Lest there be any doubt, the main point of introducing state-of-the-art technology into our transportation system should be to improve its performance, not to measure it. Once that technology is deployed more widely, of course, an important by-product will be more timely and granular information about how the system is functioning. In effect, better performance data will be a freebie.

NextGen.  The next big ramp-up in transportation technology will not be on the ground; it will be in the sky. NextGen – the multi-agency initiative led by the FAA to overhaul the way we manage air traffic -- is already seven years old. It’s actually simple in concept – just put a lot more real-time information about the system into the brain of every aircraft and use satellite-based navigation in a more robust way – but very hard to execute. Elimination of circuitous flying, reduced vertical and horizontal separation, greater safety and efficiency are among the most significant dividends. 

A 15-20-year NextGen timetable established at the outset in deference to our financially troubled airlines is now seen as much too slow – even by the airlines themselves. Airport congestion, deteriorating schedule reliability, and the imperative to reduce carbon emissions all mean that program acceleration is badly needed. What we need now, therefore, is a creative aviation reauthorization that establishes a stable and reliable funding stream through which to finance the transformation and to achieve it by a date certain – and well before 2020 or 2025. Maybe the nearly two-year delay (and counting) in getting aviation reauthorization done is a good thing. With each passing week, the urgency of figuring this out becomes more palpable. Failure is not an option.

Rail technology.  Turning to our surface system, the growing ubiquity of GPS navigation systems in our cars – an astonishing technology -- is but a hint of the efficiencies and enhanced safety that are available to us if we simply decide that it’s time to get moving. Congress has already done that for our railroads in the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. It mandated installation of Positive Train Control (a fail-safe system based on automated speed monitoring, crash avoidance, switch monitoring, etc.) by all major freight, intercity passenger, and commuter railroads by 2010.

In fact, the Federal Railroad Administration’s wonderful but little-known research facility in Pueblo, CO (run jointly with the Association of American Railroads), has been working for years on a whole range of new technologies for the enhancement of rail safety:  continuous laser-driven monitoring of track and wheel integrity at full speed and safety enhancements for grade crossings are but two examples. Many of these innovations are being adopted by our railroads simply because they pay for themselves so quickly in avoided mishaps and greater reliability. 

ITS.  The U.S. Government negotiated a permanent reservation of vital spectrum (5.9 GHz) for Dedicated Short-Range Communications – the essential technology for a great many ITS applications. DSRC is widely used in electronic toll collection today, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. We haven’t really begun to exploit DSRC’s potential.  Cooperative adaptive cruise control and forward collision warning; vehicle-infrastructure interface (VII), including safer intersections; data collection and delivery of real-time traffic information; warnings of approaching emergency vehicles; and on and on. It’s time to start deploying those applications more widely. 

As Peter Appel notes, the availability of stimulus funding should help, but only when we get past the “shovel-ready” requirement. The most important step we can take, however, would be a significant increase in our emphasis on technology in the next surface transportation reauthorization – even if it’s the 18-month reauthorization advocated by Secretary LaHood last week. We need some deadlines – particularly where vehicle equipment is involved. Open standards may be a good thing for much of the innovation that we need, but if governments are going to adopt standards for VII, or emergency vehicle warnings, or other public sector functions, somebody needs to tell the auto manufacturers what equipment to install in new vehicles.

eLORAN.  Finally, to return to a topic I mentioned after seeing the Obama Administration’s preliminary budget last February, it is essential that the Administration continue the development of Enhanced LORAN (eLORAN) as the critical backup to our vitally important GPS system.  A team of highly experienced, independent experts, jointly commissioned in 2007 by DOT and DHS, validated its utility and cost-effectiveness beyond question, despite their own initial skepticism. We don’t need to keep studying the same issue over and over. We need eLORAN and the Coast Guard should be given the funds to continue its development.

