

Day 1, November 26, 2007

  • Welcome and Introductions [Day 1 Transcript, P. 3]. Ms. Row welcomed participants and facilitated their self introductions. Ms. Row invited Paul Brubaker, Administrator of the U.S. DOT Research and Innovative Technology Administration, to make introductory comments.

    Mr. Brubaker stated that there currently are many opportunities for leveraging technologies, and that the ITS Program seeks to leverage technology to improve safety and system performance . He added that the U.S. DOT looks to the ITSPAC for real creativity in helping to develop the vision for the next transportation reauthorization legislation cycle of how to best apply current and emerging technologies to our transportation infrastructure to help immeasurably improve safety and system performance.

    Ms. Row described the structure of the one-and-one-half day meeting. Day 1 would be an overview of the current ITS Program and Day 2 would include discussions of trends, the vision of a wildly successful ITS Program, opportunities and barriers, and implications for the future ITS Program.

 

  • ITS Program Overview [Day 1 Transcript, P. 13]. Ms. Row’s ITS Program overview included a review of the program’s history (“Where We Have Been”) and a description of the current program (“Where We Are”).
    • In her historical overview, Ms. Row traced development of the ITS Program in terms of the last three transportation authorization legislation periods: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) of 1998, and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) of 2005.
    • Ms Row’s discussion of the current ITS Program addressed its two major program elements: ITS Major Initiatives and ITS Technology Transfer Programs. [Day 1 Transcript, P. 37]
      • The ITS Major Initiatives are:
        Clarus (surface weather observing, forecasting, and data management)[Day 1 Transcript, P. 38]
        Cooperative Intersection Collision Avoidance System (CICAS) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 50]
        Congestion Initiative [Day 1 Transcript, P. 55]
        Electronic Freight Management (EFM) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 63]
        Emergency Transportation Operations (ETO) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 65]
        Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 67]
        Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety Systems (IVBSS) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 72]
        Mobility Services for All Americans (MSAA) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 76]
        Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG9-1-1) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 78]
        Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 82
      • The ITS Technology Transfer Programs are:
        ITS Program Assessment [Day 1 Transcript, P. 89]
        ITS Architecture [Day 1 Transcript, P. 93]
        ITS Standards [Day 1 Transcript, P. 94]
        ITS Professional Capacity Building [Day 1 Transcript, P. 95
  • Identifying Trends in ITS (Panel Discussion) [Day 1 Transcript, P. 101]. Ms. Row introduced a panel of experts who were asked to discuss, from their professional perspectives, trends and issues they see on the horizon that are relevant to transportation and technology. The panel members were:
    • Richard Van Atta, Science and Technology Policy Institute [Day 1 Transcript, P. 102]
    • Jerry Bracken, Science and Technology Policy Institute [Day 1 Transcript, P. 108]
    • Steve Godwin; Director, Studies and Special Programs Division, Transportation Research Board [Day 1 Transcript, P. 119]
    • Robert Paaswell; Director, University Transportation Research Center Region 2 [Day 1 Transcript, P. 132]
  • Advisory Committee Questions and Discussion [Day 1 Transcript, P. 146]. Ms. Row requested ITSPAC reactions to the panel presentations and facilitated a question and answer period.
  • Opportunity for Public Comments [Day 1 Transcript, P. 163].Ms. Row invited comments or questions from non-committee participants, and there were none.
  • Wrap-up and Guidance for Day 2 Activities [Day 1 Transcript, P. 163]. Ms. Row emphasized to committee members that they would very much be involved in interactive discussions during Day 2 activities.

