concept of operations - dot.state.mn.us · this document details the concept of operations (conops)...

July 15, 2016

MAASTOTPIMSProject

CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

MAASTO TPIMS Project Concept of Operations

July 15, 2016 i

Table of Contents

Introduction....................................................................................................................................1

1.0 Purpose and Overview .......................................................................................................2

2.0 Scope .................................................................................................................................5

3.0 Referenced Documents......................................................................................................5

4.0 Background ........................................................................................................................8

4.1 National Truck Parking Issues ........................................................................................8

4.1.1 Safety Concerns ......................................................................................................8

4.1.2 Economic Concerns...............................................................................................10

4.2 National Research Programs........................................................................................11

4.3 Current Systems ...........................................................................................................12

5.0 User-Oriented Project Development.................................................................................12

5.1 TPIMS Partnership Engagement ..................................................................................14

5.2 Industry Stakeholder Engagement................................................................................14

5.2.1 Industry Stakeholder Issues ..................................................................................15

6.0 Operational Needs............................................................................................................16

6.1 Vision ............................................................................................................................16

6.2 User Needs ...................................................................................................................16

6.3 Goals and Objectives....................................................................................................18

6.4 Performance Measures.................................................................................................19

7.0 System Overview..............................................................................................................19

7.1 Procurement Methods...................................................................................................19

7.2 Data Collection..............................................................................................................20

7.3 Data Aggregation and Processing ................................................................................21

7.4 Data Dissemination.......................................................................................................22

7.4.1 Message Signs ......................................................................................................22

7.4.2 Web-Based Platforms............................................................................................24

7.4.3 Additional Dissemination Methods.........................................................................27

7.5 Architecture...................................................................................................................28

7.5.1 National ITS Architecture.......................................................................................28

7.5.2 Regional Architecture ............................................................................................29

7.6 Core Functions Matrix ...................................................................................................31

7.6.1 Procurement ..........................................................................................................33


July 15, 2016 ii

7.6.2 Data Collection Method .........................................................................................33

7.6.3 Data Collection Technology...................................................................................33

7.6.4 Operations and Maintenance.................................................................................33

7.6.5 Data Analytics and Sharing ...................................................................................33

7.6.6 Data Dissemination................................................................................................34

7.7 Locations.......................................................................................................................34

8.0 Operation & Maintenance Elements.................................................................................36

9.0 Operational Scenarios ......................................................................................................36

9.1 Daily End User Scenarios .............................................................................................36

9.1.1 Independent Truck Driver ......................................................................................37

9.1.2 Contracted Truck Driver.........................................................................................39

9.1.3 Fleet Truck Driver ..................................................................................................41

9.2 Operation and Maintenance Scenarios.........................................................................43

9.2.1 Inter-State Communications ..................................................................................43

9.2.2 State Recalibration ................................................................................................45

9.2.3 Third Party Recalibration .......................................................................................47

9.2.4 Site Closed ............................................................................................................49

10.0 Summary of Impacts/Outcomes .......................................................................................51

Appendices..................................................................................................................................52

Appendix A: Indiana.................................................................................................................53

Appendix B: Iowa.....................................................................................................................56

Appendix C: Kansas ................................................................................................................60

Appendix D: Kentucky .............................................................................................................63

Appendix E: Michigan ..............................................................................................................66

Appendix F: Minnesota ............................................................................................................69

Appendix G: Ohio ....................................................................................................................72

Appendix H: Wisconsin............................................................................................................75


July 15, 2016 iii

Tables

Table 1: Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................13Table 2: User Needs ...................................................................................................................17Table 3: Core Functions Matrix ...................................................................................................32Table 4: Project Operation and Maintenance Elements..............................................................36Table 5: Stakeholder Outcomes..................................................................................................51Table 6: INDOT Core Functions..................................................................................................53Table 7: INDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities....................................................55Table 8: Iowa DOT Core Functions.............................................................................................57Table 9: Iowa DOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities...............................................59Table 10: KDOT Core Functions .................................................................................................60Table 11: KDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities ...................................................62Table 12: KYTC Core Functions .................................................................................................63Table 13: KYTC Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities ...................................................65Table 14: MDOT Core Functions ................................................................................................66Table 15: MDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities ..................................................68Table 16: MnDOT Core Functions ..............................................................................................69Table 17: MnDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities ................................................71Table 18: ODOT Core Functions.................................................................................................72Table 19: ODOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities...................................................74Table 20: WisDOT Core Functions .............................................................................................75Table 21: Wisconsin Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities.............................................77


July 15, 2016 iv

Figures

Figure 1: Systems Engineering “V” Diagram.................................................................................3Figure 2: Overall TPIMS Project Schedule....................................................................................4Figure 3: Parking Locations...........................................................................................................9Figure 4: Dynamic Truck Parking Sign on I-94 in Michigan ........................................................23Figure 5: Dynamic Message Sign ...............................................................................................24Figure 6: Wisconsin’s Traveler Information Website ...................................................................25Figure 7: Smartphone Application ...............................................................................................26Figure 8: Regional TPIMS Architecture with Warehouse Architecture........................................30Figure 9: MAASTO TPIMS Partnership Existing and Potential Sites ..........................................35Figure 10: Daily System Use – Independent Owner/Operator ....................................................38Figure 11: Daily System Use – Contracted Driver.......................................................................40Figure 12: Daily System Use – Fleet Driver ................................................................................42Figure 13: Inter-State Communications.......................................................................................44Figure 14: State Operated Truck Parking Calibration .................................................................46Figure 15: Third Party Operator Recalibration ............................................................................48Figure 16: Closed Site.................................................................................................................50Figure 17: INDOT Proposed Architecture ...................................................................................54Figure 18: Iowa DOT Proposed Architecture ..............................................................................58Figure 19: KDOT Proposed Architecture.....................................................................................61Figure 20: KYTC Proposed Architecture .....................................................................................64Figure 21: MDOT Proposed Architecture ....................................................................................67Figure 22: MnDOT Proposed Architecture ..................................................................................70Figure 23: ODOT Proposed Architecture ....................................................................................73Figure 24: WisDOT Proposed Architecture .................................................................................76


July 15, 2016 v

List of AcronymsAcronym Name Acronym Name

511 America’s Traveler Information Telephone Number KYTC Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

API Application Programming Interface MAASTO Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials

ATMS Advanced Traffic Management System MAFC Mid-America Freight Coalition

ATRI American Transportation Research Institute MDOT Michigan Department of Transportation

CB Citizen's Band (Radio) MnDOT Minnesota Department of Transportation

CCTV Closed Circuit Television MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

CFIRE National Center for Freight and Infrastructure Research and Education NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement

CMS Changeable Message Sign NATSO National Association of Truck Stop Operators

ConOps Concept of Operations NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program

CVISN Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks NFAC National Freight Advisory Committee

DB Design-Build NHS National Highway System

DBB Design-Bid-Build NHSTA National Highway Transportation Safety Administration

DBOM Design-Build-Operate-Maintain NTSB National Transportation Safety Board

DMS Dynamic Message Sign O&M Operations and Maintenance

DOT Department of Transportation OBE On-Board Equipment

DTPS Dynamic Truck Parking Signs ODOT Ohio Department of Transportation

FDOT Florida Department of Transportation OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association

FHWA Federal Highway Administration PTZ Pan-Tilt-Zoom

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration RTMC Regional Transportation Management Center

GPS Global Positioning System TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

HOS Hours of Service TMC Traffic Management Center

INDOT Indiana Department of Transportation TOC Traffic Operations CenterIowa DOT Iowa Department of Transportation TPAS Truck Parking Availability System

IR Infrared TPIMS Truck Parking Information Management System

ITD Innovative Technology Deployment TSO Truck Stop Operator

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems USDOT United States Department of Transportation

IVR Interactive Voice Recognition VHT Vehicle Hours Traveled

JIT Just-in-Time VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

KDOT Kansas Department of Transportation WisDOT Wisconsin Department of Transportation

KTA Kansas Turnpike Authority XML Extensible Markup Language


July 15, 2016 Page 1 of 77

Introduction

This document details the concept of operations (ConOps) for a multi-state Truck Parking Information Management System (TPIMS). The TPIMS concept was developed to address the growing number of concerns associated with truck parking along the nation’s busiest freight corridors, including the lack of available real-time information to allow commercial vehicle operators to make informed parking-related decisions.

Currently, commercial vehicle parking often overflows onto rest area ramps, freeway ramps and shoulders, and adjacent roads. This creates an unsafe situation for commercial vehicle operators as well as other motorists. The problem is compounded by the lack of information provided to drivers to assist them in finding safe places to park their vehicles and rest. However, the expansion of rest area parking is costly and in many cases its benefit is uncertain. The provision of adequate parking may be addressed in part through better utilization of existing parking spaces. For this to be an effective solution available parking spaces must be detected and the information communicated back to commercial vehicle operators in real-time.

The Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials (MAASTO) is leading development of the TPIMS to address truck parking safety and efficiency needs. MAASTO consists of ten Midwestern states whose mission is to foster the development, operation, and maintenance of an integrated and balanced transportation system that adequately serves the transportation needs of those states. Today, eight of the 10 MAASTO states have partnered to address commercial vehicle parking needs and to develop the TPIMS. These eight states are:

Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Ohio Wisconsin

The MAASTO states of Illinois and Missouri have yet to formally join the TPIMS partnership but may do so in the future.


July 15, 2016 Page 2 of 77

1.0 Purpose and Overview

The MAASTO TPIMS ConOps provides a high-level understanding of a proposed system to collect and disseminate real-time truck parking availability information within the MAASTO multi-state region. The document, written from a stakeholder perspective, is organized as follows:

Scope identifies the problems that need to be addressed by the project. Reference Documents provides a list of documents that were referenced in developing

this document. Background provides an understanding of the actions taken so far to address needs

and identifies needs that still need to be addressed. User-Oriented Project Development describes the stakeholder outreach process. Operational Needs defines the needs that the project must satisfy. System Overview provides information about the various components of the TPIMS

project and a summary of how each agency in the Partnership is meeting the core functions of the system.

Operation & Maintenance Elements describes the system functions and agency responsibilities for system operations and maintenance.

Operational Scenarios graphically represents operational flows for users and operators of the system.

Summary of Impacts/Outcomes describes the desired results of the TPIMS project.

