![](media/image1.png)

Final Site Report

######## **Evaluation of Travel**

**[Time Methods to Support]{.smallcaps}**

**[Mobility Performance]{.smallcaps}**

**[Monitoring]{.smallcaps}**

**[Peace Bridge]{.smallcaps}**

To

Office of Freight Mgt. and Operations

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

Washington, DC 20590

 April 2002

# Border Crossing Freight Delay Data Collection and Analysis

## FY 2001 Data Collection -- Peace Bridge

####### Site Description

The Peace Bridge connects Buffalo, New York with Fort Erie, Ontario and
crosses the Niagra River. The bridge links the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW)
in Canada and provides with I-190 and other major roadways in the U.S.
The QEW extends to Toronto, Ontario and also links with Highway 401, one
of the major East-West Canadian expressways. I-190 provides a link to
I-90, the main artery of the New York State Thruway, connecting the area
to the major population centers on the East Coast. The bridge operates
24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The Peace Bridge contains only a single, three-lane span. The center
lane is reversible and can be used to ease congestion during peak travel
conditions. The bridge was built in 1927 and is 5,800 feet long. The
bridge is governed by a ten-member board consisting of five members from
New York State and five members from Canada. All capital improvements
and operating expenses are funded by tolls and rentals of Peace
Bridge-owned property and buildings, not public funds. While a single
organization, the Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority manages
two tightly linked groups of bridge operators and maintenance workers.

![](media/image2.png){width="4.010416666666667in"
height="4.010416666666667in"}

**Figure 1. Area Map -- The Peace Bridge**

## Data collection activities at the Peace Bridge occurred during May 22-24, 2001 and June 19-21, 2001. Truck travel times across the bridge in both directions were recorded on Tuesday through Thursday each week, for approximately 12 hours each day. The times of the data collection were staggered somewhat to obtain a broader picture of activity at the bridge.

![](media/image3.bmp)

## 

## Figure 2. U.S. Plaza

![](media/image4.wmf)

## Figure 3. Canadian Plaza

Westbound traffic (outbound to Canada) approaches the bridge either from
I-190 or from Porter Avenue, a four-lane arterial. On the U.S. side,
typically two toll booths are used for trucks but another is available
if needed (see Figure 5). Three lanes are typically open for autos. The
Duty Free Shop is located on the bridge plaza beyond the toll booths.
Once across the bridge, autos are directed to the left and trucks veer
off to the right to pass through one of four primary Customs inspection
booths. However, the fourth is used only occasionally. Trucks are either
released from primary or must continue on to secondary inspection, which
could include simply completing brokerage paperwork or physical
inspections of the cargo. Trucks requiring physical inspections enter an
area opposite the primary inspection booths. Exiting trucks and others
whose drivers must interact with their broker make a sharp left turn
after the inspection booths. Those released continue straight ahead and
those needing to park turn left again and park in a reserved parking
area. When these trucks are finally ready to depart, they must use the
same roadway that trucks released from primary must use to exit the
Customs compound.

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="6.376388888888889in"
height="3.3402777777777777in"}

## Figure 4. U.S. Toll Booths

Eastbound traffic (inbound to the U.S.) approaches the bridge from the
QEW. As vehicles approach the bridge, autos are directed to the left and
trucks take a separate road to the right that loops around the Duty Free
Shop. Beyond the Duty Free, trucks who have not yet been pre-cleared for
U.S. Customs visit the Commercial Vehicle Processing Centre (CVPC). The
CVPC reviews driver paperwork and, if not in order, holds the vehicle
until the paperwork is complete. This reduces the number of vehicles
that need to be sent to secondary inspection on the U.S. side and helps
to alleviate congestion on the bridge and in the U.S. plaza.

![](media/image6.jpeg){width="6.376388888888889in"
height="2.088888888888889in"}

## Figure 5. Canadian Customs Primary Inspection Booths, Showing the OB-2 Collection Location

The inbound toll booths are located immediately before the U.S. primary
Customs inspection booths on the U.S. side. There are three booths to
process commercial vehicles for U.S. Customs primary inspection;
however, a fourth is being constructed in the near future. Any truck not
released from primary must enter the same secondary inspection compound.
There are areas to park for drivers who need to visit their brokers as
well as docks where physical secondary inspections can be conducted. As
with the Canadian side, trucks exiting from secondary must pass through
the area used by trucks exiting the primary inspection booths. In
addition, these truck movements intersect with those of passenger autos
leaving both primary and secondary inspection.

## 

## Data Collection Process

For this study, two data collection locations were used in each
direction. The "number 1" location was immediately before the toll
booths and the "number 2" location was immediately after the primary
inspection booths. For consistency among all border crossings visited as
part of the overall project, the data collection positions were
distinguished by the direction of travel that they were measuring
(outbound or inbound). Westbound movement from the U.S. into Canada was
referred to as outbound. Conversely, inbound was used to refer to
eastbound movement from Canada to the U.S. The Outbound 1 (OB-1)
position; therefore, is in the U.S. plaza, before the toll booths. The
Outbound 2 (OB-2) position was after the Canadian Customs booths. The
Inbound 1 (IB-1) position was located immediately after the Duty Free
Shop, but before the CVPC (see Figure 6 -- panel (a) shows the data
collector and panel (b) shows the view toward the Duty Free Shop exit
onto the truck-only roadway). Inbound 2 (IB-2) was located adjacent to
the U.S. Customs booths.

