EFC issues for NRA’sConclusions & recommendations

Status report activitiesEFC workgroup

Tasks and activities EFC team 2005/2006

Finalise internal and cooperative work plan Exchange best practices, lessons learned, set up

knowledge base Prepare inventory of concrete and practical issues, use

results in briefing note in EFC issues for NRA’s Include results in Strategic Position paper to be used in

the discussions with EU-COM EFC team:

– members from Austria, Belgium (Walloon), France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland.

– Workshops in Basel (January 20 ). Oslo (April 21), Vienna (Sept. 8-9), Berlin (January 19-20, 2006)

Status and results briefing note

Inventory of issues Team members made inventory of best-

practices and lessons learned First step towards knowledge base with best-

practices and lessons learned made, all documents are placed in CEDR workspace

Implementation model used to cluster issues Draft version of conclusions and

recommendations, to be completed in coming weeks

Final version ready mid-March

General remarks

Role and positioning of Road Administrations:– Advisor to Minister– Principal

Interoperability– Policy wants it– Costs <> Toll Operator– EETS on which local operators have to deal wiht– Users have to pay– Jun2006 Regulatory Committee has serious decision to

make…. Take local issues more on board; see Efc as a

growing factor

EFC Implementation model

Policymaking (1)

Before the introduction of an EFC system the following aspects must have been addressed:

– Determination of objectives – is it for funding of infrastructure and/or traffic management or fiscal taxation, which target group, where to apply

– Political will, public acceptance – Adaptation of legislative framework– Political and administrative roles and

responsibilities– Realistic time schedule

Policymaking (2)

Continuous attention should be given to political will and public acceptance and the chosen policy must remain consistent

Each NRA can use his position to define practical, successful EFC concepts

Political objectives and decisions tend to simplify the task of implementing such a scheme, this may yield great risks for the actual timely implementation.

To secure it’s success, the NRA should have formal responsibility or be the principal of the EFC implementation

Design and specification (1)

Political and administrative roles and responsibilities must be clarified explicitly in this phase. Structure and organisation of the EFC system need to be defined in conjunction with the roles and responsibilities

Organisation and technology concepts must be examined and redefined based on detailed implementation analysis. It will determine the success of the implementation in terms of costs, returns, user acceptance and enforcement.

Enforcement should be treated as an important issue and the NRA should take their responsibility for defining the enforcement regime. The EFC organisation should be made responsible for the operation of the enforcement system.

Design and specification (2)

EFC systems collects and distributes large sums of money as electronic values. Security is a core element in the specification. It must be based on threat analysis that address all sides of security issues. Use simple, robust cost effective EFC solutions to keep operational costs low.

Reliable and cost effective solutions have a large impact on the operational costs. Technology need be applied, but cannot solve all problems.

The EU directive on interoperability of EFC must be taken into account during the specification and design

Technology

When using existing, cost effective, technology it is of greatest importance to take into consideration the specific conditions for that specific location - no scheme or location is exactly the same.

Technology should be flexible for future developments. Systems developed for use with trucks and busses are

not automatically suited for use with passenger cars Business case for interoperability is difficult, but may

return benefits on the long term. Customers expect it to be there.

Implementation(1)

EFC projects are complex and require specific experience that can only be acquired in practice

Use pilots for test purposes, to avoid unexpected delays and considerable political risks in large scale implementation

Procurement can only start as all roles, responsibilities, new laws, implementation roadmap, fallback scenarios etc.. are in place

Include a strategy for delays. Time consuming legal problems may arise during the procurement process.

Specifications should be mainly functional, relying on open standards, thus creating an open and fair competition for potential suppliers.

Implementation (2)

The principal must continue his involvement in the procurement and implementation phase. Must be decisive in all Go/No-Go milestones

NRA must safeguard professional principles and the flexibility of the concept need to be safeguarded.

EFC implementations are never turn-key projects Complex In-Car systems can only be installed by

trained technicians. The capacity of certified installation centres may form an unexpected bottleneck in the start up phase.

For situations including large fleets of passenger cars this will be a real constraint. A quite different logistic process is needed here.

Recommendations(1)

NRA’s are recommended to:– define their roles and responsibilities explicitly.– have a leading role or at least influence the

framework for the EFC implementation– safeguard the consistency of the chosen policy – to be pro-active and consider all options in relation

to his specific infrastructure conditions and associated costs and benefits.

– put emphasis on a practical and straightforward approach

– create consensus on interoperability and cross-border issues like enforcement

Recommendations (2)

NRA’s are recommended to:– address recovery rate and enforcement in relation to

each other since they can have a large influence on the success of the EFC implementation and operation in terms of costs and public acceptance.

– to monitor the procurement process to secure compliance with legal regulations to avoid time consuming appeals against the results of the procedure .

– exchange best practice experiences with the other NRA’s

– safeguard public acceptance in all phases

EFC: next activities

Finalise note”EFC issues for NRA’s Definition of additional recommendations regarding

issues for NRA’s as a result of the Directive on Interoperability and the activities carried out in relation to that Directive.

Preparation of a Position Paper with recommendations for CEDR with regard to their contacts with EU-COM in respect to the Directive on Interoperability

Next O6 activity: Drafting of a questionnaire covering several aspects: policies, organisational structure, and future activities relevant to the harmonisation of EFC and road charging. This will be discussed in the meeting in June.