Collapse

Peter Appel, Administrator of the Department of Transportation's Research and Innovative Technology Administration, sent us the following:

As we look forward to modernizing and rebuilding our transportation system and infrastructure, technology must be a part of our efforts. How that is specifically incorporated is yet to be seen—but Intelligent Transportation Systems will be a large part of our plan. In the near-term, our nation is presented with a tremendous, unique opportunity to advance ITS projects across the country through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). ITS projects planned by state and local governments are eligible for funding from the ARRA’s highway infrastructure investment—an opportunity that removes barriers and can expedite the creation of “smart infrastructure.” 

Today, with over 150 traffic management centers operating in the US, 65 percent of the population is covered by the “511” travel information system, averaging more than 73,000 calls monthly per system; there are more than 4,700 dynamic message signs across the nation, with 36 of the largest metropolitan areas providing real-time travel times on these signs. While these established ITS applications have shown us the potential for providing valuable services to travelers, the next generation of ITS will not only offer travel and safety enhancing services, but will simultaneously provide unprecedented insight into the performance of our transportation networks. 

From construction cones embedded with sensors that collect data about work zone traffic, to GPS-enabled mobile phones carried by travelers participating in innovative travel information programs, the next wave of ITS applications will provide real-time data crucial to measuring the performance of the multi-modal transportation network against specific desired outcomes.

Performance measures designed and developed by DOT’s various modal administrations come to RITA’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics, which has statutory responsibility to review the proposed measures, verify their sources and reliability, and ensure they will yield the most meaningful assessment of outputs and outcomes.  Every year, BTS reviews and publishes the scope, sources, statistical issues, completeness, and reliability of each measure proposed by the operating administrations.

Spurred by results from the Department's ITS program’s research demonstrations and evaluations, state and local governments are embracing these technologies to improve their transportation systems. Most states today have an ITS program in their organization, and over the past 2 decades, $3.45 billion in federal ITS funds have been leveraged to support state investment in these technologies. 

Likewise, we believe that the private sector stands ready to invest in these technologies, and the development of open standards for ITS applications will drive this investment. The Internet initially started with a few basic applications, and then exploded into countless new ones, and fostered new industries—with open standards acting as a major catalyst. Similarly, open standards for ITS would create a framework, or architecture, that is flexible and interoperable—allowing the private sector to develop innovative commercial applications using multiple existing and new technologies.

The Department of Transportation is committed to creating a transportation system that supports economic vitality, is sustainable, and fosters livable communities. ITS applications, and other advanced transportation technologies, will be a critical part of our effort to achieve this goal.

Collapse

First to respond to Ken Orski’s question on the set of proposed transportation performance measures in HR2724, the National Transportation Objectives Act, introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in early June. These are indeed ambitious measures, but we believe we all have a window of opportunity to articulate to the American people what a smarter, safer, and cleaner transportation system will look like and what it will achieve. This is no time for small plans or meager expectations. 

Cutting traffic fatalities in half by the next two decades—as proposed by both AASHTO and T4America—will be a herculean task, but one that we will only achieve if we set our sights on it and align funding and policies to make it happen. In fact, many state departments of transportation are already launching “zero fatality” campaigns based on similar efforts in other countries.

Another objective in HR2724 is a per capita vehicle miles traveled reduction of 16 percent over 20 years. This would essentially hold overall vehicle miles constant as the population rises. This is in line with the recent goal set by Washington state of an 18 percent per capita reduction and the type of target necessary in California under both the global warming law of 2006 and the recently passed SB375. Given existing and projected demographic and social trends, this can be accomplished primarily through developing a more efficient transportation system that allows Americans better access to the things they need while spending less time behind the wheel.

Americans are already driving substantially fewer miles (a trend that predated the economic crisis), real estate market preferences are shifting towards walkable developments, and demographics are expanding the population of older non-drivers.   It’s achievable if we get serious about broadening our transportation toolbox by developing strategies as diverse as telecommuting and high speed rail systems, but also by supporting local efforts to redevelop cities and suburbs and build more housing closer to jobs and other essential destinations. And it’s essential if we are to realize any significant progress on climate change and CO2 reduction goals.