![](media/image7.jpeg){width="3.2395833333333335in"
height="2.4270833333333335in"}![](media/image8.jpeg){width="3.2395833333333335in"
height="2.4270833333333335in"}

## 

## Figure 6. IB-1 Collection Location

Each data collector would use a handheld computer to record partial
license plate information of all commercial vehicles that passed their
location. The computer would also store the time that each license plate
was entered. The data from the two locations in each direction would be
combined, allowing the determination of the travel time for each vehicle
that was recorded at *both* locations.

For the data collection, the on-site team included four data collectors
and one supervisor. As previously mentioned, the hours during which data
were collected were varied during each week to ensure the greatest
possible coverage of conditions, including periods of low and high
traffic volume. Table 1 shows the data collection hours for each day
during the two site visits. As each data collector actually worked about
12 hours, the supervisor could collect data during their 30-minute meal
break during the day, resulting in approximately 12-½ hours of data
collection.

## Table 1. Hours of Data Collection

  -------------------- ------------------------- -------------------------
  **Date**             **Start**                 **End**

  5/22/01              6:00 am                   6:30 pm

  5/23/01              9:00 am                   9:30 pm

  5/24/01              9:30 am                   10:00 pm

  6/19/01              9:30 am                   10:00 pm

  6/20/01              9:30 am                   10:00 pm

  6/21/01              6:00 am                   6:30 pm
  -------------------- ------------------------- -------------------------

While an extremely smooth process, it took considerable time to schedule
and arrange the initial site visits to coordinate the data collection
activities. Three separate meetings were held at the bridge. One meeting
was held with the General Manager, the Manager of Information
Technology, and a Toll/Traffic Supervisor at the U.S. side of the
Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority. Another was held with the
Chief U.S. Customs Inspector. A third meeting was held with the
Divisional Program Services Officer at Canada Customs and Revenue
Agency. Also in attendance at the third meeting were representatives
from the headquarters office of Canada Customs who were interested in
the project. It was determined that we would need to obtain visitor
passes from the bridge authority shift supervisor when we arrived for
the data collection.

Initial contacts with Canadian Immigration while at the bridge indicated
that work permits were needed to conduct the data collection. However,
consultations with Canadian Consular officials in Buffalo indicated that
that would not be necessary. An e-mail was provided by the Canadian
Consulate to document that they had arranged approvals for the data
collection through the local Canadian Immigration office. On only one
occasion was the documentation insufficient for the Customs agent at the
primary auto inspection booth and Battelle's supervisor was required to
briefly speak with an Immigration official prior to entering Canada on
one of his frequent trips across the border.

Informal approval for data collection on the QEW, should that be
necessary due to the formation of a queue, was arranged through the
Canadian Customs officials. While there was no problem with data
collection on the New York State Thruway (I-190), future data collection
will require a work permit from the Thruway Authority.

Table 2 contains a list of the individuals who were contacted and their
telephone and e-mail information. Future data collection for this
project should be able to be organized and authorized with much less
effort. However, any new project would require additional time to
explain the data collection objectives to the involved parties and gain
their approval.

## Table 2. Agency Contacts

+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| **Contact**       | **Agency**       | **Phone/Fax** | **E-mail**   |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Anthony           | Buffalo and Fort | 716-884-6744  | ab           |
| Braunscheidel     | Erie Public      | ext.242       | raunschedel@ |
|                   | Bridge Authority |               |              |
| Manager -- Info.  |                  | 716-884-2089  | pea          |
| Tech.             |                  | (fax)         | cebridge.com |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Christopher Bonn  | Buffalo and Fort | 716-884-6744  |              |
|                   | Erie Public      | ext.269       |              |
| Toll/Traffic      | Bridge Authority |               |              |
| Supervisor        |                  | 716-884-2089  |              |
|                   |                  | (fax)         |              |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Stephen Mayer     | Buffalo and Fort | 716-884-6744  | smayer@      |
|                   | Erie Public      | ext.224       |              |
| General           | Bridge Authority |               | pea          |
| M                 |                  | 716-884-2089  | cebridge.com |
| anager/Operations |                  | (fax)         |              |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Mark MacVittie    | U.S. Customs     | 716-881-4447  | mark.        |
|                   |                  |               | l.macvittie@ |
| Chief Inspector   |                  | 716-883-0582  |              |
|                   |                  | (fax)         | custo        |
|                   |                  |               | ms.treas.gov |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Ken Seebach       | Canada Customs   | 905-994-6532  | ken.seebach@ |
|                   |                  |               |              |
| Div. Program      |                  | 905-994-6010  | ccr          |
| Services Officer  |                  | (fax)         | a-adrc.gc.ca |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| Mary Keefe        | Canadian         | 716-858-9515  | mary.keefe@  |
|                   | Consulate        |               |              |
|                   |                  |               | dfait        |
|                   |                  |               | -maeci.gc.ca |
+-------------------+------------------+---------------+--------------+