The main body of the ConOps document describes the core functions needed for a consistent and seamless regional TPIMS project deployment by the MAASTO Partnership. In addition to the main body of the document, state-specific appendices provide state-level details about decisions, organization, and processes relating to the TPIMS project.

Systems EngineeringSystems engineering is a multi-step verification process that takes place throughout the development, implementation, and operation stages of ITS projects. The requirements, testing procedures, and system validation steps outlined in the ”V” diagram shown in Figure 1 are intended to ensure that the initial needs and concept of the system carry forward into the design and eventually operation of the system.

It is good practice and a federal requirement to apply the systems engineering process for any ITS project that uses federal funding. Included in Figure 1 is a proposed timeline for the TPIMS project overlaid on the “V” diagram. The overall TPIMS project schedule for deployment is shown in Figure 2. A ConOps is one step in the overall systems engineering process, and focuses on “what” should be done before defining “how” it will be done. It defines the technology alternatives to be considered and assesses the best alternatives based on the identified user needs. The ConOps is not intended to prescribe a specific technology.


July 15, 2016 Page 3 of 77

Figure 1: Systems Engineering “V” Diagram

Source: Systems Engineering for Intelligent Transportation Systems, FHWA, 2007


July 15, 2016 Page 4 of 77

Figure 2: Overall TPIMS Project Schedule


July 15, 2016 Page 5 of 77

2.0 Scope

A TPIMS is a regional network of safe, convenient parking areas with the ability to collect and broadcast real-time parking availability to drivers through a variety of media outlets including dynamic signs, smartphone applications, traveler information websites, and others through a data stream. This will enable drivers to proactively plan their routes and make safer, smarter parking decisions.

The MAASTO TPIMS Partnership was awarded a $25 million MAASTO Tiger Grant with $3.7 million in state matching funds, totaling $28.7 million to deploy TPIMS outlines the following key scope items:

Deployment to be focused on high volume freight corridors (see Section 7.7 for more information about site locations)

o 8 MAASTO states: KS, KY, IA, IN, MI, MN, OH, WIo I-35; I-64; I-65; I-70; I-71; I-75; I-80; I-94; I-135o Approximately 175 sites

Utilization of a range of information dissemination methodso Dynamic truck parking signs (DTPS)o Smartphone apps that are Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)

“one-touch” complianto Traveler information websites

Use of a common application programming interface (API) for consistent data sharing across the region

The TPIMS project concept involves:

Collection of truck parking availability data Data processing and aggregation Dissemination of truck parking availability information to:

o End users (e.g., drivers and dispatchers)o Partners (KS, KY, IA, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)o Third parties

3.0 Referenced Documents

A number of related documents were referenced in the creation of the TPIMS ConOps. The following documents provide additional details on the need for truck parking information and activities conducted by other entities to address truck parking needs.

MAASTO TIGER Grant Application (2015)http://trucksparkhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/MAASTO__TPIMS_TigerGrant2015.pdf The State of Kansas, in partnership with MAASTO and the states of Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin, developed a proposal for a multi-state TPIMS in order to improve the efficiency, economic competitiveness, and safety of the national freight

http://trucksparkhere.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/MAASTO__TPIMS_TigerGrant2015.pdf


July 15, 2016 Page 6 of 77

network. The details of the proposal are provided in the successfully-awarded MAASTO TIGER Grant Application, which makes the grant application the basis for the project moving forward.

Florida Department of Transportation Truck Parking Availability System Concept of Operations (2015)http://www.floridatruckinginfo.com/%5CPDFs%5C2016FASTLANE%5C6_Statewide%20TPAS%20PSEMP%20-%20Draft.pdf The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) developed a truck parking availability system (TPAS) ConOps for a project to deploy TPAS along the four primary Interstate corridors in Florida. This study is relevant to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership project, as it is a comparable system.

Jason's Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative Analysis (2015)http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) conducted the Jason's Law Truck Parking Survey in order to meet the requirements of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21; P.L. 112-141) law that became effective on October 1, 2012. This analysis, completed in 2015, documents the findings of the survey.

Kansas Statewide Freight Network Truck Parking Plan (2016)https://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/burRail/Rail/Documents/Kansas_Statewide_Freight_Network_Truck_Parking_Plan_2015_2016.pdf In 2015, KDOT and the Kansas Turnpike Authority (KTA) set out to improve the state's freight competitiveness by studying and developing strategies for improving its statewide freight network's safety, efficiency, and competitiveness. The study made several recommendations, including identifying information and technology services to help truck drivers make better parking decisions.

I-94 Truck Parking Information and Management System Concept of Operations (2012)In 2012, the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) developed its own TPIMS ConOps for a project to deploy TPIMS along I-94 from the Indiana border to east of the I-94/I-69 interchange. The initial deployment is still in operation today and is relevant to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership project, as it is a comparable system and located within project corridors.

Evaluation of MDOT Truck Parking Information and Management System (2016)http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_Truck_Parking_Project_Report_528340_7.pdfIn 2016, MDOT evaluated its TPIMS along I-94 from the Indiana border to east of the I-94/I-69 interchange. The results of the evaluation confirm that the parking system was successfully implemented. Drivers agreed that parking information systems were personally valuable to the driver and could save them time while driving.

A Comprehensive System for Assessing Truck Parking Availability (2015)The University of Minnesota conducted a study to design and evaluate a space-by-space video detection system with accompanying dissemination technologies in the form of roadside changeable message signs (CMS), a website, and an onboard geolocation application. The study found that the detection system detected parking space occupancy with a 95% accuracy

http://www.floridatruckinginfo.com//PDFs/2016FASTLANE/6_Statewide%20TPAS%20PSEMP%20-%20Draft.pdf

http://www.floridatruckinginfo.com//PDFs/2016FASTLANE/6_Statewide%20TPAS%20PSEMP%20-%20Draft.pdf

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm

https://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/burRail/Rail/Documents/Kansas_Statewide_Freight_Network_Truck_Parking_Plan_2015_2016.pdf

https://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/burRail/Rail/Documents/Kansas_Statewide_Freight_Network_Truck_Parking_Plan_2015_2016.pdf

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_Truck_Parking_Project_Report_528340_7.pdf


July 15, 2016 Page 7 of 77

rate. The initial deployment is still in operation today and is relevant to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership project, as it is a comparable system and located within project corridors.

Mid-America Freight Coalition Truck Parking Management Systems (2015)http://midamericafreight.org/wp-content/uploads/MAFC_TPMS_Synthesis_07012015.pdf The Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC), along with the National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research & Education (CFIRE) developed a report to assess the need and provide solutions for Truck Parking Management Systems in the United States.

Truck Parking Technologies Analysis Concept of Operations and High Level Requirements (2016)The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) is currently building a similar system along I-94 using a $1 million grant from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This system will provide interstate truck parking continuity between Wisconsin and Minnesota. In Wisconsin, the system will provide dynamic message signs, integration with Wisconsin’s traveler information telephone number (WI 511), and third-party mobile applications to indicate availability of truck parking at four key rest areas.

FHWA Systems Engineering Guidebook for Intelligent Transportation Systems (2009)http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/cadiv/segb/files/segbversion3.pdf The FHWA Systems Engineering Guidebook for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) was written to guide agencies through a uniform process for developing ITS systems. The ConOps is one of the first documents produced as part of the systems engineering process for ITS.

ATRI Research Synthesis (2016)The American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) conducted literature research and analyzed driver survey data in order to gain an understanding of truck parking issues from the perspective of the drivers.

Using FMCSA’s ITD (CVISN) Grants for Truck Parking (2016) http://its.dot.gov/presentations/its_america2015/SmartPark_TR01.pdf In 2007, the FMCSA began research and development of an experimental truck parking information system as part of an Innovative Technology Deployment (ITD), formally Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN), grant. Starting in 2011, two rest areas in Tennessee approximately 20 miles apart on I-75 north were equipped with truck parking information infrastructure. The system included the use of a combination Doppler radar/laser scanner for data collection. Dissemination methods included DTPS, Interactive Voice Recognition (IVR), smartphone app, and a SmartPark Research Project Website. The intent of the project was to demonstrate whether or not truck drivers could be diverted from a full rest area to one with vacancies, as well as to test out a truck parking reservation system.

NCHRP Synthesis 317 – Dealing with Truck Parking Demands (2003)http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_317.pdf In 2003, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) compiled a synthesis of research surrounding the truck parking issue. The synthesis draws data from a survey distributed to highway maintenance engineers all over the United States, and this data is supplemented with a literature review.

http://midamericafreight.org/wp-content/uploads/MAFC_TPMS_Synthesis_07012015.pdf

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/cadiv/segb/files/segbversion3.pdf

http://its.dot.gov/presentations/its_america2015/SmartPark_TR01.pdf

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_317.pdf


July 15, 2016 Page 8 of 77

4.0 Background

4.1 National Truck Parking Issues

There is general agreement among transportation agencies and advocates that safe and convenient truck parking is insufficient along the national highway system and other freight corridors. In the Midwest, where truck volumes can exceed 25,000 trucks per day, congestion at many traditional truck parking sites has translated into truck drivers using rest area ramps, freeway ramps and shoulders, and adjacent roads for overflow parking, creating an unsafe situation for all motorists.

Access to safe and convenient parking areas for trucks is essential for safe travel of both commercial vehicle operators and the motorists with whom they share the road. The FMCSA regulates hours of service and mandates rest periods for drivers of at least 10 hours per day after every 14-hour shift. Additionally, drivers must take periodic 30 minute breaks as defined by the FMCSA. Violators risk fines and disciplinary action. However, drivers frequently report challenges to complying with these regulations, including:

Difficulty finding safe and convenient parking options where needed, and Inadequate information regarding parking availability and way-finding.

4.1.1 Safety ConcernsOne common truck parking concern is driver fatigue. Drivers who are unable to find a safe place to rest are at higher risk for being involved in fatigue-related crashes. In 2015, the National Center for Freight & Infrastructure Research & Education (CFIRE) published a synthesis titled “Truck Parking Management Systems”. This synthesis concluded that driver fatigue may account for up to 11 percent of truck crashes. The synthesis also noted that a disproportionate number of truck crashes occur between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., or in areas where parking is unavailable for more than 30 miles.