Secondly, and more directly to the question this week, technology has a vital role to play both in making our transportation system more efficient and allowing us to measure results so we know what we’re getting for our money.   

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) are showing remarkable promise in squeezing more productivity out of our existing highway and transit networks. In the recently completed long range transportation plan for the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission determined that one of the most cost-effective investments is a package of operational and technology improvements to the regional freeway system.

Technology also holds significant promise for making public transportation more effective in smaller towns and rural areas. In less populated areas where fixed route bus systems are less viable, global positioning systems and cell phones can provide the kind of information and dynamic response to residents, particularly the rural poor and others unable to drive, with a cost-effective and flexible transit or shared ride system.   We’re also going to need technology to deliver a lot of the actual information in our shift to a performance-based system, details that are currently unreliable or just simply unavailable. It is only recently that traffic congestion is getting reported in real time rather than predicted through a computer model. The quality and consistency of bridge and pavement condition data from state to state could be greatly enhanced through technology.

Technology isn’t what stands in the way of an efficient, visionary and performance-based transportation system. The much tougher test will be our imagination, our collective ability to know when and where to best use technology, and – of course – political will.

Collapse

As reflected in the responses above, technology is going to play an increasing role in evolving a performance-driven, cost-effective and sustainable approach to mobility, safety and environmental sustainability.  In fact many key players outside the Beltway (State DOTs and transit agencies) and in the private sector (automotive, information and service providers) recognize the opportunity to demonstrate relevance of their programs in these terms.

Progress is already visible in several key areas already mentioned:

·         Vehicle infrastructure wireless communications to support mobility management

·         Crash avoidance systems to reduce fatalities

·         Incident detection to reduce congestion

·         Automated enforcement to increase safety

·         Positive train control to eliminate transit vehicle crashes

·         Automatic vehicle identification/tracking for improved freight logistics

·         Micro road weather sensing to minimize delays

·         Remote and non-destructive sensing and testing to improve infrastructure life span

·         Speed management systems to operate at lowest emissions levels

But these are not “technical solutions”   These are complex programs that must be developed, operated and managed by appropriately oriented, equipped and configured organizations.  In fact, technology alone has little impact – without the necessary and appropriate (new) programs enabling processes and the supportive institutional capacity – all of which must be developed and managed at the state and local level. (and in the case of the private sector, marketed).  These include:

·         Defining the performance measures appropriate to the various public policy objectives (mobility, safety, environing) that are relevant to the wide range of specific (and different) travel purposes, modes and settings

·         Deploying the technology component of data acquisition to produce performance information where needed

·         Developing the capacity to analyze the data and use it to improve performance by adjusting how the transportation “system” is operated – both the infrastructure, the vehicles and drivers

·         Establishing an organizational structure within state and local transportation agencies that is oriented to using performance information to modify business-as-usual.

·         Evolving new forms of partnerships and institutions across jurisdictional, modal and sectoral lines needed to implement “intelligent” systems

·         Adopting mechanisms for accountability – both within organizations and to the public

Thus responsible public policy must go well beyond a naïve mandate for performance and a presumption that technology alone can produce a high quality sustainable surface transportation system.  Performance improvement requires technical expertise, new processes, organization capacity, appropriate relationships – all supported by a culture oriented to continuous improvement.  Public policy and the federal aid program need to address these institution-uilding issues head on.

Collapse

Peter Samuel, editor of TOLLROADSnews, weighs in this week with the following:

Not one of your experts seems to have grasped a fundamental point. The only objective way to measure the overall performance of the transportation system is to see what users are prepared to pay to use its component parts as compared to the operating and capital costs of each.

The benefits of any facility will be measured by what users are prepared to pay by way of tolls, fares or other user fees, or they won't use it. Those revenues can be compared to costs.

This test of performance used in much of our economy is called The Market, and there is every reason to use it in transportation also.

Anything else will prove arbitrary, subjective and quite inconclusive.

