Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
91 CHAPTER 5: IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING FOR CONNECTED VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS Any CV investment option that receives a âgoâ decision from decision-makers becomes a project or program of projects that DOTs must then plan and deliver as part of their standard business operations. As part of their planning process, DOTs should devise means and methods to deliver the project at the lowest possible cost and manage any risks effectively. To develop feasible business models, the research team built on the existing body of knowledge developed for ITS projects, lessons learned from existing CV deployments, information from ongoing deployments, and internal knowledge. The research team identified resource requirements to deliver the CV project and associated risks to help structure the implementation plan. BUSINESS MODEL FOCUS AREAS SPECIFIC TO CONNECTED VEHICLE INVESTMENTS A business model is a specification that defines how a proposed project and its value can be delivered to the customer at an appropriate cost. The financial and deployment components of the business case of the selected investment option provide the reasoning for how the project will be delivered within the delivery structure of the DOT; describe the capital, human (competencies and knowledge), and technological resources required; and identify the associated risks. The business model builds on these business case components to deliver the project and create value to customers in alignment with the organizational objectives. At the heart of the business model is the âgame planâ to acquire the capital, technological, and human resources necessary to deliver the project and manage the risks. Because of the emerging nature of the technology and supply chain surrounding it, the business model for CV investments should address four phases of project delivery: â¢ Procurement planning, including all activities leading up to procurement, such as technology evaluation and selection, drafting requirements and concept of operations, network and IT collaboration, systems configuration planning, and managing the procurement process. â¢ Installation and integration, including acquisition and installation of hardware (e.g., RSUs, OBUs, and traffic signals) and communications infrastructure, device testing to demonstrate compatibility and interoperability, and integration with DOT systems. â¢ Implementation of applications, including functioning within a CV implementation environment to enable bidirectional transmission of data between vehicle and infrastructure and a virtual platform for further analytics using software applications. â¢ Long-term maintenance and upgrading of hardware infrastructure and software systems over their life cycles.
92 CONNECTED VEHICLE INVESTMENT RESOURCES AND RISKS DOTs should carefully consider the following questions when structuring an appropriate business model for a given CV investment option: â¢ What are the resource needs of the DOT? What is the DOTâs plan to acquire those resources? â¢ What are the DOTâs risks associated with the delivery? What is the DOTâs plan to structure those risks optimally? What risks can be accepted, eliminated, or allocated to other parties through the delivery process? â¢ What role does the private sector play (e.g., key support versus central role) in providing resources and sharing risks? â¢ What value does the DOT offer in return for the resources and risk sharing? Key resource needs, based on findings from real-world deployments of CV V2I projects, include human, technological, and financial resources. Human Resource Needs DOTs may not have the internal competence, know-how, and availability to deliver the investment. DOTs should assess which activities should be performed in-house and which should be procured from the private sector: â¢ Market research to evaluate technologies, vendor capabilities, and industry capability. â¢ Systems readiness evaluation. â¢ FCC approval process management. â¢ Concept of operations development. â¢ Systems development (e.g., using a Vee, Agile, or phased approach). â¢ Configuration management. â¢ Systems architecture and design. â¢ Systems manager and integrator. â¢ Product testing to evaluate compatibility and interoperability. â¢ Installation of roadside units, on-board units, and backhaul communication. â¢ Construction engineering and inspection. â¢ Back office infrastructure. â¢ Software applications. â¢ Systems testing. â¢ Training.