Drivers who have not located parking before reaching their hours of service limits are often forced to park in unauthorized areas and/or unsafely in order to avoid fines or discipline from their employer. Without reliable, real-time information about parking availability, some drivers often choose to end their shift early and travel from lot to lot looking for available parking. Drivers who have not located parking before reaching their hours of service limits are often forced to park illegally and/or unsafely, often on the shoulder of the highway, on an off-ramp or an abandoned facility. Figure 3 shows results from the 2013 Safe Truck Parking Survey by by Desiree Wood, Hope Rivenburg, and Andrew Warcaba Associates for locations where truck drivers generally park. A significant number of surveyed truck drivers park in areas that could be considered unsafe; including ramps, abandoned lots, and isolated locations like shopping center delivery areas.


July 15, 2016 Page 9 of 77

Figure 3: Parking Locations


July 15, 2016 Page 10 of 77

In the most serious of cases, the result of parking in unsafe areas is personal injury or death. This outcome was addressed in Section 1401 of MAP-21; a section called “Jason’s Law”. In 2009, Jason Rivenburg, a commercial truck driver, sought a safe spot to rest before delivering a load of milk early the next morning. Jason’s unfamiliarity with parking options nearby led him to park at an abandoned gas station, where he was later robbed and murdered. As a result of this incident, “Jason’s Law” was passed, bringing the need for safe truck parking into the national spotlight and expanding eligibility for states to use federal highway funds for truck parking projects.

4.1.2 Economic ConcernsTruck parking improvements provide a number of strong economic benefits within the project corridors and help strengthen the overall economic productivity and competitiveness of the entire Midwest.

According to a 2013 Safe Truck Parking Survey PowerPoint by Desiree Wood, Hope Rivenburg, and Andrew Warcaba Associates, a survey of nearly 4,000 truck drivers revealed that 83% of the respondents routinely took longer than 30 minutes to find parking; 39% took longer than one hour.

According to Traffic Technology International, a national TPIMS is estimated to save the US economy billions of dollars each year. It is estimated that the yearly cost of wasted fuel and lost working hours is $7 billion with an average yearly cost of $35 billion in damaged or stolen goods in transit in the US. At least some of this might be attributed to truck drivers searching for safe areas to rest or being forced to sleep in unsafe or congested locations.

The TPIMS project seeks to greatly decrease the time spent searching for parking and, in turn, decrease the amount of fuel used. Assuming each driver saves 15 minutes while they seek parking, the MAASTO TPIMS TIGER grant application estimated the driver time savings at over $10 million annually.

A large-scale TPIMS is expected to enhance the ability of the U.S. to compete globally. The Midwest is known for its manufacturing industry and with increasing demand for just-in-time supply chains, an improvement in efficient and reliable freight movement is needed to compete globally and increase both national and international trade. Truck traffic through the MAASTO TPIMS area is projected to greatly increase in the next 25 years. By proactively providing drivers with real-time parking information, the region will allow drivers to competitively move goods more efficiently and safely.

To improve safety and efficiency within the nation’s truck transport network, drivers require real-time information regarding locations of available parking. Recommendations in the first ever National Freight Advisory Committee report identify use of ITS as a solution for truck parking issues, while also citing fatigue prevention as a means to stem crashes in the transportation sector. This can be accomplished by launching a TPIMS.

TPIMS is envisioned to be an ITS-enabled network of safe, convenient parking areas with the ability to collect and broadcast real-time parking availability to drivers through a variety of media


July 15, 2016 Page 11 of 77

outlets. This will enable drivers to proactively plan their routes and make safer, smarter parking decisions. It will also enable public and private parking facility owners to understand the magnitude and timing of the demand on their facilities, thereby allowing for smart partnerships and investments to increase parking capacity in areas where demand exceeds supply.

4.2 National Research Programs

Truck drivers are faced with a number of operational and regulatory challenges, including hours of service (HOS) limitations, limited availability of parking at public and privately operated rest facilities, pressure resulting from just-in-time (JIT) delivery schedules, and stress and delay resulting from traffic congestion in many urban areas and/or major truck corridors. These issues also impact the safety, operations, and economies of the general motoring public, agencies that maintain and operate the transportation infrastructure, and private business, in terms of the safety, operational and economic implications they pose.

There is an extensive body of research on truck parking utilization and safety. In 2003, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) determined that fatigue accounts for over eight percent of all fatal truck crashes (NHCRP, 2003). Research conducted by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2000 suggests that driver fatigue may be a contributing factor in 30 to 40 percent of all heavy truck crashes.

Congress, recognizing this problem, has on more than one occasion directed the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and USDOT to review the causes of heavy truck crashes and the adequacy of the nation’s commercial vehicle parking supply. In 1998, Congress directed the NTSB to review the causes of truck-related crashes. Section 4027 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) specifically required USDOT to conduct a study to examine one of these causes – the adequacy of the nation’s parking facilities on the National Highway System (NHS). In a special investigative report, NTSB recommended that FMCSA create a guide to inform truck drivers about locations and availability of parking.

On October 1, 2012, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21, PL 112-141) went into effect. Section 1401 of MAP-21, also known as Jason’s Law, directed the USDOT to conduct a survey and assessment to:

Evaluate the capability of each State to provide adequate parking and rest facilities for commercial motor vehicles engaged in interstate transportation;

Assess the volume of commercial motor vehicle traffic in each State; and Develop a system of metrics to measure the adequacy of commercial motor vehicle

parking facilities in each State.

From the Jason’s Law survey, some national trends in truck parking were identified. For truck drivers, finding available and safe parking at night is a significant problem. States lack resources to fund parking projects and enforcement. The survey also identified communication with truck drivers on parking issues and availability as being necessary and important for helping drivers find parking and to broadcast safe options in emergencies or adverse weather conditions.


July 15, 2016 Page 12 of 77

4.3 Current Systems

In the MAASTO region, the states of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are currently implementing variations of TPIMS, paving the way for a progression to a regional system.

A TPIMS was deployed by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) in southwest Michigan, where it has been continuously operating since mid-2014. The I-94 international trade corridor was selected for implementation due to frequent overcrowding of rest areas, which was forcing drivers unfamiliar with the area to park along ramps and shoulders at adjacent interchanges. The MDOT system is used to help truck drivers efficiently locate safe and convenient parking and plan their rest periods. There are seven private and five public sites along a 130-mile stretch of I-94 from the Indiana state line to Parma, Michigan. Data is disseminated via dynamic truck parking signs (DTPS), Michigan’s traveler information website, a third-party website, and mobile applications.

In Minnesota, three rest areas on I-94 eastbound have been equipped with a stereoscopic camera pattern recognition system developed by the University of Minnesota. The camera system is able to identify the occupancy of each space within the rest area. Multiple dissemination methods have been developed, including in-cab communications via People Net, changeable message signs (CMS), the MN 511 website, and the University of Minnesota website.

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) is currently building a similar system along I-94 using a $1 million grant from FHWA. This system will provide interstate truck parking continuity between Wisconsin and Minnesota. In Wisconsin, the system will provide DMS, integration with WI 511, and third party mobile applications to indicate availability of truck parking at four key rest areas on I-94 between the Minnesota state line and I-39.

The progress made in these three states has contributed to the initiation of this eight state collaboration across the Midwest. This regional TPIMS approach is especially focused on the rest and parking needs of long-haul trucking operators who travel hundreds of miles, often across state lines, during a 14-hour shift. The Midwest region’s attention to this issue offers an opportunity to improve the national and global competitiveness of the nation’s goods movement, and sets the stage for the later expansion of the initiative to both coasts and to significant NAFTA corridors connecting to Canada and Mexico.

5.0 User-Oriented Project Development

Table 1 lists all of the stakeholders related to the TPIMS project, along with their corresponding roles and responsibilities


July 15, 2016 Page 13 of 77

Table 1: Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities

Stakeholder Group Roles and Responsibilities

FHWA Awarded TIGER grant to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership. Ensures that grant-related activities meet federal standards.

Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials

(MAASTO)

Pooled resources together to create the successfully awarded Federal TIGER grant application for the TPIMS project. The MAASTO Planning Committee provides guidance and input to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership.

MAASTO TPIMS Partnership Comprised of the eight MAASTO states. Responsible for designing, deploying, and providing ongoing operations and maintenance of the TPIMS, and are the ultimate owner of the system.

Kansas DOT Serving as Lead Agency administering the TIGER grant for the TPIMS project. Point of contact between FHWA and grant participants.

Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC)

The non-profit research organization of MAASTO. Helps with ongoing performance metrics and grant reporting. May also function as a central data warehouse.

State Traffic Operations Centers (TOCs)/ Traffic Management Centers

(TMCs)

Responsible for day-to-day operations and maintenance of the system. Operations and maintenance may be coordinated through a contractor in some states.

Contractors

Contracted by the State DOTs to perform operations and maintenance duties on state-owned truck parking monitoring equipment. They may also be contracted to own, operate, and maintain their own truck parking monitoring equipment. The contracted company may be required to collect, aggregate, and provide truck parking data to the respective state DOT for the state’s dissemination.

Third-party Website/App Developers

Access truck parking availability data collected by the TPIMS Partnership, and disseminate the information on websites, smartphone applications, and in-cab systems.

Fleet Dispatchers/Driver Managers

Receive the truck parking information from the state 511 sites or from the third-party website/application developers, and can disseminate it to truck drivers as desired.

Truck Drivers (Independent, Contracted, and Company

Truck Drivers)

Receive truck parking information from multiple platforms including roadside signs, websites, smartphone applications, dispatchers, and in-cab systems. With the information, they are able to make better decisions regarding their stopping points.

Truck Stop Operators (TSOs)

Own and operate truck stops along freight corridors. For states that are deploying at private sites, the TSOs will collaborate through a public-private partnership to aid in deployment of infrastructure within the truck stops.

Industry Freight Organizations (NATSO,

OOIDA, ATRI)

Help to publicize the system, provide feedback from users, and collaborate on integrated solutions.

The inputs from these stakeholders form the basis of the ConOps for the TPIMS project and are fundamental for the effective design of the system.


July 15, 2016 Page 14 of 77

5.1 TPIMS Partnership Engagement

Various MAASTO TPIMS Partnership Task Force workshops and meetings are being held at regular intervals over the life of the TPIMS project.

Partnership Technical Core Team coordination meetings are being held on a recurring weekly basis. The Technical Core Team includes representatives from the following participating agencies: Lead Agency KDOT, MDOT, MnDOT, and WisDOT as the 4-state Partnership Technical Team; FHWA Kansas Division and key FHWA point of contact for the project; and the Consultant Project Management Team and key task leads when applicable.