**Data Collection Details**

The Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority provided border
crossing statistical data. This data was evaluated for an assessment of
the variability in travel conditions at the Peace Bridge. The goal of
this analysis process was to obtain statistically useful data with as
few data collection days as possible. In order to customize the data
collection activities to the Peace Bridge, the following steps were
conducted:

-   Define significant "seasonal" variations,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Define significantly different days of the week,

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Identify traffic streams that experience significantly different
    conditions, and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Estimate the number of days needed for the data collection survey.

As shown in Table 3, there is some variation in the commercial traffic
by month. Due to project constraints, data collection needed to occur
between late May and early September 2001. From Table 3, the two months
with the greatest average volumes during this data collection window
were May and June.

**Table 3. Monthly Traffic Distribution of Commercial Vehicles**

  ---------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ ----------------
  **Month**        **1998**     **1999**     **2000**     **1998-2000
                                                          Average**

  January          109,461      101,203      118,865      109,843

  February         108,576      111,860      119,572      113,336

  March            121,182      130,347      138,266      129,932

  April            119,711      126,059      120,066      121,945

  May              118,118      127,127      130,936      125,394

  June             120,477      135,313      125,779      127,190

  July             107,544      116,497      119,393      114,478

  August           113,480      129,938      126,537      123,318

  September        119,902      128,161      117,043      121,702

  October          121,235      127,332      125,772      124,780

  November         113,007      128,388      112,952      118,116

  December         108,803      117,812      98,148       108,254

  **Total**        1,381,496    1,480,037    1,453,329    1,438,287
  ---------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ ----------------

Source: Texas Transportation Institute

Tables 4 and 5 show that there is a significant difference in commercial
traffic between weekdays and weekends and, further, there is a
significant difference between Monday and Friday and the three mid-week
days. Weekend traffic is 39 percent of typical weekday traffic and
Monday/Friday traffic is 85 percent of typical
Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday traffic. In general, it was noted that
inbound traffic increased from Tuesday through Thursday and outbound
traffic decreased from Tuesday through Thursday. It was determined that
collecting three days of data, from Tuesday through Thursday, would
provide an adequate number of data samples to represent "typical"
conditions.

**Table 4. Sample Month -- Daily Traffic Distribution of Commercial**

**Vehicles for May 2000**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Day**           **Day of Week**   **Outbound**      **Inbound**
  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
  1                 Thursday          2010              2684

  2                 Friday            2737              2782

  3                 Saturday          2952              2930

  4                 Sunday            3051              2789

  5                 Monday            2816              1802

  6                 Tuesday           1174              651

  7                 Wednesday         465               1343

  8                 Thursday          2086              2831

  9                 Friday            2848              2868

  10                Saturday          2989              2889

  11                Sunday            3073              2910

  12                Monday            2863              1930

  13                Tuesday           1135              684

  14                Wednesday         458               1277

  15                Thursday          2118              2834

  16                Friday            2935              2877

  17                Saturday          3021              2976

  18                Sunday            2879              2748

  19                Monday            2683              1712

  20                Tuesday           1036              576

  21                Wednesday         357               1150

  22                Thursday          1353              1643

  23                Friday            2461              2664

  24                Saturday          2902              2841

  25                Sunday            2852              2795

  26                Monday            2763              1696

  27                Tuesday           1156              469

  28                Wednesday         372               476

  29                Thursday          660               1897

  30                Friday            2393              2827

  31                Saturday          2918              2820

  **Total**                           65,516            65,371
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority

**Table 5. Averages for Sample Month -- Daily Traffic Distribution of
Export Commercial Vehicles for May 2000**

  ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- -------------
  **Day of    **Week 1** **Week 2** **Week 3** **Week 4** **Week 5** **Average**
  Week**                                                             

  Sunday                 2766       2229       2203       2210       2352

  Monday                 6054       5517       5619       5425       5654

  Tuesday                6550       6263       6253       6020       6272

  Wednesday              6643       6368       6204       6219       6359

  Thursday    6520       6465       6318       6207       5640       6230

  Friday      5712       5250       5211       5071       4157       5080

  Saturday    2674       2208       2081       2077                  2260
  ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- -------------

Source: Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority

From discussions with the Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority,
it was learned that backups typically did not occur on the U.S. side
and, when they did, they did not grow very long. However, on the
Canadian side, backups occurred fairly frequently and could stretch for
several miles along the QEW. On the Canadian side, the backups would
often occur by late afternoon and could stretch into the late evening or
early morning hours.

**Data Collection Procedures**

The data collection stations selected for the crossing were chosen
because of the particular actions that occur at each site. Segments
defined by the data collection stations were used to determine the
commercial vehicle travel times and freight delay. As illustrated in
Figures 2 and 6, the data collection sites were located at:

-   An advance station located upstream of the commercial vehicle queue
    -- OB-1 and IB-1.

