Special Interoperability Test Certif - Joint Interoperability Test
Overview of present activities and developments in respect to the Directive of Interoperability
description
Transcript of Overview of present activities and developments in respect to the Directive of Interoperability
Overview of present activities and developments in respect to the Directive of Interoperability
4th meeting EFC Team, Berlin, Germany20 January 2006
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
EU-Com Activities
Quotes:– A lot of work is coming from expert groups
and will be voted on before July– Not all the work will be ready by then, some
workgroups haven’t even started– Expert groups have different perspective on
overall concept and architecture. You need to bring them in line before you can make decisions
– Important discussion points are still floating– It is chaotic, to say it mildly
EU-Com planning
Directive should have been adapted in National Legislation by 20 Oct. 2005
Definition of European EFC Service should be ready on 1 July 2006
HGV and coaches should be implemented mid 2009
All vehicles mid 2011
Conclusion: Planning is slipping
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
Interesting/critical issues
EETS provider Enforcement Definition of OBU Galileo, GNSS issues DSRC vs GPS/GSM ( or GNSS/CN) Some other issues
EETS providers
The concept of roaming contracts between all toll operators has been left behind. The EETS concept has come in its place.
EETS providers provide the “one contract, one OBU” European EFC service.
More than one EETS expected (DWK, Siemens, Shell..) Every EFC operator must accept all EETS providers EFC operator can also be an EETS provider EETS provider “sells” OBU and has contract with end-
user Many consequences for operators:
– must open up systems, – will be responsible for enforcement of EETS customers– no monopolies possible
Some consequences of EETS
Every EETS can have its own certified OBU, but with different value added ITS services
Who is paying the EETS services Tariff structure and rebates
Consequences for NRA: He must prepare himself to do business with outsiders. It will add additional, new requirements to enforcement.
Other issues are: blacklisting, security, rebates, liability
Enforcement
International enforcement– Ongoing discussion about approach: is it a directive
related issue or not– Keeping it outside means a faster solution is
possible (perhaps)– Making it a directive issue addresses the real
issue: the European service requires a standard approach, addressing the GNNS/CN weaknesses
– Infrared is not part of the Directive technologies yet
– Workgroup 10 will propose technologies and specifications ( Feb. 2006), workgroup 3 will take charge of organisational and contractual matters (so does Cesare III)
Enforcement (2)
Should be solved nationally, Workgroup 3 should address this topic
Enforcement is a responsibility of the local operator, EETS customer must fit into it
How to control GNSS/CN customers– GPS/GSM log not accepted– Stopping is not allowed– DSRC not effective– Infrared not standard in EETS OBU
Legal <> Commerce and theory <>practical issues. Present procedures commercially not feasible
Enforcement (3)
Vera 2 leads to new directive, secure network for exchange of data (Vera 3 eNFORCE network) and certification procedures for equipment
Results fit for traffic violatons but not for civil offences (not paying toll)
Definition of OBU
Specification of OBU– Still open ended:
– either complex system, capable of running all toll operators applications
– or simple system informing Back-Office systems about location, time etc
– Existing legislation is limiting factor, this can be changed
– Directive is to strict, limits future developments Workgroup 9 has 7 models, but will propose 1.
Should this not be a political decision?
RCI OBU (Ertico)
Own specs, industry concept– Local enforcement responsibility not yet in
specs– “All or nothing” approach: communicates
only with EETS provider or with everyone. Discussion issue
Tender for RCI OBU May/June 2006, perhaps to soon, since the Regulatory committee still has to make many decisions
Galileo
EU-COM wants to give Galileo at least the same position as other technologies
Czech tender did exclude GNSS technologies EU-COM is making up its mind now, but
probably waits for the outcome of present appeals
However: Galileo project slips too…
GNSS issues
GNSS is not flawless, but with a smart approach its weaknesses can be overcome.
Galileo is European and makes us less dependant on others
Additional measures are needed in some locations (F.I infrared beacons in tunnels)
Less reliable in urban areas.
DSRC vs GNSS/CN
Interests are high for existing users, just look at the numbers.
The traditional users want to keep control over the system and don’t want to deal with telco’s
The discussions become sharper and there is no solution in sight on the short term
The good news is that they are talking
Other issues
Classification model, now only suitable for HGV’s
CEN is doing work on its own based on own ideas
Stockholm group organises strategy workshops to define big picture. Wants to put a halt to all technicians solutions. Many proposals have unacceptable consequences or are conflicting
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
Cesare III
Develops MOU to be signed by all parties, EETS providers can only work after signing. Regulatory committee manages MOU
Prepares contracts for cooperation, adepts previous results to Stockholm group needs
Addresses organisational interoperability
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
NORITS and MEDIA
Both projects going as planned No specific issues at this moment My opinion: These projects are solving
all interoperability issues in a practical manner. Will be ready and in operation long before the first EETS is there
Topics:– EU-COM activities:
– Planning– Interesting/critical issues– Cesare III
– NORITS & MEDIA– Overview projects in Europe
What is happening in Europe?
Projects in Europe
UK HLUC plans put forward Flemish-Belgium preparing study Walloon-Belgium will cooperate with Flemish,
plans are put forward Stockholm trials started, referendum in
September, outcome unclear Appeals against outcome of Czech tender, EU-
COM critical about tenders specifications Slovenian tender won by local outsider Ireland is preparing tender for free-flow EFC Dutch road pricing plans
Dutch road pricing plans (1)
Road pricing is back on the political agenda Public opinion and political agenda’s
prevented earlier plans to become reality A national stakeholder platform proposed an
approach last year, this has been used for new policy making. Actual implementation was put forward. Realistic cost/benefit scenarios had to be determined first
Parliament now has forced the Minister to include concrete plans in the public works agenda
Dutch road pricing plans (2)
Minister has agreed under the condition that the collection costs will be significantly lower than suggested in the report of the stakeholder platform
The Government will elaborate on two ways of EFC:– A number of infrastructure projects will be
implemented sooner than originally anticipated. Toll will be used to finance this. It is not yet decided which projects this will be
– It is the current policy to have nation wide road charging implemented by 2012. The charge will be based on location, time, distance and environmental aspects.
Questions
Do you agree with these observations? What are the consequences of all this
for our/any NRS? Should CEDR do something with this in
its relation to EU-COM?