Chapter 2: Evolution of the ITS Program

The 2006 Five-Year Plan presented a detailed history of the ITS Program since its inception in 1991 as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Creation of the ITS Program provided the US DOT with an opportunity to focus on and accelerate the use of advanced transportation technologies around the Nation through activities focused on (1) basic research and development, (2) operational tests that serve as the bridge between basic research and full deployment, and (3) deployment-support activities that facilitate the implementation of integrated ITS technologies.

Chapter 2 of this report summarizes the congressional funding for the ITS Program and highlights the key activities and accomplishments achieved over the course of a 14-year history (1991 – 2005) through passage of SAFETEA-LU. From 2006 to 2008, implementation of SAFETEA-LU and other legislation resulted in changes to the ITS Program. This chapter also describes these changes and summarizes the status of the ITS Program in 2008. It concludes with descriptions and illustrations of notable progress and achievements from 2006 to 2008.

2.1 Program History

ISTEA originally authorized $659 million for ITS in fiscal years (FY) 1992–1997³, with additional funds appropriated by Congress to the States, for a total of approximately $1.2 billion. TEA-21 confirmed the direction of the ITS Program and authorized and appropriated a similar amount through FY 2003: $603 million for research and development and $679 million for deployment activities, for a total of $1.282 billion. Because SAFETEA-LU was enacted in late FY 2005 (two years after TEA-21 authorizations ended) Congress provided a continuing budget for the ITS Program in 2004–2005, appropriating $220 million for continued research and development and $244 million for deployment activities.⁴ With these funds, the ITS Program delivered the following results:

• From 1991 to 1997, the Program provided the initial research and "laboratory" adoption of technologies to existing transportation facilities and vehicles. Early adopters in metropolitan and rural areas and States began to embrace the ITS concept and to deploy predominantly public-sector, infrastructure-based ITS technologies. Advanced vehicle technologies were developed and tested separately as part of the Automated Highway System demonstration in 1997. To provide a common framework and facilitate integration of systems, the ITS Program developed the National ITS Architecture and began the development of critical ITS Standards.
• With successful results of the ITS Program under ISTEA, Congress encouraged adoption and deployment of ITS under TEA-21. From 1998 to 2004, the Program's activities focused on:
  • Promotion of a set of strategic processes for use by State and local transportation agencies that helped to ensure successful and effective ITS deployment. These included use of the National ITS Architecture, development of regional ITS architectures tailored to local needs, use of ITS Standards, and use of the ITS systems-engineering process to develop ITS projects. In support of these processes, in January 2001, US DOT issued the Final Rule and Final Policy on ITS Architecture and Standards Conformity,⁵ which required the use of these processes by all State and local transportation agencies when using money from the Highway Trust Fund and the Mass Transit Account.
  • Creation of a set of Model Deployment Initiatives to demonstrate the powerful and synergistic effects of integrated systems versus standalone technology deployments. Along with the Metropolitan Deployment Initiatives, deployment-support activities were initiated with a focus on technical assistance and workforce development. Additionally, evaluation activities were launched to assess the capability of ITS technologies and systems in real-world settings. These activities have proved to be a rich source of information on the benefits and costs of deploying ITS and the lessons learned from ITS deployment experiences.
  • Development of in-vehicle driver assistance devices that warn drivers of dangerous situations, recommend actions, and potentially assume partial control of vehicles to avoid crashes. In 1997, the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI) was established to work with the automobile industry to develop and deploy safety systems in standard vehicle product lines. Over seven years (1994–2004), IVI research focused on driver distraction and driver activities and workload. The research results formed the basis for the development of newly emerging crash avoidance systems, designed to:
    • Prevent road departures
    • Prevent rear-end, lane-change, lane-merge, and intersection crashes
    • Provide vehicle stability
    • Generate forward-collision warnings
    Many of these systems are now in production and soon will be available in new-model cars and trucks. The IVI also began research on vehicle-to-infrastructure communications. Collectively, the results of the IVI activities form the basis for the current Vehicle-Infrastructure Integration (VII) and Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety Systems (IVBSS) initiatives, which combine many of these stand-alone safety systems into one vehicular system. The current initiatives advance the IVI results through further systems integration with the vehicle to lessen driver distraction and enhance driver decision-making; and further development of vehicle-based safety-systems communications with the transportation network, enabling the ability to send data on vehicle status, and incident or crash conditions to system operators, and to receive real-time information on traffic conditions and travel choices.⁶

By 2004, it was clear that nationwide ITS deployment was underway. State and local agencies were finding value in ITS technologies and systems. Recognizing that the Nation would soon require the next generation of transportation technologies, US DOT reorganized the ITS Program to focus on nine high-risk, high-payoff research areas that eventually became the nine major initiatives described in the 2006 Five-Year Plan.