93 This list provides a starting point for DOTs to decide on the services to be procured from the private sector. If DOTs do not have the capability or availability, the resource needs can be satisfied through an in-house training program, hiring, the use of consultants, or outsourcing activities through procurement (e.g., turnkey contracts). Technological Resources DOTs will require various types of roadside, in-vehicle and back office hardware, software, and communication infrastructure. They can procure hardware for the CV environment from vendors, either individually or through a bundled turnkey contract that includes other services (e.g., construction, testing). DOTs have experience with providing procurement oversight with in-house staff or consultant support. Risks that are unique to CV infrastructure projects are related to assessing technology maturity and the general upkeep/upgrades of hardware. DOTs may opt to acquire a dedicated consultant or in- house staff to assist with drafting requirements, train in-house personnel, or secure warranties or service agreements, either stand-alone or as a part of a turnkey contract. Creating a data environment is a more complex endeavor that entails capturing and streaming data from a network of devices, aggregation, storage and analytics on a platform, and analytics using software applications that create usable information for broadcasting. DOTs typically are not well versed with technology selection in a rapidly evolving landscape, developing complex technology applications, contracting with technology companies, or keeping up with changing technology through periodic upgrades and enhancements. Similarly, large technology companies do not have experience contracting with DOTs and often lack the patience necessary to work through the procurement process. Particularly for large-scale data environments, DOTs may inherit significant financial consequences from their exposure to potential technology risks. It may be prudent for DOTs to consider allocating technology-related risks to the private sector (which is generally deemed better at managing such risks) through the procurement process. Some DOTs have been partnering with various entities, such as private application developers, technology companies, and universities for development of both small-scale applications and large-scale data environments. However, DOTs may need long-term partnerships, contracts, or subscription- based services with the private sector to handle technology needs. Financial Resources DOTs may need access to private sector capital to address potential funding shortfalls or uncertainties. Possible strategies may include private sector equity in infrastructure development, cost sharing through partnerships, or resource sharing agreements. Depending on the partnership, the private sector can realize monetary returns through annuity-based fixed payments from the DOT and/or revenue generation. Examples include preference-based fees, such as mobility-as-a- service, or service-based fees such as subscriptions and advertising. Both communication infrastructure and application/platform providers may establish business-to-business transactions with OEMs and direct transportation-service providers, such as roadside service providers, over- the-air commercial services, and fleet operators for revenue generation.
94 Like any capital infrastructure project, the delivery of CV projects will have known risks, unknown risks, and uncertainties. Conducting a risk management exercise is becoming a best practice on large, capital-intensive projects. DOTs can identify potential risks in a risk register at various delivery milestones so they can proactively manage these risks throughout the delivery lifecycle. The risk register tracks which risks have been identified, their expected consequence, and how the DOT plans to address the risks through risk acceptance, mitigation, or allocation to private sector. To illustrate, Table 24 presents a sample risk register developed for the Florida Tampa CV pilot deployment project (FHWA, 2015). Table 24. Sample Risk Register (Adopted from Tampa CV Pilot Deployment) Risk No. Task Description Owner of Risk Risk Description Severity Risk Response Risk Mitigation Strategy P1-1 ConOps/ Schedule/ System Requirements THEA Unknown system/ device compatibility issues 4 Mitigate Early engagement with FDOT and float in deployment schedule P1-2 Program Management THEA Loss of key staff 2 Contingency Succession plan P1-3 Stakeholder Education THEA Public opposition/ privacy or safety concerns 4 Mitigate Effective outreach plan P2/3-1 Deployment Plan THEA Extended road closures - planned private development 8 Mitigate Close coordination with City of Tampa/ developer P2/3-2 Deployment Plan THEA/ Stakeholder FDOT District 7 Conflicting construction projects- managed lanes 2018 9 Mitigate Close coordination with FDOT District 7 - opportunity for shared cost P2/3-3 Deployment Plan THEA/ Partner City of Tampa Conflicting construction projects - City of Tampa planned signal upgrades in pilot area 16 Mitigate Close coordination with City of Tampa (pilot partner) - opportunity for shared cost