-   The import station (primary inspection booths before detailed, or
    secondary, inspection) -- OB-2 and IB-2.

Data collection was conducted by recording commercial vehicle license
plates as vehicles crossed fixed points within the data collection
sites. Survey individuals or teams, were placed at each of the four data
collection sites to record commercial vehicle license plate data.
Figures 2 and 3 show the facilities on both sides of the border,
including station locations and major points of inspection.

Collectors at these locations would record the last five characters of
the front, lower-left license plate of as many trucks as possible that
passed their location. When trucking firms register many vehicles at
once, they often get assigned sequential license plate numbers. Using
the last five characters helps to ensure that as different trucks
operated by the same firm travel across the bridge that they are
uniquely identified. License plate information was entered into handheld
computers with a special application designed for this project. Each
entry was time-stamped with the current date and time. Prior to each
day's collection, all handheld computers were synchronized to the same
time. Prior experience indicated that recording the entire license plate
was too time consuming and that entering only the last four characters
did not provide adequate distinction between different vehicles, so the
project team chose to record the last five characters.

Typically, the queue of trucks crossing the border would not extend
beyond the bridge plaza. However, on occasion the queue would extend
onto the highway system. When this occurred, the data collector at the
#1 location would have to move further from the bridge to a point beyond
the end of the queue. In this way, they could continue to record trucks
before they began their wait at the end of the line. When this or any
other event of interest occurred, the collectors would use an "EVENT"
feature of the PDA software to record it.

For each #1 location, the supervisor would record the distance from any
data collection point other than the original position (which would be
in the bridge plaza). During post-processing, the data from all
locations nearer to the bridge than the *farthest* location would be
adjusted to include the additional travel time from the farthest
location to the original location. The travel time would be computed at
free-flow speeds, since there would have been no queue at the times that
the data were collected at these closer locations. In this way, the data
all would appear to be collected from the same location, the one most
distant from the bridge.

The data collection team used cell phones to maintain in touch with each
other. This was particularly important when the queues lengthened such
that a collector had to move farther upstream. The supervisor could be
kept informed without repeated trips to each data collection location.
This was also useful at the end of the day when the #1 collectors would
inform the #2 collectors of the last truck they recorded, so the #2
collectors would know when to stop. While cell tower locations created
some problems with reception, each collector was usually able to reach
whomever they needed to speak with.

**Data Collection Sample Size**

Sample sizes are typically not a concern with videotape or handheld data
entry devices, because the data collection includes a large number of
vehicles. However, minimum sample sizes should be verified with
variability values from field data. Early research found that sample
sizes from 25 to 100 license matches were necessary for a given roadway
segment and time period (Turner, et. al.). In most cases, there were
sufficient records to meet this requirement. The number of matches was
significantly higher in the inbound direction as all vehicles had to
travel slowly and in single file past the data collector. In addition,
the use of improved data collection equipment, described in the
following section, increased the number of matches during the second
week of data collection.

**Data Collection Equipment**

### 

As outlined in the "Data Collection Procedures" section above, handheld
computers were used as the data entry device and proved adequate to the
task. For the first week of data collection, Palm m100 model handheld
computers were used. It was decided, however, that subsequent data
collection should be done with Handspring Visors. The Handspring Visors
use the same Palm OS (operating system) and have faster processing
speeds (at least in side-by-side comparison with this application) and
larger screen sizes than the m100 models from Palm Computing. Low-end
models with 2 Mb of storage capacity were selected as the application
and data size were projected to be well below this limit.

A custom application was developed for the Palm OS, which allowed the
data collectors to identify their locations (e.g., OB-1, IB-2), the
number of open booths (primarily used for the customs inspection
booths), special events or other comments, and license plate
information. A screen shot of the application interface is shown in
Figure 7.

![](media/image9.png){width="3.125in" height="3.3125in"}

**Figure 7. Data Collection Device and Software Application**

The data were downloaded via a serial cable directly from the
application into a text file on the field laptop computer, which was a
Dell Latitude CPx H running with a 500 MHz Pentium III processor.

After analyzing the data from the first two days of collection during
the first week indicated that there might be a problem with the download
process. To ensure no loss of data, it was decided to record data
manually on the third and last day of collection that week. The
collectors used synchronized digital watches and recorded the time in
addition to the license plate information. This data was later
transcribed for processing. The original Palm m100s were used as backup
devices for the second week of data collection, but they did not need to
be used.

**Data Collection Summary**

Table 6 shows the number of commercial vehicle license plates recorded
for each of the stations on each of the data collection days. Table 7
shows the average daily traffic volume as recorded by the Buffalo and
Fort Erie Public Bridge Authority. Hourly volumes are used in the
calculation of delay; those are shown with the delay calculations in
Tables 8 through 19.

