3.1
Safety
Information Exchange Deployment Status
CVISN Level 1 deployment for Safety Information Exchange is defined as
· Use of Aspen (or equivalent software for access to safety data) at all major inspection sites
· Connection to the SAFER system so that states can exchange “snapshots” of information on interstate carriers and individual vehicles
· Implementation of the CVIEW (or equivalent) system for exchange of intrastate snapshots and for integration of SAFER and other national/interstate data.
The use of motor carrier and vehicle-specific safety performance data by state agencies conducting roadside inspections has grown significantly in recent years. As of December 1999, 84 percent of states were using Aspen and more than half were connected to the SAFER system (PTI 2000, Radin 2000). The use of SAFER Data Mailbox to upload inspection reports from the laptop computers to SAFER and download past inspection reports on individual vehicles is also growing. Currently, more than 1,200 inspections are uploaded to SAFER from approximately 24 states, as shown in Figure 3‑1. Some of these inspections are being uploaded directly from roadside locations using wireless communication.
Figure
3-1. States Uploading Safety Inspection
Results to SAFER – by Percent of State Inspections
The states that have developed or are testing wireless communication systems are able to query SAFER and download past inspection results on individual trucks that were inspected within the past 60 days. Currently there are approximately 50 past inspection queries (PIQs) performed each day by inspectors in 7 states, shown in Figure 3-2.
Figure
3-2. States Performing Past Inspection
Queries (PIQs) from the Roadside – by Average Number Performed Per Day During
April and May 2000
A key factor in the future of roadside enforcement activities involves the deployment of CVIEW or equivalent systems. The purpose of CVIEW is to integrate interstate and intrastate carrier safety data, driver and vehicle information, and a variety of carrier credentials and insurance data. The FMCSA has sponsored and funded the development of CVIEW to facilitate state-level exchange of inter- and intrastate carrier, vehicle, and driver safety and credential data to support electronic screening operations and to allow states greater control and flexibility for establishing interfaces with internal state legacy systems. The FMCSA will continue to fund development and maintenance support of CVIEW through Version 3.0, which includes all of the capabilities required for CVISN Level 1 deployment. After that, the FMCSA will not continue supporting CVIEW development, due to funding limitations. After that, states that elect to develop a CVIEW system based on the FMCSA-sponsored model will be required to assume responsibility for CVIEW enhancement and maintenance operations.
Deployment
Status of Safety Information Exchange in Prototype and Pilot States as of
2000/2001
California plans to utilize an integrated CI/CVIEW platform to obtain safety information. This safety information will be provided to roadside enforcement officers through a query to CVIEW. This system is scheduled to be operational by December 2001. California provides inspection data to SAFER via the standard SafetyNet connection and will not change with full CVISN deployment. The state currently uses a system called CCVIS, which is a functional equivalent to ASPEN. The system is installed in all fixed inspection facilities. A wireless version of the system is being tested under an FMCSA grant to provide access to mobile road inspectors.
Colorado has completed many of the elements of Level 1 compliance, including distribution of safety information to the roadside, electronic collection of inspection data from the roadside and uploading to SAFER, and electronic clearance at fixed and/or mobile sites. The state is not currently connected to SAFER for snapshots, although inspectors are using SAFER to retrieve safety ratings. They also do not currently use EDI or CVIEW. Aspen is used at 18 inspection sites and in 10 mobile units for the port of entry, as well as in the State Patrol’s MCSAP units.
Connecticut’s commercial vehicle enforcement
personnel at fixed and mobile roadside inspection sites utilize laptop and
desktop computers for the exchange of safety information. The client application software on the
computers includes Motorola software, ASPEN 32, ISS2, PIQ32, and CAPRI. The computers, using connections over a
CDPD network and a TCP/IP protocol, communicate wirelessly with an MDT Server
and with SAFER. The MDT Server
contains Motorola Messaging Switch application software. This software provides TML connections
(dial-up) for access to CDLIS, Connecticut On Line Law Enforcement
Communications Teleprocessing (COLLECT) System connections (SNA over IP) for
accessing NCIC, NLETS, and Connecticut DMV mainframe data, peer-to-peer
messaging, device security/authentication access, user security/authorization
access, transactions processing management, and, for MCSAP inspections and
Compliance Reviews, file transfers.
SAFER provides enforcement personnel with access to ISS carrier data
“snapshots” and, using the SAFER Data Mailbox, PIQ data queries. For the submission of safety reporting
information, the MDT Server connects, via a LAN, to a BLIZZARD Communications
Server. The BLIZZARD Communications
Server uploads inspection reports, via a WAN, to the SAFER Data Mailbox. The Communications Server also connects,
using a LAN, to a SAFETYNET Server that contains SAFETYNET 2000 software. The SAFETYNET Server uploads inspection
reports and compliance reviews to SAFER using a WAN. SAFER uploads SAFETYNET data, including
the reports and reviews, to MCMIS using FTP.
Connecticut is evaluating vendor responses to its RFP for CVISN and PRISM Information Systems and Consultant Services. Vendor responses have been received for the development of a CVIEW and CVIEW interfaces with the MDT Server, national systems, including SAFER, and Connecticut’s credentialing systems. These integration services will provide Connecticut enforcement personnel with access to safety snapshot data, including PRISM MCSIP data, up‑to‑date Connecticut credentials snapshot data, and snapshot data for credentials issued in other jurisdictions. These services will also allow Connecticut to submit Connecticut credentials information, such as IRP registration data and IFTA status, from CVIEW to SAFER for use by other jurisdictions.