With the passage of SAFETEA-LU in 2005, Congress affirmed the growing return on ITS investment and authorized $550 million, or $110 million per year,⁷ for ITS research in FY 2006–2010. SAFETEA-LU also contained provisions to further mainstream ITS into the transportation planning and deployment processes and to increase general awareness off improved operations brought about by ITS applications. Importantly, Congress ended appropriations to the ITS Deployment Program (also known as ITS earmarks) at the close of FY 2005, thus allowing the ITS Program to focus its resources on the research initiatives. Table 2.1 summarizes the allocation of financial resources over the course of the three authorizations, as described in the paragraphs above.

back to top

2.2 Changing Environment and Circumstances, 2006–2008

Since 2006, as the ITS Program has advanced the nine initiatives identified in the 2006 Five-Year Plan, changes have occurred that have had, and will continue to have, a significant effect on the ITS Program. This section describes these changes and their likely influence on the Program.

2.2.1 Incorporation of the ITS JPO into RITA

With passage of the Mineta Act in November 2004, the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) was created, replacing the Research and Special Programs Administration. RITA's congressional directive is to "... provide the Department of Transportation a more focused research organization with an emphasis on innovative technology...".⁸ RITA's role within US DOT is to coordinate research programs and advance the deployment of cross-cutting technologies to improve the Nation's transportation system. As directed by Congress, RITA's responsibilities include:⁹

• Coordination, facilitation, and review of the Department's research and development programs and activities.
• Advancement and research and development of innovative technologies, including intelligent ITS.
• Comprehensive transportation statistics research, analysis, and reporting.
• Education and training in transportation and related fields.

Because ITS activities are intermodal and multimodal and involve partners across many modes, the Department moved the ITS Program from its original home in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to RITA. RITA provides the ITS JPO and ITS Program with an opportunity to fully realize its mission of advancing innovative technologies and coordinating across modes to do so. With this move, RITA has undertaken responsibility for setting strategic direction for the ITS Program through collaborative relationships with US DOT modal administrations and for aligning the ITS Program with RITA activities and goals.

In 2004, the Department and ITS Program staff reevaluated the ITS Program's role in providing technology research. In previous years, the primary focus of the ITS Program had shifted to promoting deployment with State and local governments and assisting them with the removal of policy, technical, and knowledge barriers and other obstacles to deployment. The Department and the ITS Program agreed that the program focus would now shift to:

• Focusing on fewer, larger, higher risk/higher payoff research initiatives that:
  • Were problem-driven/results-oriented.
  • Directly supported the Department's goals of safety, reduced congestion, and global connectivity.
  • Directly supported congressional goals, intended purposes, and research priorities for the ITS Program.
  • Were generally multimodal and required a high degree of integration.
  • Defined clear roles for the public and private sectors.
  • Incorporated a clear, strong testing and evaluation component.
• Allowing for the completion of ongoing efforts and exploratory studies.
• Funding deployment-support activities related to architecture, standards, professional capacity building, evaluation and assessment, and outreach.

Under the guidance of RITA, the ITS Program is working to create stronger and clearer links between the Program's research results and investments and its strategic objectives. As the Administration responsible for the coordination of existing departmental research, technology, and data assets, RITA has worked, and continues to work, with the ITS Program to envision how technologies can more significantly impact safety and thereby also address congestion and environmental stewardship goals.

2.2.2 Implementation of SAFETEA-LU Legislation by US DOT

SAFETEA-LU affirmed that the scope of the ITS Program is to research, develop, and operationally test ITS and to provide technical assistance in the nationwide application of those systems as a component of surface transportation systems of the United States. The legislation also specified a number of changes that directly affect the ITS Program, as described below.

Creation of the ITS Program Advisory Committee. SAFETEA-LU directs US DOT to establish an ITS Program Advisory Committee (ITS PAC) to advise to Secretary of Transportation on the scope and direction of the Department's ITS Program.¹⁰ The legislation also directs US DOT to submit an annual report to Congress. The report must include all recommendations made by ITS PAC during the preceding calendar year, with an explanation of how the Department has implemented them and, for those that the Department did not implement, an explanation of why they were rejected.

From 2006 to 2007, the Department engaged in activities necessary to establish the ITS PAC under the procedures and requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The Department developed a charter for the Committee in February 2006 and submitted it to the General Services Administration, the Library of Congress, and Congress, as required in FACA. The Department renewed the charter in February 2008 in accordance with FACA regulations and established Committee membership in accordance with SAFETEA-LU requirements.