Partnership Task Force coordination meetings are being held on a monthly basis with the Partnership Task Force which includes representatives from the following participating agencies: eight TPIMS Partnership states, with participants representing project management, technical, and communications staff; FHWA Kansas Division; the Consultant Project Management team and key task leads when applicable. These coordination meetings included three in-person, two-day workshops and monthly video conference/WebEx meetings to coordinate and gather input on key project tasks and deliverables.

The first in-person TPIMS Partnership Workshop was held in Overland Park, KS on March 30-31, 2016. Topics included:

Discuss project goals, risks, and measures, Review and refine TPIMS regional concepts, Review Federal TIGER Grant state requirements, and An overview of project steps

A second in-person TPIMS Partnership Workshop was held in Detroit, MI on June 8- 9, 2016. Topics included:

Provide ATRI truck parking needs and issues synthesis and baseline survey, Make decisions on regional TPIMS concepts, Review Concept of Operations draft, Overview state-specific project requirements, and Provide update on TPIMS communications and marketing.

The third TPIMS Partnership Workshop is proposed to be held on August 11, 2016.

Monthly coordination conference calls/WebEx meetings are held between in-person workshops in order to coordinate and gather input on key project tasks and deliverables.

5.2 Industry Stakeholder Engagement

In order to develop performance metrics for the system, a baseline stakeholder survey was developed in partnership with ATRI and submitted to trucking industry stakeholders. In addition, stakeholder workshops were held to give the TPIMS Partnership an understanding of the concerns and needs of the industry stakeholders for the TPIMS project deployment.


July 15, 2016 Page 15 of 77

TPIMS Stakeholder Workshops were held on April 26-27th, 2016 in Minneapolis and Indianapolis, respectively.

The workshops provided participants with the opportunity to help the project team better understand truck parking issues from multiple public and private sector perspectives. This was done using a variety of feedback tools, including facilitated discussion, in-meeting opinion surveys, and visual preference exercises.

5.2.1 Industry Stakeholder IssuesAt the stakeholder workshops held in April 2016, representatives from the industry were present to provide insight on user needs. The following concerns and issues were discussed:

Drop loads may affect the accuracy of driveway counts Drivers want information about amenities/options available at parking locations Rest areas do not offer amenities - it’s almost more important for drivers to have private

truck stop data due to the amenities Most drivers will only park on ramps if they have no other alternative. Drivers often must absorb the cost of parking at paid lots, which reduces the desire for

drivers to park at those lots Drivers expressed concerns about damage at crowded truck stops, which supports the

need and value of a TPIMS Privacy options influence decisions – some drivers prefer quiet places with fewer

amenities, others prefer populated areas with surveillance It is important that drivers can trust data provided by TPIMS

o Does not need to be precise, just accurate and reliableo If one driver experiences two failures in the system, they will lose trust in the

system Shipper lack of parking is an issue - Shippers control when drivers may be on the lots,

and parking is typically not allowed. Therefore, shippers should be playing a role in the truck parking issue

Drivers want truck parking information available through multiple dissemination methods; signs were highest rated method

Having a centralized location to go to for truck parking data is important, rather than accessing through eight separate states

Consistency in state data and platforms is important Planned NATSO application to combine parking data – allows truck stop owners to

manually input datao Low mechanical countso Allows for real-time data to also be incorporated

HAZMAT needs to be accounted for as well as oversize/overweight – can only park in certain places – might need to know specific information for parking

Future expansion of capacity and TPIMS to high congestion areas/metro areas would be helpful


July 15, 2016 Page 16 of 77

Follow up stakeholder WebEx meetings are also planned for late summer 2016 in order for the TPIMS Partnership to share the decisions on the regional TPIMS concepts and conceptual design outcomes. Regular stakeholder engagement will then continue at key project milestones throughout the TPIMS project design and deployment phases through September 2018, as well as throughout ongoing operations and maintenance of the system to gather feedback on system performance.

6.0 Operational Needs

6.1 Vision

A Vision Statement for the TPIMS project was developed by the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership at the first workshop held on March 30-31st in Overland Park, KS.

“MAASTO TPIMS Partner States will strengthen America’s freight network by helping truck drivers make safer, more efficient parking decisions through a user-focused information service that consistently provides timely, reliable parking availability information.”

6.2 User Needs

After the first TPIMS Partnership workshops in March and June 2016 and the stakeholder workshops in April 2016, an itemized list of user needs was developed. The purpose of this list is to track and verify that the project is meeting the user needs throughout the systems engineering process. Table 2 provides the itemized list of user needs and indicates to which stakeholder the user need applies.

Table 2 is located on next page.


July 15, 2016 Page 17 of 77

Table 2: User Needs

TPIMS Partnership FHWA

Truck Drivers

Driver Managers TOC/TMC

Contractors (O&M)

Third-Party Developers MAFC

Industry Freight Orgs

Truck Stop Operators

A Access information from all states from one source, rather than multiple sources X X

B Account for unique parking situations (eg. HAZMAT, oversize/overweight, drop loads, etc.) X X X X X

C Balance the use of existing parking facilities to maximize usage X X X X X X

D Collect data for performance measurement, operations analysis, and evaluation for future expansion. X X X X X X X X

E Comply with the Federal TIGER Grant by operating and maintaining a TPIMS system for a minimum of 5 years X

F Comply with the Federal TIGER Grant by providing an operational TPIMS system by 4Q 2018 X

G Develop a cost-effective, sustainable solution with minimal operation/maintenance requirements X X X X

H Improve personal safety and security for commercial drivers X X X X X

I Maximize understanding and acceptance of the TPIMS X X X

J Protect user privacy and proprietary data X X X X X X

K Receive harmonious and consistent information between states X X X

LReceive information about amenities, surveillance and lighting, cost of parking, and whether the lot can accommodate HAZMAT or oversize/overweight loads

X X

M Receive information in a way that meets federal safety guidelines for commercial drivers X

N Receive timely, reliable, and accurate parking availability information to efficiently locate parking X X

O Receive truck parking information through multiple dissemination methods X X

P Reduce fatigue-related truck crashes in deployed corridors X X X X X

Q Reduce illegal/informal parking on ramps X X

MAASTO TPIMS User Needs


July 15, 2016 Page 18 of 77

6.3 Goals and Objectives

The MAASTO TPIMS Partnership goals and objectives are discussed below. The objective of the TPIMS project is not to solve a truck parking supply problem, but rather to provide drivers better parking availability information and way-finding to locate available parking. A TPIMS does not address truck parking supply directly. Studies have shown that private lots often are underutilized (Federal Highway Administration, 1999) and better information on availability and way-finding could help improve their utilization. As a result, the goals and objectives developed within the Federal TIGER Grant application and the resulting TPIMS project are focused on better parking availability information and utilization of existing parking resources.

The goals and objectives for the project are:

Improve safety o Reduce crashes (fatigue related) o Reduce illegal/informal parking on rampso Improve safety and security for commercial drivers

Maximize usage of existing parking assets Add value to the trucking industry Implement in a sustainable way

o Show return on investment with clear, measureable public benefit o Mitigate long-term O&M costs – potential transition of system to private industry

or others Provide timely, reliable and accurate truck parking availability information Provide

harmonious and consistent operations between stateso Regional consistency and branding o Seamless across state lines o Universal data interface (API) but allow private industry to provide innovations for

data dissemination o Address stakeholder goals o Allow some state-specific flexibility (truck parking monitoring technologies)

Additionally, industry stakeholders provided input on what would make the system more useful to them:

Multiple channels of communication for getting parking information (in-cab, cell phone, and signs);

Notification of parking availability as early as 60 minutes away from potential parking with availability being reconfirmed in some fashion close to the parking decision point (take exit, change route or go on); and

Parking availability information that is reliable and accurate without necessarily being precise as to specific number of parking slots.


July 15, 2016 Page 19 of 77

6.4 Performance Measures

Performance measures for the system were developed through the Federal TIGER Grant application process and refined by the Mid-America Freight Coalition in order to gauge the effectiveness of the system for its stakeholders and to meet Federal TIGER Grant reporting requirements. The following measures will be recorded both before the project is built in order to establish a baseline, and after the system is complete and deployed:

1. Parking Spot Utilization and Demand Cycles will be monitored before project implementation, and then at three-month intervals with annual analysis of the data. This approach will provide an assessment of the efficacy of the communication systems as they influence the overall utilization and demand cycle of the parking facilities.

2. Corridor Safety will be monitored before project implementation, and then at annual intervals along the corridors. A trend analysis will be completed on an annual basis with the year-end state traffic crash reporting. The intent of the analysis is to monitor truck crash rates in proximity to rest areas and private truck stops.

3. TPIMS System Reliability will be monitored by tracking the percent down time and accuracy of the TPIMS components, as well as user complaints. This approach will allow for a general measure of the robustness of the system and allow for assessment of the various technological approaches across the region.

7.0 System Overview

The TPIMS project concept involves four primary components:

1. Selection of a procurement method;2. Collection of truck parking information;3. Aggregation and processing of data; and4. Dissemination of truck parking availability information.

In order to accomplish these objectives, equipment will be deployed at public rest area sites within each of the MAASTO partner states. In addition, some states will deploy equipment at public weigh stations. Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and possibly Wisconsin will also deploy TPIMS at private truck stops.

7.1 Procurement Methods

There are a number of ways in which the public-private combinations of the TPIMS can be implemented. The following methods were considered:

Traditional public deployment with public O&M: Partnership states design, deploy, and own the infrastructure, with operations handled by Traffic Operations Centers (TOCs) or Traffic Maintenance Centers (TMCs) and maintenance through standard means (e.g., current MnDOT I-94 model).


July 15, 2016 Page 20 of 77

Traditional public deployment with private O&M: Partnership states design, deploy, and own the infrastructure, with operations and maintenance wholly or partially contracted to a third party contractor (e.g., current WisDOT model).

Private turn-key deployment with Private O&M: A contractor is hired to design, build, operate, and maintain the system. Partnership states receive a truck parking availability data feed, with maintenance obligations and outage requirements specified in a contract. A private vendor owns the entire infrastructure (e.g., current MDOT I-94 private sites model).

Variations on the aforementioned methods are also acceptable. Each member of the TPIMS Partnership must determine whether they want to collect and disseminate data as a state agency or contract with a third party to perform this function. The decision to privatize some or all of the system requires consideration of budget, capacity of the current operations staff, and conformance with current DOT priorities. All approaches would support performance metrics and system management, provide data to truck drivers to improve safety, economy, and the environment, and provide data to TPIMS partnership states for infrastructure/asset management.

