Worker Presence Subgroup meeting, 2021 05 25 - usdot-jpo-ode/wzdx GitHub Wiki

May 26, 2021 at 4:00 pm ET

Purpose

  • Formally re-launch the Worker Presence Subgroup and introduce co-chairs
  • Discuss subgroup’s updated charter and planned activities for this cycle
  • Clarify member roles and opportunities for involvement

Agenda

  • Welcome and Co-Chairs Introduction
  • Charter Scope and Activities
  • GitHub Reminders

Notes

Charter Scope and Activities

Purpose

  • The Worker Presence Subgroup is the lead steward in accelerating the inclusion of worker presence information in the WZDx specification, and supporting the publication and use of these data.
  • This subgroup is open to all Work Zone Data Working Group (WZDWG) members

Why WP?

  • Improve worker safety
  • Alert drivers to reduce speed
  • Alert ADS (Automated Driving Systems) that humans are present
  • Potential WZDX data users have stated its importance

Scope

  • Specification Update
    • Review current definitions of worker presence in existing standards and in a small representative sample of state and local regulations (5-10 jurisdictions), and recommend one or more approaches to aligning on a common terminology for the WZDx specification;
    • Work with the Specification Update Subgroup and Smart Work Zone Subgroup on updates to the specification to capture real-time worker presence information in a way that is accessible for data producers and useful for data consumers;
  • Stakeholder Engagement
    • Interview data producers and data users to better understand their capabilities and prioritize their need(s) for worker presence data, for consideration in updates to the WZDx specification;
    • Work with the WZDx Demonstration Grant awardees that are considering including worker presence information in their feed(s) to understand how they implement them;
  • Awareness and Education
    • Develop a one-pager to educate members of the WZDWG about worker presence information, including its importance for improving worker safety, the value of including it info in WZDx feeds, and barriers to broader availability of it;
    • Work with FHWA’s Put Work Zones on the Map campaign to educate other work zone stakeholders about worker presence, including:
      • The importance of alerting drivers about worker presence;
      • The need for work zone and worker presence information for Advance Driver Assistance Systems and Automated Driving Systems;
      • Improving awareness and understanding of worker presence tracking among work zone workers.

Discussion

  • Kristin: Among interesting findings from the survey, there was a lot of concern about the definition of worker presence from the data producer side, but not the same level of concern on data user. Similarly, producers were concerned about reliability and perfection of the data, while many consumers just wanted whatever data could be produced.
  • Neil: Representing the SWZ Subgroup. We recognize the need for cross cutting collaboration. You have our commitment to work alongside, especially where the technology capture comes in.
  • Vinod Chandran (CTO of Navjoy): We talk about worker presence but there are a bunch of companies that work on this. Would be nice if the spec can keep lanes open for these companies, but address the issue and make it easy to integrate.
    • Kristin: we would love to reach out to you about this and learn about other existing specs and devices
    • Vinod: I’d be more than happy to participate.
    • Kristin: If there’s a particular area you want to be involved, please send us an email!
  • Martha: Added a link to the laws and regulations from the states.
  • Is your agency implementing a WZDX grant? Is WP included? Why or why not?
    • Catherine Huebsch: Minnesota WZDx grant is planning to use worker presence in their feed.
    • David Rush: Virginia is also a recipient of a WZDx grant and I believe we have included worker presence in our proposal.
    • Vinod: CO is working on a grant, but I don’t have the details, I can find out and get back to you.
    • Erin: WisDOT was awarded one of the grants but did not include worker presence in our plan. Primary focus was to publish the feed and test smart arrow boards for real time info. In the future I think we will be included some kind of worker presence in our feeds.
    • Dan Sprengeler: Iowa DOT is using the federal grant to assimilate data from our smart arrow boards into 511. Skylar K. is working on this
  • Todd Foster: Since accurate info is key to wider use, has there been any discussion about automated (non-technical) systems vs more user activated systems that may not always be accurate?
    • Kristin: In the survey, one thing we found was that workers expressed more comfort with a manual system as opposed to automated. In terms of how this data will be used, I don’t think we know enough about what the ADS systems are doing with the data to speak to this but it’s a great point.
    • Serge: Add to this. We want to engage with perspective data users, and that would be a question. Live interviews will help to define the concept and variations.
  • Michelle: How do you plan have accurate worker presence data if it relies on manual input?
  • Vinod: If its manual of course you will have some issues. I think look at establishing a bounding box of who needs to be notified. I think it would be really important to add this into the spec. Knowing worker presence based on change in event, whether based on trucks or people.
  • Ross: Consider alternatives, such as trucks present, positive protection present, which are easier to define than presence of a human being. If we remove the word “worker” and talk about positive things such as barrier wall in ROW or trucks present just because they are easier to track. Move away from legal issues that come from workers presence. See an example in Iowa where there were no “workers” but a large concrete barrier in the middle of a bridge.
    • Wes: The event_status property can already be used to indicate when work is actively being done in a workzone
  • Maaza: The important distinction is that we want to know whether a human is present more than equipment. Humans move and we need to be more aware during those times.
  • David Haines: I see what Maaza is saying, you want to distinguish between workers and equipment. When it comes to safety you want things with human involvement much higher. Baby steps, because there are some privacy issues. If people are logged in and they are within a bound, we can raise a flag and say they are present. We’ve tested this. Couple that information with vehicle movement within the zone, we have more info.
  • Kristin: We didn’t ask this in survey (tracking workers vs. equipment). We’ve heard from producers but what about consumers?
    • Eric Kolb: I plan to ask our AD folks about their desire to consume this data.
  • Vinod: I think the idea of vehicular traffic is that if you have vehicles moving, you have people operating them.
  • Maaza: we want to distinguish but safety doesn’t change if there is a worker presence or not.
  • Dan Sprengeler: Eventually we will identify all of the work zone devices. Workers are unique and the most vulnerable. I thought this group was exclusive to workers on foot.
  • Rob Hoyler: I think an important perspective, from a navigational perspective, is whether the work zone is "active" or not - whether it be measured by the presence of workers or vehicles/equipment. Often, feeds only provide a static view, which may not always be applicable.
    • Jim Williams: I definitely agree there is a difference between a dynamic vs. static view of a work zone and the interest and requirements for those perspectives.
    • Ross: Active or not active is an easier measure than workers presence. The sticking point with workers presence is that it is a legal term the affects regulations and penalties and therefore must be carefully defined in a variety of jurisdictions. Active or not active is not as legally binding in most cases.