**Table 6. Number of Commercial Vehicle License Plates Collected**

  ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  **Station**   **5/22/01**   **5/23/01**   **5/24/01**   **6/19/01**   **6/20/01**   **6/21/01**

  OB-1          796           1133          1045          1045          1409          1342

  OB-2          590           936           870           870           1533          1454

  IB-1          1032          1005          1103          1309          1235          1456

  IB-2          1382          1477          1388          1298          1309          1437

  Total         3800          4551          4406          4522          5486          5689
  ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

**Table 7. Average Daily Traffic at the Peace Bridge**

  --------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  **Direction**   **5/22/01**   **5/23/01**   **5/24/01**   **6/19/01**   **6/20/01**   **6/21/01**

  Outbound        2305          2720          2783          2633          2675          2674

  Inbound         2236          2852          2731          2526          2559          2641

  Total           4541          5572          5514          5159          5234          5315
  --------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

##### **Data Quality Steps**

At the end of each day of data collection, the supervisor would collect
the PDAs and download the data into the field laptop computer where it
was stored on the hard drive. The data would be examined for any
anomalies and transferred across the Internet to a secondary location
for backup purposes. The OB-1 and OB-2 data would be merged together and
license plates from the two locations would be "matched" using a
spreadsheet developed in Microsoft Excel. As it is easy to mistake
certain characters, particularly letters that looked like numbers, the
license plate data was pre-processed. All 'I's were replaced with '1's;
all 'O's, 'D's, and 'Q's were replaced with '0's; all 'S's were replaced
with '5's; and all 'Z's were replaced with '2's. In addition, the data
collectors were instructed to always use '1's for 'I's and '0's for 'O's
(i.e., to use the digit, rather than the letter).

Occasionally, collectors would be unsure about a license plate and would
append "QQQ" to their entry. This would typically occur when several
trucks passed the collector in rapid succession or if one truck blocked
the license plate of another and he or she could only manage a quick
glimpse. This would allow the supervisor to search the downloaded data
for a potential match by using the travel times of other trucks that
were recorded in the same general time frame. During this process, the
supervisor could also identify the few records in which the data
collector forgot to press "ENTER" after recording a license plate before
recording the next one. These ten-character entries could be split into
two and the time for the first interpolated from the adjacent entries if
they were less than a minute or so apart.

During the first week of data collection, it was determined that a
problem with the download process might preclude accessing all the data
collected during the third day. It was, therefore, decided to employ a
manual data collection approach for that third day. The collectors used
pads of paper and synchronized wrist watches to record both the license
plate information and the time of day. This data was later transcribed
and double-checked. For future data collections at other locations,
backup handheld computers were provided to all data collectors to use if
they felt that their primary device was not functioning properly.

Data post-processing also included a step to identify any anomalies in
the data, including outliers. Outliers, records that indicated travel
times significantly greater than typical for that time period, were most
often caused by recording the license plate of a vehicle only some of
the time as it made repeated trips across the border during a single
day. This is because the matching algorithm uses the most recent time at
the #1 position when matching to a record from a #2 location. For
example, if the vehicle was recorded as it headed from Canada to the
U.S. early in the morning, later returned to Canada, was missed as it
re-entered the U.S. later in the day, and then recorded on its
subsequent return to Canada, the #1 time from its first trip would be
matched with it #1 time from the first trip (for a valid travel time) an
also matched to the #2 time from its second trip (an invalid travel
time). This invalid travel time would be easily identified by manual
inspection of the data, aided by highlighting those travel times above a
specific, but variable, threshold.

## Freight Delay Analysis

The measure for the freight transportation system at international
roadway border crossings is travel delay per truck trip through the
first inspection point in the import country. Delay is measured relative
to the travel time at low volume conditions, which will allow the
processing time of the inspection to be accommodated outside of the
measure. Estimating the average delay per truck for each hour where
congestion is present and then applying the average hourly truck volume
produces an estimate of total delay.

The average delay per truck for each hour is the difference between the
travel time at low volume conditions and the travel time each hour.
Travel time is also affected by the number of open inspection booths and
this information was recorded on all days as it changed. To determine
the average travel time for each road segment, the matched license plate
data in the database is used. The number of matches are noted for
statistical analysis and the travel time is noted for each hour. The
travel time for each truck was assigned to the hour when they passed
through the primary customs inspection location as this was the only
location that remained consistent throughout the data collection. It
should be noted, however, that the hourly volumes are obtained from the
bridge operators and are measured at the toll booths.

The data are presented in Tables 8 through 19. The columns illustrate
the key elements for estimating delay:

-   No Delay Travel Time -- The time through the system at low volume
    conditions. For this report, the value used was that of the lowest
    hourly travel time in that direction for each three-day data
    collection period.

-   Average Number of Open Booths -- The average number of primary
    Customs commercial vehicle inspection booths open and available for
    processing trucks. This figure is not used to compute delay but is
    useful to help understand the relationship between booths, traffic
    volume, and delay.

-   Number of Matched Vehicles -- The number of vehicle observation used
    to estimate the travel time for each hour.