In accordance with the statute, US DOT identified individuals with the required expertise to serve on ITS PAC and extended invitations to 19 candidates in June 2007. The legislation specified that the Advisory Committee should have no more than 20 members, be balanced between metropolitan and rural interests, and include, at a minimum:¹¹

• A representative from a State highway US DOT.
• A representative from a local highway US DOT who is not from a metropolitan planning organization (MPO).
• A representative from a State, local, or regional transit agency.
• A representative from an MPO.
• A private sector user of ITS technologies.
• An academic researcher with expertise in computer science or another information science field related to ITS who is not an expert on transportation issues.
• An academic researcher who is a civil engineer.
• An academic researcher who is a social scientist with expertise in transportation issues.
• A representative from a nonprofit group representing the ITS industry.
• A representative from a public interest group concerned with safety.
• A representative from a public interest group concerned with the impact of the transportation system on land-use and residential patterns.
• Members with expertise in planning, safety, and operations.

ITS PAC provides input into the development of the ITS strategic plan and reviews areas of ITS research being considered for funding at least once a year.

At the writing of this 2008 Program Plan, ITS PAC has met four times since June 2007. The first meeting, in September 2007, was held via a web conference, where ITS JPO staff provided basic information to Committee members on the role and responsibilities of the ITS PAC, including a review of SAFETEA-LU legislation and FACA procedures, information on conflict of interest, and an initial overview of US DOT's ITS Program.

The second meeting was held in November 2007 at US DOT Headquarters in Washington, DC. ITS JPO staff provided Committee members with more detailed information on the ITS Program and presented information on the Program's strategic planning efforts. The Committee provided input to ITS JPO staff on industry trends and areas of interest for strategic planning.

The third meeting of ITS PAC, held in March 2008, was a working meeting to solicit detailed input on the ITS JPO's proposed future mission, goals, and focus areas on the basis of information provided by ITS JPO staff as part of the ITS Program's revisioning efforts.

At the fourth meeting, held in July 2008, current research initiatives were reviewed. The Committee addressed several key questions required by SAFETEA-LU:

• Are these current and future activities likely to advance either the state of the practice or the state of the art in ITS?
• Are the technologies being researched and tested likely to be deployed by users? If not, what are the barriers to deployment?
• What are the appropriate roles for government and the private sector in investing in these existing and future research and technologies that are being considered?

These first four meetings established the rhythm and processes for a solid working relationship between ITS PAC and ITS JPO. ITS PAC will continue to present formal recommendations that will guide the future strategic direction of the ITS Program. The recommendations, along with the Department's responses to them, will be included in the next ITS PAC report to Congress in February 2009.

Designate and Convene a Panel of Standards Experts. SAFETEA-LU also required that the ITS Program involve a panel of experts to review the progress and role of the ITS Standards Program and to make recommendations regarding how ITS JPO can address likely challenges that the Standards Program will face in the future. In 2006, the ITS JPO asked the Transportation Research Board (TRB) to assemble experts with the appropriate backgrounds and industry positions to discuss and provide workable suggestions for the future of the ITS Standards Program.¹² In 2007, TRB reported on the Federal role in developing and deploying ITS Standards and recommended that US DOT continue to play a prominent role in supporting these standards, guided by a well articulated strategic vision and program plan. It also advised that US DOT engage users of standards in all phases of development and become more active in international ITS Standards activities. This input has given the ITS Standards Program the necessary guidance to start to develop a strategic plan.

Discontinue the ITS Deployment Program. The ITS Deployment Program was authorized under TEA-21 Sections 5208 and 5209. Section 5208, Intelligent Transportation Systems Integration Program, authorized a comprehensive program to fund model deployment projects that would accelerate the integration and interoperability of ITS in metropolitan and rural areas.¹³ Section 5209, Commercial Vehicle Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Deployment authorized a comprehensive program to deploy ITS to improve the safety and productivity of commercial vehicles and drivers and reduce costs associated with commercial vehicle operations.¹⁴ These programs were not reauthorized by SAFETEA-LU, and funding ended at the close of FY 2005.

The legislation directed the funding to State and metropolitan and rural areas with the requirement that they match the funds at 50 percent. In partnership with FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the ITS Program developed the criteria to guide the ITS Deployment Program and ensure that consistent, successful best practices were employed in deployments across the Nation. Further, the ITS Program required that either an independent, outside evaluation or a self-evaluation be conducted with each deployment, thus creating the basis for the vast amount of knowledge about ITS costs, benefits, and lessons learned that has been developed over the years.

