The Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Operational Test

Joseph P. DeLorenzoMidwest Service CenterHazardous Materials Specialist

T3 SessionApril 26, 2005Identifying Improvements in Safety, Security and Efficiency

Presentation OutlineResearch OverviewDeploymentTechnology & performanceEvaluationBenefit-cost analysis using wireless communication with GPS as exampleConclusions

Project GoalsDemonstrate an approach that uses existing technology to improve the safety and security of HazMatQuantify the benefits and costs of this approachSafety, Security & Efficiency

Research QuestionsThe study quantitatively verified many assumptions about technology & securityWireless communication w/ GPS is the base for all impact areasEfficiency drives private deployment Benefit-cost ratios vary based on load type (Low end is LTL, High end is explosives)Technology is most effective at reducing theftTechnology is not a complete solution

Research ApproachUtilized an Expert Panel & Delphi ProcessCo-chaired by TSA and SAICIncludes representatives from major associations and other security/counter terrorism experts.Provided input into staged and controlled testsProviding input into Delphi processReviewed and commented on final analysis

Risk/Threat AssessmentSets the stage for the rest of the project:Considers:Commodities, quantity, frequency, operation type, routing and loading/ transfer pointsOrganize the safety and security risksFrames the problemIdentifies vulnerabilities

Test Design Developed Operational Test ScenariosAddress major threats and vulnerabilities Consider different industry segments (bulk fuel, LTL, Truckload explosives, bulk chemical)Selected Technologies Existing technologiesTechnologies suites address multiple vulnerabilitiesCost tiersIncluded carriers, shippers, consignees and state agencies

Test Design

Technologies Tested Served as the base technologyBoth Satellite and Terrestrial Communications with GPSDigital Cellular phone

Wireless Mobile Communications

Technologies Tested

AVL (GPS)Geofencing, Off-route alertsTethered trailer trackingUntethered trailer trackingVehicle and Trailer TrackingRESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDFunctioned as expectedGeofencing had high level of interest but there are resolution issuesTrailer tracking has high level of interest (additional FMCSA testing)

Technologies TestedIn-dashWireless remoteLocal disablingPanic ButtonsRESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDDrivers like both in-dash and key fobViewed as insurance policyDid not expect high usage but recognized they created piece of mind

Technologies TestedOn board computers

Remote vehicle disablingLoss of signal disable Dispatch initiatedLocal (no OBC)Remote locking and unlocking

RESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDDisabling: Technology functioned well, there are concerns about the application of the technology under real-word conditionsRemote locking and unlocking: Worked excellent in both daily operations and on-site testing

Technologies Tested

Global Login/ PasswordBiometric smart cardElectronic Supply Chain Manifest (ESCM)

Driver and Cargo Identification and VerificationRESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDBiometrics: Good fingerprint reads were difficult due to environmental, ergonomic and other issues, needs further developmentGlobal Login: Well received and functioned reliably.ESCM: Poor performance of biometrics and duplication of effort affected the ESCM

Technologies TestedRESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDOperational problems were identified with the process of assigning and locking sealsCommunication problems were noted with the seal due to trailer designsSystem usage was complex, need further developmentDriver and Cargo Identification and Verification

Electronic Seals

Technologies TestedAutomated Public Sector Response Center (PSRC)Carriers &ShippersQualcommNMCLaw Enforcement & Emergency Response Community

Technologies TestedAutomated Public Sector Response Center (PSRC)Spill CenterPSRCCarriers &ShippersQualcommNMCLaw Enforcement & Emergency Response Community

Technologies TestedAutomated Public Sector Response Center (PSRC)RESULTS/LESSONS LEARNEDTechnology functioned well, demonstrated ability to reduce incident notification times.System needs to be exception based.There are concerns about relying on an industry based system.Message priority is a concern.Needs of public sector need to be further investigated.

Technology CompendiumDevelopment of a research compendium of technologies and service providersCurrently 94 providers with 147 existing technologiesEnhancements plannedVia www.safehazmat.com

Evaluation ApproachOverall goal to provide information for decision-makersConservatism built into the analysis wherever possibleCosts include those for systems already deployedMinimum benefits calculatedAssumes security benefits start to accrue at or near full deploymentNote: To date no studies were uncovered that have attempted the analysis conducted here, particularly relating to security benefits

Efficiency BenefitsEfficiency benefits defined for wireless communication with GPSPayback periods within industry standardsRecognizing that all operations may not realize all of the benefits, a minimum benefit was calculated.Full deployment could result in savings of $1 billion per year industry wide

Efficiency BenefitsWireless Communication with GPS Positioning* For the first three years: Includes monthly service fees and capital costs amortized over the three year period

Efficiency BenefitsWireless Communication with GPS Positioning* For the first three years: Includes monthly service fees and capital costs amortized over the three year period

Efficiency BenefitsEfficiency ratios give some indication to the speed at which technology will be voluntarily deployed

* Assessment of ITS/Commercial Vehicle Properties User Services, Prepared By ATA Foundation, June 1996** Motor Carrier Technologies, Prepared by ATA Foundation, October 1999*** Motor Carrier Technologies Survey, Prepared by American Trucking Associations, 2001