-   Average Travel Time -- The amount of travel time from entry to exit
    for trucks entering the system each hour (use the time the vehicle
    passes the advance point as the determinant of the time period
    label).

-   Delay per Trip -- The difference between the average travel time and
    the "no delay" time.

-   Average Traffic Volume -- The average hourly truck volume for the
    "season" or time of year being analyzed. For both weeks of data
    collection, the applicable season is March through June. Also, the
    average traffic volumes shown are computed for only Tuesdays,
    Wednesdays, and Thursdays during the four-month season.

-   Total Delay -- The product of the hourly truck volume and delay per
    trip.

Table 8. Total Delay -- 5/22/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image10.wmf)

Table 9. Total Delay -- 5/23/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image11.wmf)

Table 10. Total Delay -- 5/24/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image12.wmf)

Table 11. Total Delay -- 6/19/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image13.wmf)

Table 12. Total Delay -- 6/20/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image14.wmf)

Table 13. Total Delay -- 6/21/2001 -- Outbound

![](media/image15.wmf)

Table 14. Total Delay -- 5/22/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image16.wmf)

Table 15. Total Delay -- 5/23/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image17.wmf)ND -- No data were recorded

Table 16. Total Delay -- 5/24/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image18.wmf)

Table 17. Total Delay -- 6/19/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image19.wmf)

Table 18. Total Delay -- 6/20/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image20.wmf)

Table 19. Total Delay -- 6/21/2001 -- Inbound

![](media/image21.wmf)

From examination of the data, it appeared that there was a bimodal
distribution of travel times in the inbound direction. A smaller group
of trucks had longer travel times than most of the trucks moving through
at a given time and most of the times for this smaller group were quite
similar to each other. This is expected due to the additional processing
time experienced by trucks that were processed at the CVPC. Canadian
Customs officials indicated that a delay of 20 minutes or more was
common for trucks needing to wait for proper authorization and this was
consistent with the observed data. The data for these vehicles are
presented in Tables 20 and 21. There were considerably less data per
hour for vehicles likely passing through the CVPC than for other
vehicles. While not containing sufficient sample sizes for detailed
analysis, these data provide some additional insight to the overall
experience of truck travel times at the Peace Bridge. It should also be
noted that some vehicles included in this table could have spent an
equivalent amount of time at the Duty Free Shop without visiting the
CVPC.

Table 20. Data for Inbound Vehicles Likely Utilizing the CVPC -- Week 1

![](media/image22.wmf)

ND -- No data were recorded

Table 21. Data for Inbound Vehicles Likely Utilizing the CVPC -- Week 2

![](media/image23.wmf)

ND -- No data were recorded

As previously mentioned, the number of open primary Customs inspection
booths was also recorded. Examining the previous tables shows the
relationship between the volume of trucks moving across the border and
the number of open inspection booths on the travel times, particularly
in the inbound direction.

At the Peace Bridge, data collectors had to relocate due to an
increasing queue length in both the outbound and inbound directions.
Heading into Canada, a location was selected at the next ramp down I-190
from the bridge, approximately 0.75 miles from the initial location. On
several occasions, the data collector moved to the alternate location
only to discover that the queue had already dissipated. This caused some
additional small gaps in the data collection.

On 5/24/01, the OB-1 collector moved from the original location to the
highway ramp for the first time at approximately 10:30 am and remained
there for 50 minutes. At 11:50 am and 2:10 pm, the collector moved for a
second and third time and remained there for about 20 minutes each time.
The OB-1 collector moved for a fourth time at 6:50, but only for ten
minutes.

During the second week of data collection, the OB-1 collector only moved
once, on 6/21/01 from 3 to 5:15 pm. Earlier in the day, around 10:30 am,
car traffic entering Canada inspection blocked the access of trucks to
the approach to the commercial inspection booths periodically and for
approximately 3 minutes all the commercial inspection booths were empty.
Traffic across the bridge into Canada was allowed to use two of the
three lanes for the entire distance but there car volumes were quite
high keeping the congestion level high for much of the day. On 6/20/01,
while the collector never had to move, the queue approached the end of
the off-ramp from I-190 near the OB-1 location four times.

Heading into the U.S., several different locations along the QEW were
chosen, depending on the current conditions. Of course, it was the
easiest to record data at the initial location near the Canadian Duty
Free Shop as trucks approached the bridge. Here, they were moving slowly
and were most often single file. The next location was along the
Concession Road ramp, approximately 0.45 miles from the initial
location. The farthest point was at the Gilmore Road interchange,
approximately 2.8 miles from the initial location. Here, trucks would
pass at highway speeds and would often use both lanes, reducing the
number of vehicles that could be effectively recorded. On several
occasions, the queue actually approached quite close to the Gilmore Road
location.

Of note on 5/22/01 was that some construction blocked the U.S. primary
inspection booths for about 3 minutes shortly before 9 am. On 5/23/01,
just before 5:30 pm, the IB-1 collector had to move to the highway
location at Concession Road. Approximately 20 minutes later, the
collector returned to the original location. On 5/24/01, the IB-1
collector again moved to Concession Road at 4 pm and remained there
until about 5:30 pm.