In a fully public system, the state DOT could maintain control over information within the system (i.e., data integrity) and costs would remain transparent. In this type of system, an agreement between the state and any private property owners would be required to allow installation of state-owned equipment on their private truck stop property.

The addition of private truck stop locations may be easier in a partially or wholly privatized system by simplifying the future integration of data into a larger regional/national network across state lines, leading to a more consistent system and uniform consumer product. A private system could also potentially create a business model that would shift O&M costs to the private sector. Privatizing O&M puts operational activities under the control of organizations that are experienced in managing parking.

Disadvantages of a fully private system are the reverse of the advantages of a public system. Additionally, if a private operator were to have difficulty during an economic downturn, a state’s entire TPIMS could fail, instead of only its private portion. This would also apply to a system of private operators, though some operators might be more robust and pick up the failed part of the network.

7.2 Data Collection

Truck parking information must be collected efficiently, accurately, and in a timely manner. There are many ways to collect data from truck parking areas to accurately reflect their occupancy. In the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership, eight methods are being considered. Four of the methods will look at counting trucks entering and exiting the parking area. This process is referred to as entrance and exit counting. The other four methods will focus on providing counts by detecting the presence of a truck at each parking space. This process is referred to as space-by-space or space occupancy counting. The eight data collection methods investigated are:


July 15, 2016 Page 21 of 77

Entrance and Exit Counting Technologies In-Ground Magnetometer Video Detection Microwave Radar Laser

Space-by-Space Counting Technologies Magnetometer Magnetometer and Microwave Radar Magnetometer and Infrared Video Detection

The selection of technology will be determined based on individual site characteristics at each truck parking area. The Detection Technology Evaluation Technical Memorandum prepared for the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership in June 2016 provides technical details and evaluations of each of the data collection methods considered for the project.

7.3 Data Aggregation and Processing

The method used for aggregating and processing parking availability data depends on whether or not a state wants to keep this function within the agency or privatize it. A state may choose to pay a contractor for this function, integrate this process into their advanced traffic management system (ATMS), or use a hybrid approach.

Assigning the processing and aggregation of the truck parking data to a contractor may be the best solution for some states. In this case, a third party is contracted to aggregate the collected data and provide resulting truck parking availability information. The data could then either be disseminated by the third party, sent to the state ATMS for dissemination, or a combination of the two.

It is important that the agreement with the contractor specifies the required accuracy and timeliness of the data provided. The drawback to using a third party data processor is that the state would not directly control the data or its accuracy. To address this consideration, periodic audits are required to ensure that accurate and timely data is being provided that meet contractual requirements. States should retain the ability to view, download, and display the data as part of their ATMS software with very minor changes.

A state may choose to process and aggregate the calculated truck parking availability data using their current ATMS software. Updating and expanding the functions of ATMS software may be a complex and costly process. However, with this option the state would own the data and be able to ensure its reliability.

The final option is a hybrid of state and contracted operations, as is being done currently in Michigan - the state processes and aggregates the data for public sites using their ATMS software, while a third party processes, aggregates, and provides truck parking availability data to the state for all the private sites. This option allows the state to control some of the data and reliability while engaging a third party at some of the more difficult locations to aggregate and


July 15, 2016 Page 22 of 77

verify the reliability of the data. Additionally, since private truck stop operators (TSOs) may not desire to have state-owned truck counting infrastructure on their property, this option allows for a separation between public and private infrastructure.

7.4 Data Dissemination

There are several ways to present the aggregated truck parking availability data to the public, and any or all options may work in tandem. One report concluded that truck drivers preferred to receive truck parking information around 20 miles before the exits for which the information is given (University of Minnesota, 2015). The survey performed during the Stakeholder Workshops on April 26-27th, 2016 indicated that drivers prefer to receive the information approximately 60 miles from parking locations and then an update as they get within a range of five miles of the parking location.

7.4.1 Message SignsRoadside signage can disseminate truck parking information on two platforms: 1) dynamic truck parking signs (DTPS), and 2) existing or new dynamic message signs (DMS).

Dynamic Truck Parking SignsA DTPS, such as the one shown in Figure 4, displays both static and dynamic text. The static message component indicates the upcoming rest areas and exits along the corridor. In Michigan, the static message components of the signs generally identify parking availability at three upcoming stopping points: usually one rest area and two exits. This helps provide parking availability information for the closest available lots, as well as lots 20-30 miles in advance. The dynamic message component provides the near real-time number of available parking spaces at each location. Each state may choose which truck parking facilities are displayed on each sign.

Figure 4 is located on next page.


July 15, 2016 Page 23 of 77

Figure 4: Dynamic Truck Parking Sign on I-94 in Michigan

Because of the time lag between viewing a sign and reaching a facility, as well as limits to the count accuracy, when the count of available spaces falls below an established boundary, the word “LOW” can be displayed instead of a precise number. For exits where multiple parking areas are available, the dynamic panel sign displays the sum of available parking spaces. Thus, drivers may be required to visit several parking areas at the advertised exit to secure a parking space.

Multiple surveys and studies have concluded that dynamic panel signs are the most preferred method of truck parking information dissemination for truck drivers. As the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) illustrates, creating a uniform sign type for use throughout the MAASTO region is a form of branding and can increase visibility and awareness of the MAASTO truck parking system, making it familiar to drivers throughout the region.

Infrastructure requirements for dynamic panel signs include a source of power and communications. The sign can be incorporated into existing ATMS system to allow for integrated operations with other ITS assets.

Existing/New Dynamic Message SignsDMSs can display a wide variety of messages relating to any aspect of the corridor on which they are located. Existing or new DMSs (full-color or monochrome) can be used. MnDOT elected to use portable changeable message signs for their pilot project as a temporary solution. Figure 5 shows a monochrome DMS displaying truck parking information.


July 15, 2016 Page 24 of 77

Figure 5: Dynamic Message Sign

Source: http://www.gobytrucknews.com/minn-helps-truckers-find-parking/123

If a corridor has an existing DMS system, then it is very cost-effective to use them to display truck parking information. However, these signs will not have a consistent look matching the DTPSs. Therefore, the use of existing DMSs as the only roadside means to disseminate truck parking information is not recommended. New full-color DMSs can be used to provide a consistent look, but these systems are more expensive than a DTPS.

Another consideration with the use of a DMS is that it is not dedicated to displaying truck parking information alone. Because other information can be provided on the signs, the parking information can be inconsistent and unreliable for truck drivers. For instance, when a traffic incident occurs, truck drivers tend to seek parking until the incident clears. In these cases, the DMS would be used to display information regarding the incident, and would no longer display the truck parking information which may be in higher demand due to the incident.

7.4.2 Web-Based PlatformsWeb-based platforms such as traveler information websites or smartphone applications enable drivers and dispatchers to make informed route planning decisions at the beginning of their trip as well as en route.

Traveler information websites, such as those funded by the 511 programs, and smartphone applications are relatively low-cost ways to disseminate truck parking information. The cost to create and maintain a website and/or application is marginal compared to that of roadside signs, as is the cost to expand the website or application with the addition of new truck parking areas. States such as Michigan and Kansas have state specific travel information websites such as MiDrive and KanDrive.

Unlike the road signs, web-based platforms can state the number of stalls available at each parking area at an exit, instead of the sum total for the entire exit. This can reduce the amount of time it takes a driver to find a spot. Web-based platforms can also provide extensive detail

http://www.gobytrucknews.com/minn-helps-truckers-find-parking/123


July 15, 2016 Page 25 of 77

about the amenities available at each parking area such as fuel prices, dining, laundry, showers, ATMs, etc. Websites have the additional ability to display the real-time truck parking cameras.

A pitfall to web-based applications is that this information can only be accessed by dispatchers, drivers with Wi-Fi or data plans and cellular service along the corridor, and vehicles with integrated in-cab systems. In order to ensure safe operations, mobile applications will need to be FMCSA “one-touch” compliant by relying on hands-free voice interactive commands. A smartphone application may sense a vehicle’s roadway heading and GPS location to present parking availability information to drivers for facilities in proximity to the vehicle’s position and travel path, whereas a website shows all of the available truck parking locations in its database.

An on-site survey conducted for the MDOT parking project in 2015 revealed that, even though a smartphone truck parking application had been available since December 2014, few drivers were aware of the application. Some drivers also confused the truck parking smartphone application with commercial truck stop applications. The commercial truck stop applications provided amenity information, but rarely provided truck parking availability information. Figure 6 shows a screenshot of a Traveler Information Website, and Figure 7 shows an example of a truck parking information smartphone application.

Figure 6: Wisconsin’s Traveler Information Website

Source: http://www.511wi.gov/Web/

http://www.511wi.gov/Web/


July 15, 2016 Page 26 of 77

Figure 7: Smartphone Application

Source: Truck Smart Parking Services

Two options were explored for the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership to choose from regarding web-based truck parking availability information dissemination:

PublicUnder the public option, truck parking availability data is housed in a central clearinghouse funded by the Partnership. Truck parking availability data is disseminated via a Partnership funded website and/or Smartphone application. A public data feed is also provided, which will allow private third parties to provide truck parking availability information on their websites, smartphone applications, and imbedded in-cab systems. With this method, the Partnership controls how information is displayed on the official site and application, including the look and the refresh rate. Maintaining, operating, and upgrading the central clearinghouse, website and/or Smartphone application must be funded with non-grant funds, since these costs are operation and maintenance costs.

PrivateWith the private option, private third parties would obtain truck parking availability data from the Partnership and provide truck parking availability information on websites, smartphone applications, and embedded in-cab systems. With this option, there is no Partnership-developed website or smartphone application. This results in lower development, operational and upgrade costs than the public option, but it also relies on third-party vendors to disseminate the data. Since private industry is already showing interest in the truck parking availability data, this is considered a growing market sector that can disseminate the information successfully. As a result of third-party service provider’s focus on providing real-time traveler information and the


July 15, 2016 Page 27 of 77

competitive environment they operate in, they can more efficiently and proactively upgrade and enhance the web-based dissemination tools. This is also a simpler option for the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership, and would make it easier to expand the system to other states in the future. With this method, each private developer would be required to enter into a data agreement.