Chart1

0.17

0.28

0.418

Year

Percentage of Carriers

% of Carriers Using GPS

Sheet1

2001***

17.0%28.0%41.8%

Percent of Carriers that Use Wireless Communications Other Than GPS46.0%72.0%77.8%

Percent of Carriers That Provide "In-Cab" Wireless Communications31.0%

Percent of Carriers that Use Handheld/Laptop Computers in Regular Operations6.0%10.0%9.6%

Percent of Carriers Using Automatic Data Capture20.5%

Percent of Total Tractor Fleet Equipped with GPS (trucks)45.2%

Percent of Total Trailer Fleet Equipped with GPS (trailers)4.2%

Percent of Carriers Using Automated Customs Systems9.6%

27.3%

Use of Cell Phones by Carriers55.0%62.0%

Use of Pagers by Carriers50.0%55.0%

Sheet1

Year

Percentage of Carriers

% of Carriers Using GPS

Sheet2

% Using Wireless Other than GPS+Sheet1!$A$26

Year

% Use Among Carriers

% Using Wireless Other Than GPS

Sheet3

Chart2

0.46

0.72

0.778

% Using Wireless Other than GPS+Sheet1!$A$26

Year

% Use Among Carriers

% Using Wireless Other Than GPS

Sheet1

2001***

17.0%28.0%41.8%

Percent of Carriers that Use Wireless Communications Other Than GPS46.0%72.0%77.8%

Percent of Carriers That Provide "In-Cab" Wireless Communications31.0%

Percent of Carriers that Use Handheld/Laptop Computers in Regular Operations6.0%10.0%9.6%

Percent of Carriers Using Automatic Data Capture20.5%

Percent of Total Tractor Fleet Equipped with GPS (trucks)45.2%

Percent of Total Trailer Fleet Equipped with GPS (trailers)4.2%

Percent of Carriers Using Automated Customs Systems9.6%

27.3%

Use of Cell Phones by Carriers55.0%62.0%

Use of Pagers by Carriers50.0%55.0%

Sheet1

Year

Percentage of Carriers

% of Carriers Using GPS

Sheet2

% Using Wireless Other than GPS+Sheet1!$A$26

Year

% Use Among Carriers

% Using Wireless Other Than GPS

Sheet3

Safety and Public Sector BenefitsPublic Sector focused on two areas:Improved response times through faster notificationPanic buttons provided time savings of 18 minutes over traditional notification processOff-route detections improved by nearly 3 hoursImproved quality of informationPositive driver ID time savings of 28 minutes Alerts included manifest information, driver information and location

Safety and Public Sector BenefitsPublic Sector Reporting Center ConceptProof-of-concept test Other issues such as functioning with wider deployment and message priority must be considered. Industry participants expressed an interest in the PSRC concept to improve asset management

Security BenefitsUsing the Delphi method vulnerability reductions were identifiedGreatest reduction was from the base wireless communication system with GPSIncremental gains were identified from the other technologiesGreatest reductions were in theft prevention

Security BenefitsSelected Vulnerability Reductions: Bulk Fuel

Security BenefitsPotential cost savings based on vulnerability reductionsCalculated benefits (safety, security 7 efficiency) using 3 methodsNet benefitsBenefit Cost RatiosBreak even analysisCombined benefits analysis

Security BenefitsWireless Communication with GPS

Security BenefitsBreak Even Points for 3 year period

Overall Benefits & CostsWireless Communications + GPSOverall benefits = Safety Benefit + Security Benefit + Efficiency Benefits

ConclusionsThe wireless communication system with GPS tracking provided efficiency benefits and the base vulnerability reductionAdditional technologies provided incremental improvements in security.A stratification of load types and technologies seems inherent in the resultsGreatest vulnerability reductions were provided for theft scenarioWireless communications with GPS tracking provided a positive return on investment in all four test scenarios.

ConclusionsExcept for LTL, preventing only one terrorist attack over a three year period produces a cost savings well beyond the break even point.The combined benefit-cost analysis showed positive benefit-cost ratios in all categoriesNotification times and the quality of information provided to the public sector was improved.

The Bottom LineDespite the results, technology alone is not a complete security solution only technology along with sound security practices and supported by ongoing public and private outreach, training and security programs can help to meet a constantly present threat.

Next Steps High-level Needs Assessment to address public sector response to hazmat safety and security incidents. Completion April 2005 Industry Outreach TaskPromote voluntary deploymentContinue and expand Technology CompendiumAdditional testing: Untethered Trailer Tracking Expanded Satellite Based CommunicationsVehicle Disable (upcoming)

Final ReportsPosted on the FMCSA Web site: www.fmcsa.dot.govhttp://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safetyprogs/fot/2 Final ReportsDeployment final report describes the actual testing process and lessons learnedEvaluation final report the independence evaluation and benefit-cost analysis

The Endjoseph.delorenzo@fmcsa.dot.gov708.283.3572