95 Table 24. Sample Risk Register (Adopted from Tampa CV Pilot Deployment) Risk No. Task Description Owner of Risk Risk Description Severity Risk Response Risk Mitigation Strategy P2/3-4 Safety Plan/ Outreach Plan THEA/ USDOT Pilots Accident in pilot area with litigation 5 Mitigate/ Transfer Mitigate risk through safety plan and outreach plan; transfer financial risk via insurance Examples of known risks for a typical CV project are listed as follows (Sando et al., 2019; Hatcher et al., 2018; Hyman and Tarnoff, 2016): â¢ Institutional/Organizational/Legal o No enabling statutes to pursue alternative delivery. o Insufficient training. o Intellectual property rights. â¢ Technology o Inadequate market knowledge on technology maturity. o Gaps in system readiness assessment. o Inadequate technical requirements for procurement. o Inability to verify vendor claims. o Obsolescence. o Device incompatibility and lack of interoperability. o Software incompatibility with current or planned infrastructure components. o Data storage, safety, security, and privacy issues. o Coding issues with map data. o Too much dependence on a single technology, and not being technology agnostic. â¢ Delivery o Cost overrun/delays with software applications development. o Longer lead time for procuring customized CV devices. o Longer time for system and security testing. o Delays associated with obtaining FCC license. o Lack of contracting experience with technology companies. o Inadequate financial incentives for technology companies. o Early contract termination. o Inadequate handback requirements. o Latent defects with hardware and software components. o Permitting issues (e.g., cable installation in Section 4f properties). o Requirements are too prescriptive to allow for private sector innovation and partnerships.
96 o Dependence on outdated and incompatible methodologies for system development. â¢ Financial o Funding uncertainties. o Funding shortfalls. o Higher annual O&M costs. o Revenue risks. Examining this set of technological, capital, and human resource needs and risks will lend itself to establishing the role that the private sector can play in the delivery of CV investments. Based on the observations from the current CV landscape, the private sector plays a predominant role in technology, equipment, and expertise to build the necessary technical capacity of CV infrastructure. The private sector can assume the risks related to technological maturity, uncertainty, and related financial risks, which in turn, would help public agencies âhedgeâ the risk of technology and systems obsolescence. Business models may differ in how the private sector will be engaged and how their responsibilities, costs, and risks will be allocated. CONNECTED VEHICLE INVESTMENT DELIVERY The business caseâs deployment component considers procurement options to deliver the CV investment. A business model formalizes this selection by considering the four parts of project delivery, as detailed in the definition: â¢ Installation of conventional ITS equipment and CV related hardware, which includes procurement planning, field installation of devices, integration to an existing TMC, and maintenance of hardware. â¢ Installation of backhaul communications using DSRC, fiber optic, or cellular. â¢ Enabling the data environment for CV implementation. DOTs have significant experience installing ITS equipment and using a variety of delivery methods for either a stand-alone project or a part of a major construction project (Tarnoff et al., 2005): â¢ Qualifications-based selection for system manager and system integrator functions using on-call consultants to perform or oversee system planning, design, software development, systems integration, inspection, and testing. â¢ Low-bid procurement for well-defined projects involving field construction and installation of vendor-supplied commercial off-the-shelf solutions. â¢ Design-build procurement for major construction projects. The DOT may opt for other variants, including design-build-operate-maintain and design-build-finance-operate- maintain, based on the construction project needs. â¢ Separate contracts for a program of projects requiring complex software development.