Within the private option, two approaches to sharing the truck parking availability data with private third parties were considered. One approach included development of a central clearinghouse where data from all states is consolidated for distribution to private third parties. This approach provides one location to access the data for all states and the clearinghouse can also act as a data archive. The second approach has private third parties obtain data from individual states using a consistent data feed format. With this option a central data warehouse is required to archive data for performance measure only. Based on discussions with potential private third parties, it was determined that accessing the data from each state was not a concern as long as a consistent data feed is provided by each state.

If the central clearinghouse is not operational, data feeds from all states are lost. Operating and maintaining the central clearinghouse is an operational cost that must be funded by each state with non-grant money. The clearinghouse must remain operational for the system to operate, so any reduction in funding can jeopardize the systems operation. The warehouse can be funded with grant funds because its primary purpose is archiving data for grant required performance measures.

At the workshop held on June 8th-9th, 2016, the TPIMS Partnership chose to move forward with a private option that also includes a data warehouse. See Section 7.5.2 for more information.

7.4.3 Additional Dissemination MethodsThere are many ways in which truck parking data may be disseminated. While some of these methods have been researched and documented in detail, other methods include but are not limited to:

In-Cab SystemsMany trucking companies equip their fleet vehicles with in-cab systems. These systems may provide applications for navigation, tracking HOS, providing fuel optimization and low-bridge information, etc.

Manufacturers of in-cab systems may elect to use data from an online data feed to disseminate data via the in-cab systems.

GPS SystemsIn a manner similar to in-cab systems, GPS manufacturers may elect to use data from an online data feed to disseminate data via on-board or aftermarket GPS systems.

Highway Advisory RadioHighway Advisory Radio, also known as Travelers’ Information Stations, exist for the purpose of disseminating highway information to travelers via radio. A governmental entity may elect to operate a Highway Advisory Radio Station for the purpose of providing truck parking


July 15, 2016 Page 28 of 77

information. Restrictions on Highway Advisory Radio Stations may prohibit the dissemination of truck parking information at private truck stops.

Citizen’s Band RadioIndividual truck drivers may communicate the availability of truck parking via Citizen’s Band (CB) radio. This method would bypass the data collection infrastructure, as a driver who is currently parked at a rest area or truck stop may provide parking availability information at their location to drivers looking for parking.

Other Radio OptionsSatellite radio services and some local radio stations may incorporate truck parking data into their existing traveler information segments.

Call-in Phone SystemsUsing Interactive Voice Recognition (IVR) technology, call-in phone systems may be developed in order to help a commercial truck driver find parking along their route. A driver who is looking for information would verbally call the IVR system and follow the voice prompts to get the desired truck parking information in a hands-free environment.

Traveler Information KiosksExisting traveler information kiosks at truck stops and rest areas may be adapted to display truck parking information provided by the TPIMS.

7.5 Architecture

7.5.1 National ITS ArchitectureThe TPIMS system needs and functions are mapped to the following national ITS architecture service packages:

AD1 - ITS Data Mart ATIS01 - Broadcast Traveler Information ATIS02 - Interactive Traveler Information ATIS05 - ISP Based Trip Planning and Route Guidance ATIS07 - Travel Services Information ATMS06 - Traffic Information Dissemination ATMS09 - Transportation Decision Support and Demand Management ATMS16 - Parking Facility Management ATMS17 - Regional Parking Management

More details on the national ITS architecture service packages are documented in the MAASTO TPIMS Project ITS Architecture document.


July 15, 2016 Page 29 of 77

7.5.2 Regional ArchitectureThe proposed architecture for TPIMS in the MAASTO region includes the flexibility to allow each state to run their own system while common standards provide interoperability across state lines. This will allow for seamless integration while setting standards for future truck parking efforts nationwide. The technology deployed at parking facilities and roadside signs will integrate with each state’s existing ITS network and software platform. For state-specific details see State Appendices. As shown in Figure 8, the TPIMS Partnership will send their data to a central warehouse for storage and analysis. Additionally, through a common XML feed third-parties will be able to request and receive data from each state for third-party apps and websites. Partnership states can exchange data with each other as desired.

Figure 8 is located on the next page.


July 15, 2016 Page 30 of 77

Figure 8: Regional TPIMS Architecture with Warehouse Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 31 of 77

7.6 Core Functions Matrix

Each state in the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership was able to format the project to best fit their state’s needs and requirements. Table 3 shows each state’s initial decisions regarding procurement process, data collection method, data collection technology, data analytics and sharing, and information dissemination. This table was created to illustrate the commonalities and differences between state decisions early on in the project for the sake of guiding final decisions. State decisions are subject to change. Public and private sub-categories were created for procurement, data collection method, and data collection technology since the strategies employed may differ between public and private sites. Not all states are deploying at private sites.

Table 3 is located on the next page.


July 15, 2016 Page 32 of 77

Table 3: Core Functions Matrix


July 15, 2016 Page 33 of 77

7.6.1 ProcurementEach state was able to choose their preferred procurement type. Iowa and Ohio are using DBOM for public and private sites. Indiana, Kansas, and Minnesota, are only deploying at public sites and are using DBB. Wisconsin is deploying at public sites and is also considering deploying at one private site. Wisconsin and Kentucky are using DBB for both public and private deployments. Michigan is using DBB for public and DBOM for private sites.

7.6.2 Data Collection MethodStates were able to choose between Entrance and Exit driveway counts, shown as “In/Out” in Table 3, and space-by-space detection as their primary data collection method. This method may change at specific truck stops in the event of special circumstances as selected sites are investigated for monitoring equipment placement. Since Iowa and Ohio are deploying a DBOM procurement type, they will be developing functional requirements RFP, shown as “Functional Requirements” in Table 3, and allowing the third-party vendor to propose the best method of data collection which meets the requirements laid out in the RFP.

7.6.3 Data Collection TechnologyEach state provided feedback regarding their preferred data collection technology, which may be different at specific sites, depending on truck parking lot configuration and functional requirements. While this Concept of Operations discussed eight different data collection technologies, states are able to choose any data collection technology which suits their needs and budget. As with the data collection method, Iowa and Ohio are allowing a third-party vendor to determine the data collection technology, provided that the selected technology meets functional requirements.

7.6.4 Operations and MaintenanceEach state determined who would operate and maintain infrastructure at public sites, private sites, and sign locations. See section 8 for more operation and maintenance details.

7.6.5 Data Analytics and SharingProcessingIowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Kansas have elected to use a third-party contractor to handle the processing of all data collected by the TPIMS. Kentucky, Indiana, and Minnesota will process the data within their ATMS software. Michigan will continue to process private truck stop data via a third-party and handle public site data within their existing ATMS.

SoftwareMichigan and Wisconsin plan to use their current software, which already has the capability to process the raw truck parking data, shown as “Current” in Table 3, while other states will need to develop software to process the raw data, shown as “Not Developed” in Table 3. Kentucky and Indiana must develop software to process sensor data along with facilitating the posting of availability data on their roadside signs and state-specific web-based applications. Kansas and Ohio will need to modify their ATMS software to accept availability data from their contractor and disseminate the data on roadside signs and state-specific web-based applications. Iowa will


July 15, 2016 Page 34 of 77

need to modify the ATMS software to accept availability data from their contractor and disseminate on state-specific web-based applications. Minnesota, which is shown as “Needs Additional Development”, currently has software to interface with their existing truck parking sites. However, modifications will need to be made to accommodate new sites as part of the MAASTO TPIMS project.

Sharing FormatEach state has agreed to format data in a consistent format, denoted in Table 3 as “Availability Data Consistent”.

7.6.6 Data DisseminationSignsEach state has the ability to choose the type of message signs with which they will disseminate information. Per the TIGER grant application, message signs have been identified as a primary method of truck parking availability dissemination.

Website and ApplicationsThird-parties will disseminate the truck parking availability information to the public. As a result of third-party service provider’s focus on providing real-time traveler information and the competitive environment they operate in, they can more efficiently and proactively upgrade and enhance the web-based dissemination tools. The TPIMS Partnership has agreed to provide a data feed using consistent data fields and formatting for each state.

7.7 Locations

Figure 9 shows the locations and corridors of existing and potential TPIMS sites in the MAASTO region. Note that the potential site list is not finalized. Sites and corridors may be added or removed depending on budget and other considerations. These corridors were chosen by each state to meet their particular needs. The Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, and Wisconsin DOTs will implement TPIMS at public facilities on their corridors. Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Iowa will implement at both public and private facilities to meet their truck parking availability needs. These facilities and corridors were selected for the following reasons:

They carry high volumes of commercial vehicles, many of which are destined for large cities such as Kansas City, Des Moines, Indianapolis, Louisville, Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland, among others. Commercial traffic uses the truck parking facilities along these corridors as staging and resting areas prior to delivering their loads to their destinations.

State law enforcement agencies report that public rest areas and private truck parking facilities along these segments experience overcrowding that spills over onto rest area and interchange ramps and shoulders, creating safety and operational concerns. Enforcement of illegal parking is a growing challenge.

Crash data compiled from the previous ten years indicate that many crashes involving trucks involve driver fatigue.


July 15, 2016 Page 35 of 77

Figure 9: MAASTO TPIMS Partnership Existing and Potential Sites


July 15, 2016 Page 36 of 77

8.0 Operation & Maintenance Elements

As a part of the Federal TIGER Grant award process, the MAASTO Partnership committed to operating and maintaining the TPIMS and its subsystems for a minimum of five years following deployment. This section of the ConOps documents the operation and maintenance commitments which will be necessary to maintain the system.

Each state’s Appendix includes a table titled “Operation & Maintenance Responsibilities” which identifies the different architecture elements along with which entity will be responsible for their operation and maintenance. The responsibility of O&M may be shared between multiple entities. Table 4 lists the project operation and maintenance elements that are discussed in each state’s Appendix.

Table 4: Project Operation and Maintenance Elements

Project ElementATMS Server DTPS

ATMS Software DMSRest Area Communication Equipment Traveler Information Web SiteHead-End Communication Equipment Truck Parking Processing ServerPublic Rest Area Parking Availability

Monitoring System Truck Parking Processing Software

Public Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data

Private Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas Private Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data

9.0 Operational Scenarios

Operational scenarios are hypothetical scenarios intended to illustrate the operational flows for users and operators of the TPIMS. The operational scenarios discussed include daily system use for three types of truck drivers and operations and maintenance flows for four different scenarios.