The question Lisa posed is “What role can technology play in measuring and improving the [transportation] system's performance, and how can the federal government best encourage the adoption of effective technological solutions to the country's transportation problems?”

If we think of “technology” in the broadest sense to include not simply devices and electronic systems that can be manufactured, but also processes and human behaviors that will be encouraged through better policies, then a very powerful technology we should implement is road pricing and tolling. 

This is the conclusion of the recently released Bipartisan Policy Center report and the reports of the two congressional commissions that preceded it: the 2008 Policy and Revenue Study Commission report and the 2009 Infrastructure Financing Commission report. All three reports represent a steady drumbeat of calls to reform the current transportation funding system.

The Bipartisan Policy Center report emphasizes “that existing revenue mechanisms fail to take advantage of the fact that the performance of the transportation system can be directly influenced by how users pay for it.” (Emphasis added). Moreover, the report says, “the gas tax in the United States is very low relative to most developed countries, which means that all taxpayers subsidize the full costs of road use regardless of their contribution to system costs. This has resulted in artificially high demand and a substantial shortfall in the revenues necessary to cover the costs of maintaining the transportation network.”

The Bipartisan Policy Center report goes on to say, “Federal policies and funding should assist states and local governments in developing sustainable funding sources including eliminating federal restrictions on road pricing, supporting efforts by states to implement direct user charges and expanding TIFIA credit support.” 

If we want to improve the performance of the transportation system, as Lisa suggests, then we cannot continue to use antiquated policies, mindsets, and “technologies.” Toll operators around the world right now are successfully linking payment for the transportation system with use of the system, sending highly accurate price signals to users that encourage more efficient transportation use decisions. Technologies such as electronic toll collection, open road tolling, and congestion charging allow these price signals to be sent in real time without stopping, without waiting, and without barriers.  

Collapse

System performance is rapidly becoming "conventional wisdom" in the debate over transportation legislation and budgeting.  In a time of stretched budgets, it's vitally important that we be able to define what our public investments (and private investments as well) are intended to achieve and be prepared to document our results.  Look at the OMB guidance just issued for the FY 2011 federal budget and you will see how much of a premium the federal budget czars are putting on performance and results. 

In the transportation world, this may be easier said than done, especially in a system that relies on so many partnerships.  But we can't just take an easy way out and say that spending the money is the goal of our programs.  We need to define goals in a collaborative way and then hold all of us accountable for achieving those goals.

The federal investment in Intelligient Transportation Systems should come to the front in this process.  The use of technology in a targeted way is not only a cost-effective means of meeting objectives, whether reduction of congestion or improvement of safety, it's also the only effective way to determine how well we are doing across the system.

A federal strategy for effective implementation and use of ITS is a key element.  Federal support for R&D is critical, since many of the public and private participants in the transport world are too small in a relative sense to take on big challenges, although their contributions can be leveraged.  Technology deployment is another potential federal role, although I hope it would be on a competitive and narrowly focused basis.  In the long term, technology investments can compete well with the hardware and construction investments in our capital programs, providing that they are eligible for funding and provided that decision makers are aware of their options.  Making all the participants aware of what can be done, using the "bully pulpit," is perhaps the greatest contribution that we can call on our federal officials to provide.

Collapse

High Tech Parking Meters Debut in San Francisco

As the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) manages the entire surface transportation network, including pedestrians, bicycles, transit, parking, traffic and taxis, we are always seeking out technology that serves all modes, but particularly gives transit a clear pathway in this unique, Transit First City.

Accordingly, on May 14 the SFMTA and the Port of San Francisco installed and activated the first eight of 100 new parking meters that will serve 1,000 spaces in the Port’s jurisdiction along The Embarcadero waterfront. This is a soft launch of SFpark – a first step toward using new technology to make parking easier, reduce double-parking and improve the flow of traffic and Muni service.  SFpark will be implemented in other pilot areas of the City this fall.