97 â¢ Low-bid job-order contracting for preventive maintenance of ITS equipment, such as software updates and cleaning/tuning of ITS devices and components. Even with all this experience, DOTs are still evolving in their knowledge of more standard ITS deployments. Stronger collaboration with statewide IT departments, for example, have led to a much more robust long-term outlook on cybersecurity, network architecture, and telecommunications. CV implementations will benefit from this increased collaboration. For backhaul communications, DOTs have used low-bid procurement methods or have added installation or upgrade as a part of their construction projects. Because the installation of fiber optic cable is capital intensive, some DOTs, including Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia, have partnered with telecommunication providers through resource sharing agreements to install fiber optic cables in the highway ROW so both parties benefit. Depending on the size of CV implementation and agency capabilities, DOTs may use multiple delivery mechanisms for systems planning and hardware installation until the point of integration with the DOTâs TMC. CV implementations require significant back office systems, data hubs, and software application capabilities. As observed in pilot deployments, a DOTâs existing delivery mechanisms, used for ITS applications, will be adequate for small-scale CV implementations to bring these components into service. However, the current back office infrastructure will not be adequate for large-scale implementations that require massive amounts of data flowing bidirectionally. Therefore, large-scale implementations might need alternative business models for procurement. BUSINESS MODEL OPTIONS The previous sections reviewed the key considerations for business model structuring and selection. This section presents three business model options for consideration, each of which engages private sector partners to some degree. Such consideration requires DOTs to examine technological and human resource needs and risks alongside delivery options for each phase over the CV investmentâs life cycle. Business model considerations may also be influenced by the possibility that alternative technologies might emerge in the future that significantly affect partner roles and requirements. In addition, business model selection is expected to be highly localized to respond to different implementation contexts and political environments; therefore, it will vary across the nation. Three business models are proposed for private sector engagement in CV infrastructure implementation in the 5- to 10-year time horizon. These arrangements are distinguished principally by the allocation of responsibilities, risks, and commercial opportunities between the public and private sectors. The DOT can follow a modular approach to CV implementation where the agency can adopt one or more delivery approaches to meet its needs. For example, the DOT can use one approach for installing roadside ITS cabinets and another for data management.
98 Traditional Model of Public Sector Systems Ownership and Development Using Purchased Commercial Capabilities This traditional model option is a conventional âvendorâ arrangement where the public sector owns the physical assets, and the private sector supplies communication and information services for a fee. This model is suitable for publicly developed and owned DSRC communications networks, and hence, substantially dependent on public sector investment and development initiatives focusing on DSRC capabilities. The private sector could develop, own, maintain, and lease the needed equipment, systems, and technology to the public sector for a fee. The private sector does not contribute financially and assumes no financial risk. The success of this arrangement depends on how well the DOT articulates service requirements and standards in the contract. This model can be adopted in a stand-alone program of projects or as packages in construction projects. This model will still apply for construction projects using alternative delivery, such as design-build or design-build-finance-operate-maintain, where the private sector plays the role of a vendor in delivering the products and services to DOT with no financial risks. FDOTâs delivery of US 90 Tallahassee and I-75 FRAME using a standard request for proposal process are examples (see Section 4.5). Many DOTs are currently using project bundling to realize increased efficiencies in the delivery of infrastructure projects. Project bundling entails a single contract to deliver projects of similar characteristics, typically grouped by work types. By grouping projects of similar characteristics, DOTs can realize cost and schedule benefits that economies of scale and repeatable details offer. Albeit predominantly used for bridge preservation projects, project bundling is increasingly used in fiber optic cable installation, roadway, roadway repair, resurfacing, lighting, safety, and electric vehicle charging stations projects. Kentucky's Broadband & Fiber Optic Bundling to develop a 3,000-mile fiber optic network along roadways is an example of relevance to CV deployments. Other states, including Arizona, Alabama, California, Colorado, the District of Colombia, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Illinois, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington, are using project bundling to deliver broadband and fiber optic projects. Projects of similar characteristics, such as upgrading of traffic signal controllers, OBU installation for fleets, and O&M, can be good candidates for project bundling. Project bundling offers cost and schedule efficiencies, and the single contract award mitigates potential hardware compatibility and interoperability issues. Public-Private Partnership Model Modeled after the conventional design-build-finance-operate-maintain arrangement routinely used in infrastructure and service delivery, this arrangement facilitates a more meaningful collaboration between the DOT and interested private sector vendors to co-develop systems and applications. This model is suitable for a range of communication options, including technology agnostic applications, direct C-V2X, 5G, or DSRC. The DOT provides access to the ROWs, signals, and other infrastructure, as well as access to DOT-owned data for commercial purposes. The private sector provides a suite of services related to technology, application development,