Links

Attendees

Co-chairs

  • Luke Urie, Austin Transportation Department
  • Kristin Virshbo, Castle Rock Associates
  • Serge Beaudry, Ver-Mac

Attendees

  • Pat Zelinski, AASHTO
  • Adam Carreon, ArizonaDOT
  • Donna Clark, ATSSA
  • Joe D'Ginto, Aurora Innovation
  • Mahsa Ettefagh, Booz Allen Hamilton
  • Mary Crowe, Castle Rock Associates
  • David Aylesworth, CeVe
  • Benjamin Acimovic, Colorado DOT
  • Christina Bennett, Colorado DOT
  • Deepanshu Girdhar, Colorado DOT
  • Amanda Brauer, County of St. Charles, Missouri
  • Alan Clelland, DKS Associates
  • Nick Hegemier, DriveOhio
  • Eli Sherer, GEWI
  • Eric Kolb, Google
  • Maaza Mekuria, Hawaii DOT
  • Jorge Uy, HNTB
  • Michelle Boucher, IBI Group
  • Ross Sheckler, iCone
  • Mischa Kachler, Indiana DOT
  • Jim Williams, INRIX
  • Dan Sprengeler, Iowa DOT
  • Sinclair Stolle, Iowa DOT
  • Lauri Brady, Kapsch TrafficCom
  • David Haines, Kimley-Horn
  • Hua Xiang, Maryland DOT
  • Neil Boudreau, Massachusetts DOT
  • Carrie McInerney, Massachusetts DOT
  • Chuck Bergmann, Michigan DOT
  • Cathy Huebsch, Minnesota DOT
  • Michelle Moser, Minnesota DOT
  • Ted Ulven, Minnesota DOT
  • Dan Smith, Missouri DOT
  • Stewart LaPan, Navjoy
  • Justin Healey, Navjoy
  • Ethan Alexander, Navjoy
  • Vinod Chandran, Navjoy
  • Tony English, Neaera
  • Justin Anderson, Noblis
  • Michael Meeks, Ohio DOT
  • Chad Mann, Oregon DOT
  • Ryan Blake, Panasonic Cirrus
  • John Parker, Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority
  • John Copple, Sanborn Map
  • Craig Moore, Seattle DOT
  • Eli Jones, Tennesee DOT
  • Rob Hoyler, TomTom
  • Kenneth Steve, USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics
  • John Harding, USDOT FHWA
  • Paul Jodoin, USDOT FHWA
  • Martha Kapitanov, USDOT FHWA
  • Steve Sill, USDOT Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office
  • Wesley Alford, USDOT Volpe Center
  • Molly Behan, USDOT Volpe Center
  • Mark Mockett, USDOT Volpe Center
  • Chuck Felice , Utah DOT
  • Todd Foster, Ver-Mac
  • JoAnne Maxwell, Virginia DOT
  • David Rush, Virginia DOT
  • Tammy Trimble, VTTI
  • Justin Belk, Washington State DOT
  • Steve Haapala, Washington State DOT
  • Erin Schwark, Wisconsin DOT
  • Qassim Abdullah, Woolpert
  • Michael Hanowsky, Woolpert
  • Vince Garcia, Wyoming DOT
  • Katherine Smutzer