9.1 Daily End User Scenarios

The interfaces that a truck driver might use to get truck parking information will vary based on their employment type and which technologies they have access to while planning and driving their route. Some large trucking companies prohibit interacting with dispatchers or any electronic device while the truck is moving, while other companies encourage the use of a dispatcher to assist in finding available truck parking while en route. For the daily system use operational scenario, it is assumed that the driver in the “Contracted Truck Driver” scenario is allowed to interface with equipment while the truck is in motion, and the driver in the “Fleet Truck Driver” scenario is not. For the sake of comparison, each scenario begins with the following series of events:


July 15, 2016 Page 37 of 77

A truck driver is dispatched from Minneapolis to Toronto. The driver calculates that a mandatory rest stop will be required somewhere in Southwest Michigan.

Pre-trip, the driver checks a website and plans to stop at a truck stop at Exit 112 along I-94.

The driver encounters delays while traveling along eastbound I-94 and becomes fatigued. Since the driver is nearing the limit on federally mandated HOS, the driver decides to rest prior to reaching the originally planned truck stop.

9.1.1 Independent Truck DriverThis scenario involves an independent owner/operator, who is allowed to interface with technologies while moving within the FMCSA guidelines, planning their trip and later changing plans while traveling within the MAASTO region. Figure 10 shows a graphical representation of this scenario. The following text description of this scenario is from the viewpoint of the truck driver.

Approaching a rest area, the truck driver sees a dynamic truck parking sign indicating limited parking at the upcoming rest area and Exit 1. However, the sign indicates that ample parking spaces are available at Exit 12.

The driver activates the FMCSA-compliant third-party app on the smartphone, which is mounted on the driver’s dashboard. The driver verbally requests upcoming facilities with available parking. The app automatically locates the truck’s position and travel direction, and provides visual and audible alerts regarding the next available facilities with available parking:

5 spaces open. 12 miles ahead. Exit 12. Private Truck Stop 1. 15 spaces open. 12 miles ahead. Exit 12. Private Truck Stop 2.

The driver avoids the delay of pulling into Exit 1, and continues on the mainline to Exit 12. The driver listens for updates to the parking availability on the smartphone.

After traveling for approximately seven miles, an update comes from the smartphone app:


The driver requests service information about Private Truck Stop 2. The smartphone app provides audible and visual information regarding the truck stop.


July 15, 2016 Page 38 of 77

Figure 10: Daily System Use – Independent Owner/Operator


July 15, 2016 Page 39 of 77

9.1.2 Contracted Truck DriverThis scenario involves a contracted truck driver, who is allowed to interface with technologies while moving within the FMCSA guidelines, planning their trip and later changing plans while traveling within the MAASTO region. Figure 11 shows a graphical representation of this scenario. The following text description of this scenario is from the viewpoint of the truck driver.

Approaching a rest area, the truck driver sees an advance truck parking information sign indicating that parking opportunities at the upcoming rest area and Exit 1 are limited. However, the sign indicates that ample parking spaces are available at Exit 12.

The driver contacts their dispatcher or driver manager and requests upcoming facilities with available parking. Based on the truck’s position, the dispatcher is able to find information regarding the next available facilities with available parking:


The driver avoids the delay of pulling into Exit 1, and continues on the mainline to Exit 12.

The driver requests service information about Private Truck Stop 2. The dispatcher or driver manager lists the services available, including the price of parking, food, fuel prices, showers, etc. and any parking discounts available if such services are purchased.



July 15, 2016 Page 40 of 77

Figure 11: Daily System Use – Contracted Driver


July 15, 2016 Page 41 of 77

9.1.3 Fleet Truck DriverThis scenario involves a fleet truck driver who is not allowed to interface with technology while their truck is moving. The driver plans their trip and then later needs to change plans while traveling within the MAASTO region. Figure 12 shows a graphical representation of this scenario. The following text description of this scenario is from the viewpoint of the truck driver.

Approaching a rest area, the truck driver sees an advance truck parking information sign indicating that parking opportunities at the upcoming rest area and Exit 1 are limited. However, the sign indicates that ample parking spaces are available at Exit 12. If desired, the driver may pull off at an earlier exit to contact their dispatcher/driver manager or use their smartphone to research amenities and exact truck stop locations at the desired exit.

The driver avoids the delay of pulling off at Exit 1, and continues on the mainline to Exit 12. While the driver may not know the exact amenities or the specific location of the truck parking, they are able to narrow down their decision and avoid further delay.



July 15, 2016 Page 42 of 77

Figure 12: Daily System Use – Fleet Driver


July 15, 2016 Page 43 of 77

9.2 Operation and Maintenance Scenarios

The operation and maintenance scenarios are intended to provide insight from the daily operations and maintenance perspective.

9.2.1 Inter-State CommunicationsThis scenario revolves around a communications malfunction which causes one state’s data to fail to transmit to external parties. Figure 13 shows a graphical representation of this scenario.

ODOT receives a report that a sign near the border with Indiana is blank. The sign belongs to Indiana, but is located in Ohio.

Firstly, the Ohio TMC/TOC contacts the Indiana TMC/TOC to determine whether or not their data collection and feed are working properly. The Indiana TMC/TOC confirms that their data is populating. The Indiana TMC/TOC then contacts their operations contractor to troubleshoot the problem at the sign in Ohio. The Indiana maintenance team determines the issue is with the local message sign controller and resets the controller. The Indiana TMC/TOC determines that the central ATMS server then needs to be reset. While waiting for the server to restart, the Indiana maintenance team manually updates the sign from the local message sign controller with data from the ATMS feed.



July 15, 2016 Page 44 of 77

Figure 13: Inter-State Communications


July 15, 2016 Page 45 of 77

9.2.2 State RecalibrationThis scenario addresses the need to recalibrate the system once it is determined that the vehicle occupancy at each of the parking areas is incorrect. TOC/TMC operators will use PTZ cameras overlooking parking areas to determine if the vehicle count is correct. Figure 14 shows a graphical representation of this scenario.

The operator takes remote control of the on-site camera to perform a manual count of the truck parking availability. The operator will then verify the count against what the system is reporting to the ATMS system for dissemination. If the truck count is determined to be incorrect, then the TOC/ TMC operator will enter the correct information into the data aggregator. If the truck count is determined to be correct, the TOC/TMC operator can continue on to the next parking location.



July 15, 2016 Page 46 of 77

Figure 14: State Operated Truck Parking Calibration


July 15, 2016 Page 47 of 77

9.2.3 Third Party RecalibrationThis scenario addresses the need to recalibrate the system once it is determined that the vehicle occupancy rate at each of the parking areas is incorrect. Third party operators will request to use PTZ cameras overlooking parking areas to determine if the vehicle count is correct. Figure 15 shows a graphical representation of this scenario.

Once third party truck parking operator requests for use of PTZ cameras overlooking the truck parking areas, the operator will then use the camera to count the trucks parked in the parking area. If the truck count is determined to be correct, the third party operator can continue on to the next parking location and return control of the camera back to the TOC/TMC. If the count is incorrect, the third party operator will enter the correct count into the aggregator system, the system will then populate the ATMS software with the correct vehicle count for the corresponding parking area. The ATMS software will then publish the correct data on the dynamic truck parking sign. The third party operator is then able to continue on to the next parking area.



July 15, 2016 Page 48 of 77

Figure 15: Third Party Operator Recalibration


July 15, 2016 Page 49 of 77

9.2.4 Site ClosedThe final scenario is in the event that a site is closed temporarily for maintenance, construction or an incident. Figure 16 shows a graphical representation of this scenario.

When a state such as Indiana closes a rest area, the closure needs to be delivered to the end user. In this scenario, INDOT closes a rest area for maintenance. The first thing the INDOT TOC/TMC operator does is change the status of the rest area from “Open” to “Closed” in the ATMS software for the closed site. Once that information is entered, the XML feed will publish that the site is closed. This XML feed will also publish the data to the data warehouse for archiving and data analysis. The ATMS software will then publish the change to Indiana’s DTPS to state “CLD” instead of an availability number. For this scenario, “CLD” is used to represent closed but the exact text to represent closed for a rest area has not yet been determined by the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership.



July 15, 2016 Page 50 of 77

Figure 16: Closed Site


July 15, 2016 Page 51 of 77

10.0 Summary of Impacts/Outcomes

Table 5 shows the impacts and outcomes that each stakeholder should expect to experience as a result of the project.

Table 5: Stakeholder Outcomes

Entity Outcomes

FHWAPositive economic and safety impacts on the National Highway System as a result of enhanced freight competitiveness on corridors where TPIMS has been deployed.

Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials (MAASTO)

Positive economic and safety impacts as a result of enhanced freight competitiveness on corridors where TPIMS has been deployed. The opportunity to collaborate with other AASHTO regions or interested states on the expansion of the initial TPIMS deployment nationally.

MAASTO TPIMS Partnership agencies

Positive economic and safety impacts as a result of enhanced freight competitiveness on corridors where TPIMS has been deployed. The opportunity to expand their initial TPIMS deployment and/or collaborate with future interested states on the expansion of the initial TPIMS deployment nationally.

Kansas DOTPositive economic and safety impacts as a result of enhanced freight competitiveness on corridors where TPIMS has been deployed.

Mid-America Freight Coalition (MAFC)

More satisfied users and enhanced truck parking data for research purposes and performance measurement.

State Traffic Operations Centers (TOCs)/ Traffic Management

Centers (TMCs)

Better distributed truck parking will reduce overcrowding in unsafe locations, resulting in a safer freeway network for all users.

Contractors Financial benefit for providing a service to the MAASTO TPIMS Partnership agencies.

Third-party website/application developers

Financial benefit for providing enhanced information to users.

Fleet Dispatchers/Driver ManagersEasier to assist truck drivers in finding safe, reliable parking options – more efficient movement of goods throughout the MAASTO region.

Truck Drivers (Independent, Contracted, and Company Truck

Drivers)

Easier to find safe, reliable parking and have a more productive trip – don’t have to spend as many service hours looking for a place to park and lose productivity.

Truck Stop Operators (TSOs)

Better distributed parking will help truck drivers more confidently go to sites that may look full even if there are spots available, as well as direct truck drivers to truck stops that may currently be underutilized. Potential increased financial opportunity from truck drivers other available amenities in coordination with truck parking.

Industry Freight Organizations (NATSO, OOIDA, ATRI)

More satisfied users and enhanced truck parking data for research purposes.


July 15, 2016 Page 52 of 77

Appendices

This page was intentionally left blank.