100 FUTURE OUTLOOK FOR BUSINESS MODELS There is a current line of thought among the industry that many of the critical V2I applications, if not all, involving publicly owned infrastructure and data, can be substantially achieved by a combination of Automated Driver Assistance Systems, V2V systems, and publicly available information with no reliance on public sector data or sector infrastructure. A combination of vehicle-based detailed mapping, ubiquitous IoT, and advanced V2V systems may eliminate the need for any public sector involvement in operational management or dependency on public infrastructure. In such a situation, public regulation would merely establish inter-industry standardization of vehicle function, especially those involving safety and traffic management for freeways or arterials. A high degree of vehicle automation and ubiquitous private provision of V2X and networked telecommunications would be necessary to realize such a business model. These preconditions, by any current forecast (including the most optimistic ones), are perhaps 15 to 20 years away. Until such time, the business model options presented in this chapter will perhaps be the ones DOTs will most likely use. CHAPTER SUMMARY This chapter built on the outcomes of the business case components presented in chapter 4 that are designed to inform a decision on pursuing investment in CV infrastructure. Once a âgoâ decision is reached, the project or program of projects must be planned and delivered as part of a DOTâs standard business operations. A business model specifies this process by defining how a proposed project and its value can be delivered to the customer at an appropriate cost. Building on the existing body of knowledge, including lessons learned from existing CV deployments, this chapter discussed the need for developing a âgame planâ to deliver the project. Because of the emerging nature of the technology and supply chain surrounding it, the business model for CV investments should address procurement planning, installation and integration, implementation of applications, and long-term maintenance and upgrades over the life cycle. A business model must consider how the projectâs required human, technological, and financial resources will be provided and who will provide them. Taken together with identified risks, a DOT can determine the role that the private sector can play in delivering the CV project, and what the DOT can offer in return to the private sector. The DOTs have gained significant experience with ITS projects that can be leveraged for CV projects. Despite this experience, DOTs are still evolving in their knowledge of more standard ITS deployments. With CV deployments, the DOTs must devise delivery mechanisms for enabling back office systems, data hubs, software application capabilities, and backhaul communications. These large-scale implementations might require alternative business models for procurement. By observing the current CV landscape, the research found that indeed the private sector can play a predominant role in technology, equipment, and expertise to build the necessary technical capacity of CV infrastructure. The research identified three business model options that engage the private sector to varying degrees, distinguished principally by the allocation of responsibilities, risks, and commercial opportunities between the public and private sectors:
101 â¢ The traditional model of public sector systems ownership and development using purchased commercial capabilities is a conventional âvendorâ arrangement where the public sector owns the physical assets, and the private sector supplies communication and information services for a fee. This model is suitable for publicly developed and owned DSRC communications networks where the private sector could develop, own, maintain, and lease the needed equipment, systems, and technology to the public sector for a fee. â¢ A public-private partnership model relies on collaboration between the DOT and interested private sector vendors to co-develop systems and applications. This model is suitable for a range of communication options, including technology agnostic applications, direct C-V2X, 5G, or DSRC. The DOT provides access to the ROWs, signals, and other infrastructure, as well as access to DOT-owned data for commercial purposes. The private sector provides a suite of services related to technology, application development, data management, and network infrastructure. â¢ Connected vehicle as a service model where the DOT purchases a service package from the private sector by subscription or contract. The private sector supplies âall-inâ services, including physical assets, cloud data, and analytics for a fee, while the public sector owns the data feed and provides signal controller and network access. This model is suitable for potential V2I applications that are technology agnostic and those not dependent on latency bandwidth requirements. While the DOTs are currently adopting the first two models, albeit not for turnkey services, the third model is anticipated to emerge in the near future.