The Port’s new meters allow people to pay with both credit cards and coins. Most spaces will have four-hour time limits, about 10 percent) will stay at two-hour time limits, and some will have 12-hour limits, up from two-hour time limits. By making parking easier to pay for and extending time limits, parking will be more convenient, entailing fewer parking tickets and more freedom to enjoy the City.

SFpark is a new approach to parking management that combines cutting-edge technologies and strategies, including demand-responsive pricing and real-time information about parking space availability. By making parking easier to find, unnecessary circling will be eliminated, reducing time wasted and associated emissions.

The SFpark pilot projects will allow the SFMTA to perform the first large-scale test of these new parking management practices in the country which represent the only parking-based congestion management program. The SFMTA will carefully monitor and evaluate the pilots to choose the best next-generation parking technology for citywide installation in 2011 and to develop a proposal for better parking management citywide that will achieve the overall goals for San Francisco’s surface transportation network which the SFMTA manages.

There are currently 320,000 estimated on-street parking spaces in San Francisco and 25,000 total metered spaces. The citywide SFpark pilot this fall will include 6,000 on-street meters and 11,500 off-street spaces. The total cost of the SFpark pilot projects is $24.75 million, 80 percent of which is federally funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Urban Partnership Program.

Collapse

The current accepted wisdom about the need for a "performance-driven, outcome oriented" transportation program brings to mind a piece of advice I once received from a wise colleague: Do not advocate a policy that you could never hope to put into effect. Do not ask policy makers to do something outside the range of practical feasibility.

While setting performance goals and measuring progress toward their achievement is commendable, some of the goals advocated for the surface transportation program reflect more the advocates’ wishful thinking than achievable objectives. For example, the National Transportation Objectives Act of 2009 (HR 2724) (inspired by the "Transportation for America" coalition) proposes as one of its objectives a 16 percent reduction in per capita vehicle miles and a tripling of "walking, biking and public transportation usage." There is no attempt by the authors of that bill to explain how and why they have chosen these particular targets , nor to provide even prima facie evidence of the feasibility of achieving these objectives in the face of rising population, growing economic activity, limited ability to expand transit outreach and a demonstrated secular trend of increased automobility.

So I would urge that we refrain from raising false hopes and setting unachievable objectives in the guise of advocating an outcome-oriented transportation system that would improve system performance and efficiency.

Collapse

Intelligent Transportation Systems are intended to make us a more mobile nation and a safer one. Like the creation of our Interstate Highway System more than 50 years ago, ITS will have a dramatic impact on our country’s transportation challenges and opportunities.

Today, traffic congestion and highway safety are serious problems that affect our quality of life and our economy. In the future, cars will be equipped with all kinds of advanced sensors, computer processors, on-board displays and communications systems. In essence, the car will become part of an integrated network of connected vehicles and roadways with features like:

• Cars that warn drivers about unsafe conditions, imminent collisions and excessive curve speeds.

• Dashboard screens with preloaded debit cards to pay tolls electronically, order meals at the next restaurant or download a movie for the kids to watch in the backseat.

• Vibrating seats alerting you that you’re veering onto the shoulder or falling asleep. Imagine approaching an intersection and getting a warning when someone is about to run a red light. 

ITS technologies also provide the data that allow public agencies to monitor and measure performance of the entire transportation system in real-time. These data provide the basis, not only for advanced mobility and safety applications, but also for the identification of transportation improvement priorities, asset management, and improved planning tools. The data derived from highway and vehicle sensors will transform how public agencies manage their infrastructure in the future.

The federal government has an important role to play in facilitating continued research and development, especially related to technical, institutional and business issues involved in the new IntelliDrive initiative. Beyond a national research agenda, the federal government has a role to play in the establishment of standards to guide technological development and interoperability. Finally, it is important for the federal government to provide test beds and model deployments to stimulate private sector investment and involvement in the IntellliDrive program.

The private sector also has a role to play. Any business model includes a product or service, a seller and a buyer. Currently, the products and services are being developed by numerous vendors. The missing component of the business model is the buyer. At this time, consumers, including government agencies, auto makers and suppliers, and the end-users of the products and services, do not have the resources to invest in these technologies. In addition, marketing of these products and services is difficult because the end-users do not understand the benefits. The current business model is not working because the consumer base seems disinterested.