The late afternoon and evening hours during the second week of data
collection were more congested than during the first week of data
collection. On 6/19/01, the IB-1 collector moved to Concession Road at
5:30 and then to Gilmore Road at 6 pm. The collector remained at the
Gilmore Road location until the end of data collection at approximately
10 pm. On 6/20/01 the collector moved from the original location
directly to Gilmore Road at around 4:30 pm and remained there until the
10 pm cut-off time. The collector did not have to move from the original
location during the last day of collection, 6/21/01, which ended at 6:30
pm.

For all days of data collection, there were no weather conditions of
note and the chosen locations for data collection proved to be well
suited to the task. Of particular issue, however, was the difficulty in
reading license plates beginning at early dusk. While the locations near
the bridge facility provided ample lighting, the illuminated headlights
of approaching trucks effectively blinded the data collectors until the
split second before the truck passed their location. This proved
particularly difficult for the IB-1 collector who was recording trucks
passing in excess of 60 miles per hour. The binoculars that all data
collectors used to some degree made the glare even more pronounced.

## Statistics

Table 22 shows the baseline or "no delay" travel time, the average
travel time, and three other measures that indicate the reliability of
the travel time estimates. The baseline time (in minutes) is the time
needed to travel the study distance (between the starting point in the
exporting country and the initial inspection point in the importing
country) in free-flow traffic conditions. The average time is computed
from all vehicles measured during the data collection period over the
study distance. The 95^th^ percentile time is the time (in minutes)
within which 95 percent of all trucks can cross the border. The buffer
time is the additional time above the average crossing time (in minutes)
that it takes for 95 percent of all trucks to cross. The buffer index
expresses the buffer time in terms of the average time and is the
percentage of extra time that must be budgeted to cross the border
within the 95^th^ percentile time. For example, if the average time was
10 minutes and the buffer time was 5 minutes, the buffer index would be
50 percent.

Table 22. Crossing Times

+----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------+-----------+
|          | Baseline  | Average  | 95^th^   | Buffer   | Buffer    |
|          |           | Crossing | Pe       | Time     | Index     |
|          | Time      | Time     | rcentile |          |           |
|          |           |          | Time     |          |           |
+----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------+-----------+
| Outbound | 9.0       | 21.7     | 38.0     | 16.2     | 74.7      |
+----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------+-----------+
| Inbound  | 8.3       | 21.5     | 83.4     | 61.9     | 265.7     |
+----------+-----------+----------+----------+----------+-----------+

From the table, it is apparent that, although the average travel time is
similar in both directions, the reliability is significantly more
favorable for outbound traffic than for inbound traffic.

Figure 8 illustrates the average travel time experienced for different
truck volumes per lane per hour in each direction.

![](media/image24.wmf)

Figure 8. Average Travel Time for Different Hourly Volumes

Figures 9 and 10 show typical average hourly traffic volumes per booth
for the study period as well as the measured average hourly travel
times. In addition, the average number of open primary Customs booths in
each direction is shown.

![](media/image25.wmf)

Figure 9. Typical Inbound Traffic

## 

![](media/image26.wmf)

Figure 10. Typical Outbound Traffic

## Conclusions

Lessons learned during data collection activities in this project at
this site and at others along the Canadian and Mexican borders with the
U.S. have identified several issues that should be taken into
consideration to assist future data collection efforts. Some apply to
advance planning and the initial site visit and others apply more
specifically to the data collection activities themselves.

[Planning and Site Visits]{.underline}

-   Prior to conducting any data collection project, all jurisdictional
    and cooperating agencies should be made explicitly aware of the
    purpose and objectives of the study as well as all the details
    associated with the data collection project (e.g. dates, times,
    procedures to be followed during the data collection period, etc.).
    Failure to do so may result in confusion and possible delay of the
    study. This has been very time-consuming at some ports and should be
    adequately accounted for in the schedule. For some agencies,
    including U.S. Customs, it is important to contact both the federal
    and local levels. Some entities that should be contacted might not
    be readily apparent and can include construction companies working
    on public rights-of-way, state police, city officials, and Thruway
    Authorities. Some agencies provide verbal approval for the data
    collection and may even provide supporting documentation to their
    field staff, yet are reluctant to provide documentation for the data
    collectors to carry. Every effort should be made to obtain written
    authorization that can be carried by the data collectors,
    particularly from bridge authorities and immigration officials.
    Several times at some sites, the officer at the primary auto
    inspection booths asked data collectors to go to secondary
    inspection and speak with immigration officials. Although allowed to
    continue, this caused some unnecessary delay in the data collection.

-   Prior to data collection activities, a general idea of traffic peak
    periods and conditions should be understood to optimize collection
    of appropriate traffic data and coverage of the appropriate times.
    This information should be obtained from discussions with
    knowledgeable officials and by examining historical traffic data.