Day 2, November 27, 2007

  • Introduction [Day 2 Transcript, P. 3]. Ms. Row described the process for Day 2 activities. In contrast to the Day 1 focus on the history and description of the current ITS Program, the Day 2 objective would be to focus on addressing the future vision for the ITS Program – the “few big ideas about what the future of this program can and should be that make it compelling and exciting and provide great leverage to improve our transportation environment.”
  • Report on Results of ITSPAC and Other Interviews [Day 2 Transcript, P. 6]. Ms. Row informed committee members that they received as a handout another copy of the summary of their responses to interviews by the ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) staff, which had been included in the meeting read-ahead materials. Additionally, they received as a handout a distillation of the recurring insights and themes identified in the interview responses. Ms. Row added that she didn’t intend to “walk through” this information, and that she expected that the nature of committee member responses to the interview questions would be reflected in the day’s discussions.
  • Future Vision for ITS Program [Day 2 Transcript, P. 7]. The future vision discussion took the form of a series of short presentations followed by group discussions, which were facilitated by Joyce Bader. The group discussions addressed the following four topic areas that had been developed during JPO staff discussions:
    • Trends [Day 2 Transcript, P. 7]
    • Vision: What would we see in the world if ITS were wildly successful? [Day 2 Transcript, P. 49]
    • Opportunities and Barriers [Day 2 Transcript, P. 104]
    • Implications for the future ITS Program [Day 2 Transcript, P. 137
  • Summary Outcomes [Day 2 Transcript, P. 203]. Ms. Bader facilitated a review of common themes and differences evident in the just-completed “future vision” discussion. She concluded that the discussion produced immense material on potential vision, mission, and focus for the ITS Program; which will require a lot of “sifting through” in terms of how the existing ITS Program might need to change in the future.
  • Next Steps in Strategic Planning Activities [Day 2 Transcript, P. 203]
    • Ms. Row stated that the U.S. DOT will “assimilate…sort… and parse” the large amount of information gathered during the meeting and begin to craft words to explain “what we are hearing and…what the implications are.” This information will be vetted within U.S. DOT, and then the ITSPAC will meet again in March 2008 to provide the U.S. DOT additional input. Ms. Row summarized the following “nuggets” of key information she had heard during the discussions [Day 2 Transcript, P. 205]:
      • A positive transportation experience that supports expanded choices in terms of quality of life
      • Stress-free travel with focus on movement of people, not necessarily cars
      • Metrics for transportation system performance measuring
      • Minimizing transportation system environmental impacts
      • Transportation is ill-priced, leading to investment decisions that sub-optimize system performance
      • It is time for a transformational, political strategy
      • ITS applications are not totally successful in the eyes of the public
    • Ms. Row added that the outcomes of the ITSPAC meeting will be “framed” and used to communicate a “big and exciting” vision for the future of ITS at a number of upcoming venues, such as the January 7-10, 2008, Consumer Electronics Show; the January 13-17, 2008, annual Transportation Research Board meeting ; and the November 16-20, 2008, World Congress on ITS and ITS America Annual Meeting.
    • Ms. Row invited Mr. Brubaker to address the group[Day 2 Transcript, P. 208] .
      • Mr. Brubaker commented that the Secretary of Transportation frequently addresses three priorities: safety, system performance, and 21 st Century solutions; and that the Secretary really is talking about how to apply technology to system performance to immeasurably improve things like the velocity of the supply chain. Mr. Brubaker stated that there is a draft document currently going through the U.S. DOT clearance process that ties together the Secretary’s priorities and lays out a vision of high-level goals for the 21 st Century transportation system. Mr. Brubaker stated this document will be a very valuable publication to consider in addressing the future of the ITS Program.
      • Mr. Brubaker also expressed the desire to “get some quick retail wins” by deployed technologies to demonstrate their value to the public.
      • Mr. Brubaker agreed with Mr. Replogle’s comments concerning the lack of national leadership and goals in forging a vision for the future transportation system. He stated that as the ITS Program goes forward, goals will be established that will provide “something to shoot for and something to measure against.”
      • In closing, Mr. Brubaker expressed his desire that future planning activities be “dramatic and bold and innovative and realistic.”
      • In her final summary[Day 2 Transcript, P. 213] , Ms. Row stated that future ITS Program strategic planning likely will address two major components: (1) content -- “what we think we ought to be doing,” and (2) role -- the appropriate JPO role in the future ITS Program.
      • Based on group discussion, the next ITSPAC meeting was scheduled tentatively for March 12 and 13, 2008.
      • Ms. Row requested committee member comments on the meeting “process” and on additional information and/or resources they might need to support future committee work[Day 2 Transcript, P. 216]. Several committee members contributed process-related comments and recommendations for additional information and resources.

7. Adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are accurate and complete.

Shelley Row
Designated Federal Official
ITS Program Advisory Committee

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE • Washington, DC 20590 • 800.853.1351 • E-mail OST-R

Accessibility | Disclaimer | Fast Lane | FedStats | Freedom of Information Act | No FEAR Act | OIG Hotline | Privacy Policy | USA.gov | White House


OST-R's privacy policies and procedures do not necessarily apply to external web sites. We suggest contacting these sites directly for information on their data collection and distribution policies.