Nevertheless, this technology is being developed and tested across the country and some advanced applications, such as navigation systems, lane departure warnings and backup cameras, are already deployed on higher-end automobiles. Within the next decade, these technologies and others may be installed in most vehicles.

Unfortunately, this timeline could be lengthened by rising fuel costs. Most of the revenue for transportation improvements comes from the gas tax. As fuel consumption decreases, revenue for roads also decreases. Yet the adoption of these technologies will allow us to move away from reliance on the gas tax and toward a more equitable mileage-based user fee. Ultimately, this can help us restore our economy and global competitiveness. The downturn in the auto industry may also impact this timeline.

In the next federal highway funding bill, as we look at ways to reinvent how we fund and deliver transportation projects and services, ITS should certainly be considered as part of the solution. In addition, government should encourage and not discourage innovative procurement methods, including privatization of new transportation corridors or of corridor expansions. Such facilities can both address a public travel need and provide revenue opportunities both for the transportation agency and for the private partners.  

Collapse

This is certainly a laudable goal and measuring performance on the roadway  will be facilitated through modern technology. But if performance is to drive investment decisions we will also have to be able to predict performance in advance of implementation. ,a far more difficult chore. Also performance can be evaluated only years after the improvement has been realized, and tying perfomance changes to the improvement project will be difficult owing to the many variables involved- changes in vehicle performance, changes in travel behavior, changes in land use will also affect performance.  

The current debate that we are having over moving to a more performance-based transportation system is made possible largely because of advances in technology that allow us to collect better data to measure the performance of our transportation network. Advances in vehicle and infrastructure-based sensors and detection equipment, the broad use of GPS-equipped devices, and other intelligent transportation systems (ITS) and technologies provide us with the capability to collect real-time data in areas such as congestion levels and delays, multimodal travel time variability, roadway conditions, emissions and air quality, road safety, incident response times, vehicle miles traveled, and other performance indicators.

In addition to measuring performance, we are beginning to see much greater use of ITS and other technology-enabled solutions in the U.S. to actively manage our transportation network to improve system performance and return on investment. A few examples include traffic operations centers to coordinate traffic management and incident response, optimized signal timing at intersections, smart transit and parking systems, congestion pricing, HOT lanes, Bus Rapid Transit, electronic tolling, ramp metering, weigh-in-motion truck inspections, and real-time multimodal traffic information and navigational assistance delivered through a variety of integrated roadside, web-based and consumer devices.

While we are starting to see progress in deploying innovation to improve performance, the U.S. is still in the early stages of adopting many of these technologies and operational strategies when compared to other parts of the world including Japan, Singapore, Europe, and even China. As Congress works to pass a new surface transportation bill, there is an important role for the Federal government to play in encouraging more widespread deployment of smart technologies and innovative solutions, as well as in strengthening collaborative R&D between the public and private sectors, that will help create a more performance-based, intermodal transportation system that is safer, cleaner, more efficient, and more financially sustainable.

Working with private sector partners, state and local agencies must make better use of technology solutions to modernize today’s infrastructure and optimize existing capacity, while building smarter and more efficient roads, bridges, transit systems, and multimodal transportation options for tomorrow’s transportation users. A few ways to advance this goal would be to:

• Incentivize performance improvements by linking funding to specific performance goals to ensure that transportation users receive an appropriate return on their investment. To align state and metropolitan planning with national goals, state DOTs and MPOs should develop a performance management process to monitor progress toward meeting national goals in area such as traffic-related fatalities, traffic congestion, and travel times. A financial incentive program would also be helpful in encouraging state and local agencies to achieve or exceed national goals.

• Plan for performance by conducting a cost-benefit analysis of ITS solutions and operational strategies as part of statewide and regional annual and long-range plans. To encourage rapid, effective and low-cost performance results, ITS solutions should be funded at 100 percent federal share.