Due to the these actions by Congress and the ITS Program and its modal partners, the ITS Deployment Program has facilitated the deployment and growth of ITS at the State and local levels. Additionally, the funding provided has allowed State and local agencies to establish baseline ITS systems and networks that have since become the foundation from which agencies have continued to build and expand.

The ITS Deployment Program was funded through September 30, 2005, and was not renewed under SAFETEA-LU. With passage of the FY 2008 Omnibus Appropriations Bill on December 26, 2007, Congress formally concluded the ITS Deployment Program. Over the course of its seven-year tenure (FY 1998–2005), Congress authorized more than 700 projects totaling approximately $906M.¹⁵ Of this amount, approximately $790M has been used to implement 514 projects around the Nation. Appendix B lists the States and projects that received funding and the total amount provided by Congress for each State under the ITS Deployment Program.

At the end of FY 2007, with the conclusion of the ITS Deployment Program, Congress decided to rescind approximately $161M in unobligated (unused) earmark funds. For nearly 200 projects, the process required to receive funding was never completed or was only partially funded due, in part, to institutional issues at the State or local level, such as:

• Inability to attract a non-Federal match (predominant reason).
• Lack of sufficient staffing at the State or local agency.
• Change in project scope, partners, or leadership resulting in the relevance of the project being lost.

2.2.3 Major New Departmental Initiatives

In 2006, US DOT announced several major new Department-wide initiatives, many of which complement the nine existing ITS initiatives. These initiatives represent an intense focus on two of the Nation's most pressing transportation challenges: congestion and rural transportation safety.

Congestion Initiative. In 2006, shortly after the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the Department, led by then- Secretary Norman Mineta and later by Secretary Mary Peters, announced a major initiative to reduce transportation-system congestion. Transportation-related congestion is one of the single largest threats to our Nation's economic prosperity and way of life. Whether it takes the form of cars and trucks stalled in traffic, cargo stuck at overwhelmed seaports, or airplanes circling over crowded airports, congestion costs America an estimated almost-$200 billion a year. In 2005, Americans lost 4.2 billion hours and 2.9 billion gallons of fuel simply by sitting in road traffic jams.¹⁶

The Congestion Initiative offers a blueprint for Federal, State, and local officials to work together to reverse the alarming trends of congestion, incorporating and combining many efforts across modes. The ITS Program is engaged in two aspects of the Congestion Initiative:

• Funding innovative technology applications to reduce congestion at a variety of sites across the Nation.
• Evaluating the deployment and impact of technology applications. Selected sites include metropolitan sites that are facing growing congestion. These sites are willing to aggressively apply innovative applications, such as congestion or parking-pricing systems, while making improvements in transit, telecommuting programs, and technology to relieve urban congestion. As of September 2008, six sites had been selected, and more are anticipated in the future. The sites are:
  • Chicago, Illinois
  • Miami, Florida
  • Minneapolis / St. Paul, Minnesota
  • Los Angeles, California
  • San Francisco, California
  • Seattle, Washington

An additional focus of the Congestion Initiative is to support transportation system managers in more effective use of emerging operational and technological tools, many of them developed originally through ITS Program research, to reduce congestion.¹⁷ The ITS Program will support the Department in providing the technology transfer and technical assistance needed for embracing and using new technological tools. (For further details on this initiative, see Chapter 3.3 of this report.)

Rural Safety Initiative. In 2008, the Department launched the Rural Safety Initiative Program to reduce highway fatalities and injuries on the Nation's rural roads. Rural areas face a number of unique highway safety challenges. Rural crashes tend to occur at higher speeds than urban crashes, victims of fatal crashes in rural areas are more likely to be unbelted than their urban counterparts, and it often takes first responders longer to arrive at the scene of a rural crash, leaving victims waiting longer for medical attention. Outdated roadway designs and roadside hazards, such as utility poles, sharp-edged pavement drop offs, and trees close to the roadway, also are major contributors to the severity of rural crashes. According to the latest data from National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), the fatality rate for rural crashes is more than twice associated with urban crashes. In 2006, 23,339 people were killed in rural motor vehicle crashes, accounting for 55 percent of all motor vehicle fatalities.¹⁸

In August 2008, the Department provided 21 awards to 14 States, three counties, and two parishes to improve safety on rural roads. Twelve awards were made to rural communities with significant safety hazards. These communities have identified high-impact, leading-edge ITS solutions. The ITS Program, in cooperation with the Department and the communities, will conduct two key activities: demonstrating the use of innovative technologies to improve rural safety, and evaluating their impact at field-test sites across the Nation. The results will be evaluated, and examples and best practices will be published and be made available to other rural communities facing similar safety challenges. (For further details on this initiative, see Chapter 3.3 of this report.)

