cedr – task o6 to harmonise electronic fee collection (efc)
DESCRIPTION
CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC). Report to O1 – 02.01.2007 Jacob Trondsen, NPRA. Questionnaire 2006. Progress since 01 meeting in Trondheim Replies received from Austria, Italy and Latvia - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CEDR – Task O6To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)
Report to O1 – 02.01.2007
Jacob Trondsen, NPRA
![Page 2: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Questionnaire 2006
Progress since 01 meeting in Trondheim
• Replies received from Austria, Italy and Latvia• Reminder sent to those members who have yet to reply: BE-W,
HU, IE, PT, SI, UK
• Draft version of report prepared and sent to O6 29. November 2006
• There has been no feedback
![Page 3: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Update of Status in Member States (1)
• Existing Systems (based on replies received)– 13 of 19 members who have replied have EFC
schemes in operation.
– Most EFC schemes are for infrastructure financing.
– 7 members have over 50% EFC of total tolling system
– Free flow is experienced in 5 member states
– Where there is free flow enforcement is through ANPR, manual checking of license plates, OBU functions and mobile checks.
– Overall the NRAs play a limited role in EFC schemes. NO and SE have direct roles but other countries are, if at all, not involved in EFC policy (EETS, standardisation, harmonisation).
– Predominant charging technology is DSRC
![Page 4: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Update of Status in Member States (2)
Country Operational EFC
Purpose of Scheme
Technology Main Responsibility
Involvement in Interoperability
Austria * YES DSRC Belgium (VL)
YES IF DSRC CON None
Belgium (W)*
YES DSRC
Denmark YES IF DSRC CON, TO INT Estonia NO Finland NO France YES IF DSRC CON, TO NAT Germany YES IF, HGV,
O GNSS, O TO NAT
Greece YES IF, HGV DSRC CON, TO, SYS NAT Hungary * NO Iceland YES IF DSRC CON None Ireland * YES DSRC Italy YES IF DSRC CON NAT Latvia NO Lithuania NO Luxembourg NO Netherlands YES NL DSRC CON None Norway YES IF DSRC PA NAT, INT Poland NO Portugal* YES DSRC Slovenia* YES MICROWAVE Spain YES IF DSRC PA, CON NAT, INT Sweden YES IF, DM DSRC, O PA, CON NAT, INT Switzerland YES IF, HGV,
DM, O DSRC, GNSS
PA NAT, INT
UK* YES DSRC, O
List of Abbreviations used in Table :Purpose: IF – Infrastructure; HGV – Truck tolling; DM – Demand Management; O - Other
Technology: DSRC & GNSS; O - Other
Main responsibility: PA – Public Administration; CON – Concessionaire; TO – Toll Operator; SYS – System supplier
Involvement in Interoperability: NAT – National interoperability; INT – International interoperability (cross-border and/or regional);
* Countries who have not submitted a reply but about whom some relevant information is known
![Page 5: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Update of Status in Member State (3)
• Interoperability– 10 of the members with EFC schemes have some
level of interoperability
– Of the 10 all claim technical interoperability; 5 contractual and 6 procedural.
– NO, FR, and ES have technical, procedural and contractual (full) interoperability nationally
– High demand for interoperability mostly for the benefit of HGV users.
– Benefit of interoperability is mainly improved services for users and reduced costs for operators
![Page 6: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
National Plans and Strategies
• Plans for new schemes
Future EFC Plans
0
5
10
15
20
Num
ber
of C
EDR
Mem
bers
Number of CEDRMembersExisting EFC Schemes
Existing EFC and plansfor newNo EFC schemes
No EFC schemes butplans to introduce one
![Page 7: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Implications of the EFC Directive (European Electronic Tolling Service) (1)
• Implementing EETS
– Members disagree with the EC’s item-by-item approach
– Preferable to agree the overall design and principles of EETS first.
– Top down approach preferred.
– Describe EETS then show costs of benefits
– EC approach too complex
![Page 8: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Implications of the EFC Directive (European Electronic Tolling Service) (2)
• Timeplan for implementing EETS– Members expect delays.
• Most crucial contractual instrument– Enforcement, clearing guarantees, contracts between issuers and chargers
• Interoperability with GNSS and DSRC possible but not necessarily desirable (from commercial/business point of view).
• Enforcement issues– Most members require changes to existing national legislation
– Proof of passage required in most countries
– Question of anonymity unclear.
– Many states give national operators access to their vehicle registration databases, but not many foreign operators.
![Page 9: CEDR – Task O6 To harmonise electronic fee collection (EFC)](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022082611/56812ac4550346895d8e9656/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Norwegian Public Roads Administration
Implications of the EFC Directive (European Electronic Tolling Service) (3)
• Role of CEDR in developing EETS
– Members mostly agree on a need for close cooperation amongst NRAs
– Not convinced that it is necessary to set up a separate body for monitoring and providing CEDR input.
– Some support for additional harmonisation activities but unclear what, when and by whom.