• Put smart technologies to work by providing dedicated funding for ITS deployment, operations and management, and intermodal integration so that state and local agencies and private sector innovators can implement the most effective tools for managing congestion, reducing traffic fatalities and injuries, minimizing emissions and environmental impacts, improving productivity, and optimizing capacity and system performance.

• Create Smart Towns and City Streets by launching a competitive selection process to designate several “smart” cities, towns, and communities to serve as model deployment sites for wireless safety, mobility and environmental solutions. Advances in vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications are providing significant potential to prevent accidents before they happen, reduce congestion and emissions, and provide an infinite range of traveler services from real-time traffic, transit and parking information to collision avoidance systems and even the ability to reschedule a bus, train or plane ticket from your cell phone or navigational device. Selected sites would also provide ideal locations for demonstration of a vehicle miles traveled (VMT)-based user fee and other innovative financing options.

While a continued and strengthened research role is needed, the Federal government has a significant role to play in advancing the deployment of technologies that will lead to a safer, cleaner, more efficient and more financially sustainable transportation system for our nation’s communities and transportation users.

Collapse

As the Bipartisan Policy Center’s new transportation report makes clear, there should be no question that moving to a more performance-based federal surface transportation funding system would improve system performance and efficiency.

However, until now efforts to create a more performance-based funding system were limited by inadequacies in information collection. Fortunately, new information and communications technologies are making it much easier to collect and analyze system data in order to hold stakeholders more accountable for actual results. In fact, the principle reason it is now feasible for Congress to consider moving to a performance-based transportation program is that it is now possible to accurately measure system performance. New and improved information and telecommunications technologies make this much easier and more affordable.

Take pavement quality for example. System maintenance is a federal policy goal, but it’s been hard to develop accurate and comprehensive measurements that could be used to hold states accountable. Now new technology makes it easier to accurately and cheaply measure the quality of road surfaces. Devices known as prophilographs and prophilometers can measure the smoothness of pavement at highway speeds. Both of these pieces of equipment use lasers to measure the pavement surface in varying intervals. These measurements are then run through a computer algorithm to determine the general smoothness of the pavement. Lasers, however, are not particularly effective when measuring cracks, which have used to have been measured visually from a DOT car driving on the shoulder of the road. Now the vans carrying the prophilographs and prophilometers can take a close-up video of the road to be inspected in a lab later. The video is calibrated to where a crack is observed, so it can be pinpointed on a map.

Traffic sensor systems can be used to measure traffic flows in real time. Not only would the deployment of such a national “infostructure” to measure traffic flows on the National Highway System allow policy makers at all levels of government to measure the performance of the system, it could also enable consumer applications so that travelers could know in real time what roads are congested so they could take alternative routes, choose different travel times, or switch to transit.

Toll technology will also enable a more performance based system. This is why the National Surface Transportation Financing Commission proposed transitioning the fuel tax system to a satellite-based, vehicle miles traveled program. One of the many advantages of this system is that it would facilitate the development of a much more effective pricing system, which in turn would send stronger signals about where new capacity is needed.

But these systems will take a very long time to emerge if we continue to rely on a current system of providing limited federal support for intelligent transportation systems (ITS), most of it limited to R&D, while hoping that states will do the heavy lifting of implementation. As is clear from looking at the world leaders in ITS – Korea and Japan – building out intelligent transportation systems, including ones that will better enable performance measurement, requires the national government to set a vision, organize all the stakeholders, and provide robust levels of funding and leadership. States acting on their own are simply not able to build a nationwide performance measurement system. The private sector will need to play an essential role in building and operating parts of this system, but that role will depend on the federal government providing funding and setting a clear and achievable vision for implementation. Funding an IT-based performance measurement system will bring a host of benefits to the surface transportation system, including enabling structuring the system on a more performance-based The good news is that building an IT-enabled surface transportation system will have multiple benefits besides being able to make the federal funding system more accountable, including sizeable benefits to travelers.

Collapse