-   Any additional data needs should be discussed explicitly with the
    appropriate officials. At some crossings, for example, average
    hourly truck volumes are not normally recorded and maintained, but
    can be if special arrangements are made in advance. Alternatively,
    it may be appropriate to use other means to measure truck volumes,
    such as roadway counters or having the data collectors indicate the
    vehicles that pass without their license plates being recorded
    (assuming continuous data collection during each day). These
    additional traffic volumes could be used to corroborate data
    provided by the local authorities or used if their planned data
    collection did not occur or there was some other problem in
    providing the data.

-   It is also important to be aware of special federal or local
    holidays on both sides of the border when scheduling data
    collections as these could affect traffic flows. Some minor holidays
    that occur on Mondays and Fridays, might not significantly affect
    traffic for a Tuesday through Thursday data collection period, but
    may increase the likelihood that key local officials will be on
    vacation and unavailable should any problems arise.

-   When scheduling the data collection times, consider the availability
    of sunlight or high-powered lighting. It becomes increasingly
    difficult to read license plates at night as trucks approach with
    their headlights on (also a problem during rain) and entering the
    data into the PDAs also becomes more difficult when it is dark.

-   Photographs of the border facilities and data collection locations
    should be taken during the site visits to assist in documenting the
    collection effort and to better inform the data collectors prior to
    their arrival on-site.

-   Processing, data quality, and analysis of all traffic data require
    the largest portion of the study time.

[Data Collection Activities]{.underline}

-   Prior to data collection activities, an explanation and
    understanding of the procedures to be followed and logistics should
    be made clear to all members of the study team (e.g., number and
    location of license plate characters to be recorded, all commercial
    vehicles should be recorded, when and how to contact the on-site
    supervisor, etc.).

-   Proper identification for all survey members and written
    documentation of authorization from all jurisdictional agencies
    should be carried at all times by all members of the study team,
    especially when conducting business in a foreign country.

-   The supervisor should assess all conditions upon arrival for data
    collection to note any changes from the site visit or prior
    collection activities. Sometimes unplanned construction or other
    events may alter the preferred data collector locations or the truck
    flow patterns.

-   While only one supervisor was originally planned for each data
    collection visit, it was determined that installing one supervisor
    on each side of the border was highly desired. One supervisor would
    be designated the overall site supervisor. This presented several
    benefits, the most important being added safety and security for the
    data collectors, particularly for a collector who needed to move to
    a remote location upstream from the border when the queue extended
    beyond their original location. Other benefits were increased
    awareness of current conditions and the origin of backups, the
    increased ability to relieve data collectors for breaks and lunch
    while maintaining continuous data collection, and assisting with
    data collection during exceptionally high-volume times or in
    difficult locations (such as remote spots along a highway when the
    vehicles were passing at free-flow speeds). Without the extra
    supervisor, a single supervisor would make repeated trips across the
    border to check on the collectors, relieve them, and provide them
    with food and drink if they were not conveniently located nearby.
    Border delays would often make this an extremely time-consuming
    process.

-   For Mexican data collection, it is recommended that Mexican
    nationals be used, both as supervisors and as data collectors. This
    helps to enhance coordination with national, state, and local
    officials and to minimize the likelihood of immigration or other
    problems with federal, state, or local agencies.

-   As mentioned above, the supervisors should be used to maintain
    nearly constant data collection during breaks. This improves data
    quality by ensuring the supervisors repeatedly observe each
    collector and can identify and correct any problems they might be
    having. Further, this improves the number of trucks matched at both
    the #1 and #2 locations, improving the sample size for analysis.

-   Communication between the data collectors and their supervisors is
    crucial to an efficient and successful effort, particularly when one
    of the data collectors must move upstream past the end of a growing
    queue. Communication with the supervisor is also important when a
    data collector is having a problem with an official questioning
    their authority to do their work or when some other unexpected event
    occurs. For example, occasionally, there may be an anomaly with the
    data collection equipment and the collector can receive immediate
    instructions on how to proceed rather than having to wait until the
    supervisor next visits their location. Two-way radios (FRS-type with
    up to a two-mile range) and cell phones work adequately in most
    situations, but interference and range can limit their
    effectiveness. Cell phone service can be spotty near border areas.
    Additional longer-range communication options that do not require
    FCC approval should be considered for future collections. Obviously,
    when using cell phones, ensure that long-distance charges and
    roaming fees will not be significant costs.

-   It is important to ensure that the data collectors are safe and
    comfortable during their long periods of collection. If their data
    collection locations cannot provide adequate cover from severe rains
    or heat, additional vehicles should be considered. Comfortable sport
    chairs with attachable beach umbrellas served to protect the
    collectors well during light rain and moderate sun. Ensure that the
    collectors have an adequate supply of water and that facilities are
    conveniently accessible. This becomes more difficult for the remote
    locations upstream from the border crossing.

# REFERENCES

Turner, S.M., W.L. Eisele, R.J. Benz, and D.J. Holdener. *Travel Time
Data Collection Handbook.Report.* No. FHWA-PL-98-035. Federal Highway
Administration, Texas Transportation Institute, March 1998