July 15, 2016 Page 53 of 77

Appendix A: Indiana

Table 6, Figure 17, and Table 7 show Indiana’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 6: INDOT Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 54 of 77

Figure 17: INDOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 55 of 77

Table 7: INDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server INDOT INDOT INDOT

ATMS Software INDOT INDOT INDOTRest Area Communication Equipment INDOT INDOT INDOTHead-End Communication Equipment INDOT INDOT INDOT

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System INDOT INDOT INDOTPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data INDOT INDOT INDOT

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas INDOT INDOT INDOTDTPS INDOT INDOT INDOTDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site INDOT INDOT INDOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System N/A N/A N/APrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data N/A N/A N/A


July 15, 2016 Page 56 of 77

Appendix B: Iowa

The Iowa DOT has expressed a desire to proceed without the use of signs as an information dissemination method. In order to accomplish this, the Iowa DOT submitted a letter to FHWA citing their reasoning behind this method. The letter was written as follows:

“The Iowa Department of Transportation is excited to have been included in the TIGER grant award as part of MAASTO’s proposal for a regional truck parking information management system (TPIMS). This project has promise to provide an important service to the freight industry by improving efficiency and safety.

Key components of this project, as stated in MAASTO’s application, are:

Identifying available parking options using advanced parking technologies, and Communicating parking availability in real-time to commercial vehicle operators so that they can

make informed parking decisions.

While collecting accurate and timely parking information is critical to the success of this project, it is even more important to disseminate this information as effectively and timely as possible. To that end, the Iowa Department of Transportation will focus on as many information dissemination solutions as possible to assure success.

In reviewing the variety of options, we did consider the more traditional method of placement of Type B information signs with DMS insets to provide updated information. We have opted not to include this method in our solution due to the following reasons:

1. The physical distance from the sign locations to the truck parking areas. The time required to travel this distance allows for changes in the number of spaces actually available to that shown on the sign. At certain time periods late in the day, there is the strong possibility of the parking areas filling up. In all cases, this has the potential to make the system seem inaccurate.

2. The signs are located at fixed locations in the ROW, adjacent to the highway. If a vehicle is traveling on the inside lane(s), there is a possibility the visibility of the sign will be “screened” by trucks in the outside lane(s).

3. Once again, due to the signs being located at fixed locations, the truck drivers have a specific and finite time frame to view the sign and interpret the information. Given the many tasks drivers must focus their attention on to safely operate their vehicles, it is possible (even likely) their attention may be diverted to other driving tasks during the time they have to view the sign.

Instead, Iowa prefers solutions for disseminating information that will focus on providing real-time, accurate information directly to the freight operators and dispatchers via:

Smartphone, hands-free apps Integration of truck parking information with other in-cab programs and communication devices Real-time XML data feed to provide to service providers (i.e. satellite radio & other services).

In closing, we think these solutions will best provide the accurate and timely truck parking information to the freight operators and dispatchers when they need it and can make best use of it.”


July 15, 2016 Page 57 of 77

Table 8, Figure 18, and Table 9 show Iowa’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 8: Iowa DOT Core Functions

Functions Type Method Description

PublicPrivate

Public

Private

Public

Private

Public

Private

Sign Operations N/A Iowa DOT will use other dissemination methods.

Processing Third Party Iowa will use a third party to aggregate and disseminate data.

Software Not DevelopedATMS software must be modified to accept and disseminate

availability data.

Signs No Signs Iowa will use other dissemination methods.

WebsiteState and

Private Iowa will update their existing 511 website to display truck parking

availability.Mobile

Website/ Mobile App

State and Private

Iowa would support a private app that would use the TPIMS Partnership data to provide parking availability to truck drivers.

Data Collection Technology

Procurement DBOM

Data Collection Method

Third party contractor will determine how to collect data at each location.

Iowa will contract a third party to collect data who will determine the data collection technology at each location. All surveillance cameras

will be owned and operated by Iowa DOT

Functional Requirements

Information Dissemination

Third PartyOperations & Maintenance

Data Analytics & Sharing


A third party contractor will run, maintain, calibrate and aggregate data at all sites.


July 15, 2016 Page 58 of 77

Figure 18: Iowa DOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 59 of 77

Table 9: Iowa DOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server Iowa DOT Iowa DOT Iowa DOT

ATMS Software Iowa DOT Iowa DOT Iowa DOTRest Area Communication Equipment Contractor Contractor ContractorHead-End Communication Equipment Contractor Contractor Contractor

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System Contractor Contractor ContractorPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data Contractor Contractor Contractor

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas Iowa DOT Iowa DOT Iowa DOTDTPS N/A N/A N/ADMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site Iowa DOT Iowa DOT Iowa DOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System Contractor Contractor ContractorPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data Contractor Contractor Contractor


July 15, 2016 Page 60 of 77

Appendix C: Kansas

Table 10, Figure 19, and Table 11 show Kansas’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 10: KDOT Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 61 of 77

Figure 19: KDOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 62 of 77

Table 11: KDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server KDOT KDOT KDOT

ATMS Software KDOT KDOT KDOTRest Area Communication Equipment KDOT KDOT KDOTHead-End Communication Equipment KDOT KDOT Contractor

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System KDOT KDOT ContractorPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data KDOT KDOT Contractor

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas KDOT KDOT KDOT/ContractorDTPS KDOT KDOT KDOTDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site KDOT KDOT KDOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System N/A N/A N/APrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data N/A N/A N/A


July 15, 2016 Page 63 of 77

Appendix D: Kentucky

Table 12, Figure 20, and Table 13 show Kentucky’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 12: KYTC Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 64 of 77

Figure 20: KYTC Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 65 of 77

Table 13: KYTC Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server KYTC KYTC KYTC

ATMS Software KYTC KYTC KYTCRest Area Communication Equipment KYTC KYTC KYTCHead-End Communication Equipment KYTC KYTC KYTC

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System KYTC KYTC KYTCPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data KYTC KYTC KYTC

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas KYTC KYTC KYTCDTPS KYTC KYTC KYTCDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site KYTC KYTC KYTCPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System KYTC KYTC KYTCPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data KYTC KYTC KYTC


July 15, 2016 Page 66 of 77

Appendix E: Michigan

Table 14, Figure 21, and Table 15 show Michigan’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 14: MDOT Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 67 of 77

Figure 21: MDOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 68 of 77

Table 15: MDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server MDOT MDOT MDOT

ATMS Software MDOT MDOT MDOTRest Area Communication Equipment MDOT MDOT MDOTHead-End Communication Equipment MDOT MDOT MDOT

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System MDOT MDOT MDOTPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data MDOT MDOT MDOT

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas MDOT MDOT MDOTDTPS MDOT MDOT MDOTDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site MDOT MDOT MDOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System Contractor Contractor ContractorPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data Contractor Contractor Contractor


July 15, 2016 Page 69 of 77

Appendix F: Minnesota

Table 16, Figure 22, and Table 17 show Minnesota’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 16: MnDOT Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 70 of 77

Figure 22: MnDOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 71 of 77

Table 17: MnDOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server MnDOT MnDOT MnDOT

ATMS Software MnDOT MnDOT MnDOTRest Area Communication Equipment MnDOT MnDOT MnDOTHead-End Communication Equipment MnDOT MnDOT MnDOT

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System MnDOT MnDOT MnDOTPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data MnDOT MnDOT MnDOT

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas MnDOT MnDOT MnDOTDTPS N/A N/A N/ADMS MnDOT MnDOT MnDOT

Traveler Information Web Site MnDOT MnDOT MnDOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System N/A N/A N/APrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data N/A N/A N/A


July 15, 2016 Page 72 of 77

Appendix G: Ohio

Table 18, Figure 23, and Table 19 show Ohio’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 18: ODOT Core Functions

Functions Type Method Description

PublicPrivate

Public

Private

Public

Private

Public

Private

Sign Operations Internal Signs will operate on the Ohio ATMS software.

Processing Third Party Ohio will use a third party to aggregate and disseminate data.

Software Not DevelopedATMS software must be modified to accept and disseminate

availability data.

Signs DTPSDynamic Truck Parking Signs will display parking availability for

multiple parking locations.

Website State and Private Ohio will update their existing traveler information website (OHGO)

to display truck parking availability.Mobile

Website/ Mobile App

State and Private Ohio would support a private app that would use the TPIMS

Partnership data to provide parking availability to truck drivers.

Ohio will contract a third party to collect data who will determine the data collection technology at each location. All surviellance cameras

will be owned and operated by ODOT.

Data Collection Technology

Procurement DBOM

Data Collection Method


A third party contractor will run, maintain, calibrate and aggregate data at all sites.

Information Dissemination

Operations & Maintenance

Third Party

Data Analytics & Sharing


Third party contractor will determine how to collect data at each location.


July 15, 2016 Page 73 of 77

Figure 23: ODOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 74 of 77

Table 19: ODOT Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server ODOT ODOT ODOT

ATMS Software ODOT ODOT ODOTRest Area Communication Equipment Contractor Contractor ContractorHead-End Communication Equipment Contractor Contractor Contractor

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System Contractor Contractor ContractorPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data Contractor Contractor Contractor

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas ODOT ODOT ODOT/ContractorDTPS ODOT ODOT ODOTDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site ODOT ODOT ODOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System Contractor Contractor ContractorPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data Contractor Contractor Contractor


July 15, 2016 Page 75 of 77

Appendix H: Wisconsin

Table 20, Figure 24, and Table 21 show Wisconsin’s core functions, proposed system architecture, and operation and maintenance responsibilities, respectively.

Table 20: WisDOT Core Functions


July 15, 2016 Page 76 of 77

Figure 24: WisDOT Proposed Architecture


July 15, 2016 Page 77 of 77

Table 21: Wisconsin Operation and Maintenance Responsibilities

Project Element Own Maintain OperateATMS Server WisDOT WisDOT WisDOT

ATMS Software WisDOT WisDOT WisDOTRest Area Communication Equipment WisDOT WisDOT WisDOTHead-End Communication Equipment WisDOT WisDOT Contractor

Public Rest Area Parking Availability Monitoring System WisDOT WisDOT ContractorPublic Rest Area Parking Availability and Services Data WisDOT WisDOT Contractor

CCTV Cameras at Rest Areas WisDOT WisDOT WisDOT/ContractorDTPS WisDOT WisDOT WisDOTDMS N/A N/A N/A

Traveler Information Web Site WisDOT WisDOT WisDOTPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability Monitoring System Considering Considering ConsideringPrivate Truck Stop Parking Availability and Services Data Considering Considering Considering