back to top

2.3 The ITS Program in 2008

Since 2006, the ITS Program has focused on ensuring that its research initiatives are moving toward completion and are delivering maximum value. The Program has increased its emphasis on oversight and project management to ensure greater accountability and the delivery of measurable impacts and achievements. After two years of research and development activity, the initiatives are producing results that fulfill the goals and directives of Congress as enacted in SAFETEA-LU. (For in-depth descriptions of each initiative, see Chapter 3.)

As of this writing, the ITS Program is firmly established within RITA and is represented within the RITA Strategic Plan.¹⁹ With the move to RITA, the ITS Program is identifying new ways to partner with and across the modes to better target research and deployment activities. The move to RITA has strengthened the ITS Program's ability to conduct technology transfer, leverage university research, and partner with the private sector to develop new transportation markets and make technologies more rapidly available for commercial sale and consumer use.

Under RITA's oversight, the ITS Program has been increasing its focus on safety and reexamining its direction. Stakeholder input has provided the Program with a greater awareness of the need to align transportation system performance with the marketplace and to leverage opportunities offered by the growth in mobile information technologies.

back to top

2.4 Notable Progress and Achievements, 2006–2008

2008 has been a year of research results. The following figures and tables demonstrate the progress in ITS research and deployment:

• Table 2.2 provides examples of deployment success stories—positive, significant changes at the State and local levels that have occurred through ITS deployment.²⁰
• Figure 2.1 is a set of two maps that compare the levels of integrated ITS deployment in the 75 largest major metropolitan areas in 1997 (when deployment tracking started) with those in 2008.²¹ In 1997, only 14 percent of major metropolitan areas had a "high" level of integrated ITS deployment compared with 45 percent in 2008.
• Figure 2.2 presents a map representing the national distribution of the proof-of-concept test sites associated with the ITS research initiatives. These test sites allow the ITS Program to evaluate the system and technology prototypes, models, and strategies under real-world conditions before finalizing the research and initiating commercialization and technology transfer activities. Importantly, the systems and technologies tested at these sites frequently remain in use by State and local agencies, which integrate them into existing systems to provide local travelers and shippers with state-of-the-art transportation services.

Figure 2.2: Map of ITS Research Test Sites

Electronic Freight Management (EFM) Demonstration and Deployment Sites Columbus, Ohio and Hong Kong, China Vehicle-Infrastructure Integration (VII) Proof-of-Concept and Field Test Sites Oakland County, Michigan San Francisco, California SafeTrip-21 Testbeds San Francisco, San Diego, and Lake Tahoe, California I-95 Corridor, New Jersey to North Carolina Clarus Demonstration Sites Local DOT Participation: City of Indianapolis; McHenry County, Illinois; New York State Thruway State Participation: Alaska, Arizona, California, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota (partial), Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming Canadian Participation: Alberta, British Columbia, Yukon Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Pioneer Sites Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, Texas Oakland and San Diego, California Minneapolis, Minnesota Montgomery County, Maryland Seattle, Washington Mobility Services for All Americans (MSAA) Demonstration Sites Aiken, South Carolina Atlanta, Georgia Camden, New Jersey Fitchburg, Massachusetts Kent, Ohio Louisville, Kentucky Orlando, Florida Paducah, Kentucky

Next Generation 9-1-1 (NG9-1-1) Demonstration Sites King County E-911 Systems, Seattle, Washington City of Rochester Emergency Communications Department, Rochester, New York State of Indiana, Office of State Treasurer, Indiana Wireless 911 Board, Kosciusko County, Indiana State of Montana Public Safety Services Bureau, Helena Ramsey County Emergency Communications Center, St. Paul, Minnesota Columbia University's Next Gen Laboratory, New York City Texas A&M's Internet2 Laboratory, Texas The Booz Allen Center for Network and System Innovation, Virginia Congestion Initiative Sites Chicago, Illinois Los Angeles, California Miami, Florida Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota San Francisco, California Seattle, Washington Rural Safety Initiative Sites Arizona DOT California DOT, San Joaquin County California, El Dorado County Colorado DOT Colorado DOT, Freemont County Illinois DOT Iowa DOT Kansas DOT Minnesota DOT South Carolina DOT, Greenville County Washington, King County Wisconsin DOT

back to top

ITS Home | US DOT Home | Privacy | Feedback

United States Department of Transportation - ITS