Responses to the Request for Expressions of Interest

1
Responses to the Request for Expressions of
Interest

• Congestion Mitigation Commission

November 20, 2007
2
WHY DO AN RFEI?

• Provide insights to the Commission on any
  technical or implementation challenges related to
  the mayors plan and alternatives/adjustments
• Gain formal comments on the implementation of
  pricing- and technology-based congestion
  mitigation systems from the firms with the
  deepest knowledge on the subject
• Gain input that can help shape an RFP to be
  issued after legislative determination of what
  plan will be adopted
• Begin work towards implementation in order to
  preserve the option for any plan to be
  implemented in time for the UPA-imposed deadline
  of March 31, 2009

3
QUESTIONS ASKED IN RFEI

• Discuss ideas related to
• Technology Choices
• E-ZPass
• License Plate Recognition
• Automatic Vehicle Identification
• Communications
• Interoperability with E-ZPass
• Operations
• Enforcement
• Maintenance
• Privacy
• Urban Design
• Traffic Data Monitoring

Questions used Mayors plan as a base, but
explicitly included consideration of some
variations the Commission might endorse
4
RESPONSES RECEIVED

• 3M with CSE Global Ltd and MSI Global
• Accenture
• Alcatel-Lucent
• Autostrade
• Booz Allen
• Boston Consulting Group
• Capita/CmaT
• Consulting Stream
• ConSysTec
• Diamond Consultants
• FlexToll
• HopStop
• IBM Global Business Services
• Kapsch TrafficCom AG
• KPMG
• Liberty Imaging

• MacroVision
• Majesco-Mastek
• Mark IV
• Northrup Grumman/Congestion Solutions Group
• PA Consult
• PBSJ
• Raytheon
• Remington ELSAG Law Enforcement Systems, LLC
• Siemens
• Skymeter
• SpeedInfo
• Steer Davies Gleave
• TransCore
• Wilbur Smith Associates

• 30 responses received from 30 firms or consortia
• Several were complete end-to-end consortia, but
  many responded to only one component or question
• Responses now available (excluding
  business-sensitive information) on EDCs website
  (www.nycedc.com)

5
ISSUES RAISED/FINDINGS FROM RFEI
Basic approach validated

• Wide response from firms with direct experience
  confirmed feasibility of the concept
• EZ-Pass, with license plate identification for
  non-EZ-Pass users, clearly the best approach
• Multiple concepts were suggested for providing
  uncharged travel on peripheral roadways
• Implementation schedule of March 31, 2009, was
  identified as ambitious, although several firms
  expressed confidence in achieving it. Key risks
  identified include communications system, urban
  design/approvals, field testing, and EZ-Pass IAG
  agreements
• Several firms proposed actions to reduce the risk
  of implementation delay
• Flexibility in terms of authorizing legislation
  to allow the City to make decisions during
  implementation
• Fewer charging points to reduce extent of the
  system
• Phased implementation
• Several respondents proposed approaches to ensure
  privacy of data, including
• Timely elimination of unneeded records
• Encryption of any data transmitted wirelessly
• Protocols for use of data by employees

Implementation timeline ambitious
Privacy concerns can be addressed
Issues noted for focus in RFP
6
NEXT STEPS

• City/EDC team will continue to analyze responses
  and may request meetings with some respondents
• Findings will inform technical input to
  Commission staff and development of framework for
  RFP
• RFP framework will serve as model for City to use
  if a congestion mitigation plan is adopted
  legislatively if one is, the framework will be
  refined to suit the plan approved and issued
• Responses available from link on home page at
  www.nycedc.com