Kentucky has implemented SAFER to provide updates for interstate carriers and vehicle snapshots. In addition, users receive snapshots from SAFER for interstate operators. Kentucky is using EDI and CVIEW to interact and interface with SAFER, and is in the process of upgrading to CVIEW version 2.2. Aspen is used at all weigh stations and inspection sites, which is networked for access to state systems. There are currently 17 weigh stations on communications network sites, and 40 to 50 percent of all inspections are done electronically. In addition, SafetyNet 2000 has been installed.
Maryland has met all major areas of safety information exchange deployment, including the implementation of CVIEW to provide updates for interstate carrier and vehicle snapshots, EDI to interact with SAFER for snapshot updates, Past Inspection Queries (PIQs) to access SAFER safety history data, and Aspen to capture inspection results at all inspection sites. CVIEW (Version 2) is installed and operational. The percentage of inspections collected by the Aspen system has been increasingly rapidly.
Michigan has connected to SAFER to provide segment updates, and users will get snapshots from SAFER for interstate operators. The state has acquired some use of the Aspen system but not CVIEW.
Minnesota is in the early stages of Level 1 CVISN deployment. The state has created a task force to reengineer the crash data reporting system. This will include the incorporation of MUCC data elements into the data standard, establishing data interchange standards with local agencies, sponsoring the development of a pilot application to capture data at the point of collection, and rebuilding the back-end data management system. Establishment of the SAFER/CVIEW connection continues to be a key issue. Minnesota’s current plan is to use PPTP over the Internet once the security issues are overcome. In addition, the implementation of SafetyNet 2000 is being scheduled.
Oregon’s truck safety inspectors use computers with the Inspection Selection System (ISS) to target high-risk trucks. Laptops with Aspen software record the details of more than half of all inspections. Because most of its data originates in electronic form, Oregon has been successful at achieving speedy uploads of information to the national SafetyNet databank. Also, because of its reliance on ISS and because it has assigned a U.S. DOT number to all intrastate carriers, Oregon has had very low “non-match” error rates when submitting information to SafetyNet (source: www.odot.state.or.us/trucking/its/cvisn/briefing.htm).
Virginia is one of two prototype states involved in the CVISN deployment initiative. They are also one of the states to implement all aspects of the Level 1 CVISN deployment. The Virginia State Police have results that prove that technology has assisted in improving highway safety. Virginia has purchased new laptop computers, printers, vehicle mounts, and related equipment based on the guidelines and specification from the Field Systems Group, FMCSA. This upgrade of equipment will provide the capability to operate the new generation of ASPEN and related software in the 32-bit configuration for the next 3-4 years. In addition, this upgrade will increase our Inspection Selection System capability, will improve access to SAFER, and will allow connection to CVIEW for snapshot data on drivers, vehicles, and carriers direct from roadside. These enhancements will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of commercial vehicle inspections and enforcement activities, improve highway safety, and keep Virginia in the forefront as a CVISN compliant state.
Washington has connected to SAFER and inspectors are effectively using the safety ratings and vehicle snapshots in conjunction with their high-speed WIM. Users get snapshots from SAFER for interstate operators. The state uses EDI and CVIEW to interface with SAFER, and Aspen is being used at all major inspection sites. CVISN has been fully deployed at five sites and will be expanded to five more interstate sites during the next two years.
3.2
Electronic
Screening Deployment Status
CVISN Level 1 deployment for electronic screening is defined as
· Electronic screening at one or more fixed or mobile inspection sites
· Readiness to replicate electronic screening capability at other sites
Starting in the early 1990s, FOTs such as Advantage I-75 (Interstate 75 corridor), HELP/Crescent (I‑5 corridor), and Oregon Green Light demonstrated the technical feasibility and time-saving benefits of using electronic screening systems for commercial vehicle operations. In particular, these tests proved that DSRC technologies can provide reliable communication between moving vehicles and roadside enforcement operations. However, most of the growth in electronic screening has occurred since the emergence of three programs: HELP (Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate) PrePass, NORPASS (North American Preclearance and Safety System), and Oregon’s Green Light. Currently over half the states in the United States and more than 9,000 motor carrier fleets are participating in such electronic screening programs. Furthermore, total truck enrollment in the three programs has grown by approximately 100 percent per year for the past few years. Current enrollment stands at approximately 200,000 trucks, which is a small fraction of the 7.2 million trucks in the U.S. Table 3‑2 shows how enrollment is distributed among the three programs.
Table
3-2. State and Motor Carrier
Participation in Electronic Screening Programs
|
Numbers
of: |
Pre-Pass |
NORPASS |
Green
Light |
|
States |
21 |
6 |
1 |
|
Trucks |
186,769 |
15,000 |
15,000 |
|
Companies |
7,989 |
800 |
1,100 |
The PrePass electronic screening system is operated by HELP, Inc., a non‑profit partnership between motor carriers and government agencies. According to HELP, the mission of PrePass is to “develop and deploy advanced technology systems to create a cooperative operating and regulatory environment which improves the efficient and safe movement of commercial vehicles and the performance of highway systems” (PrePass).
PrePass has seen substantial growth in the numbers of operational trucks, sites, and motor carriers enrolled in the system since 1996, as shown in Table 3-3. Currently active at 149 locations, another 72 sites are committed to be deployed.
Table
3-3. PrePass Growth 1996 to
2000
|
Year |
Numbers
of | ||
|
Operational
Trucks |
Sites |
Motor
Carriers | |
|
1996 |
4,632 |
10 |
262 |
|
1997 |
27,995 |
29 |
690 |
|
1998 |
62,114 |
55 |
1,696 |
|
1999 |
110,445 |
87 |
3,026 |
|
2000 |
164,881 |
135 |
7,255 |
|
2001 |
186,769 |
149 |
7,989 |
Source: www.prepass.com
The NORPASS system of electronic screening has been deployed at weigh and inspection stations in six states in the U.S. (e.g., Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Idaho, Washington, and Utah) and various Canadian provinces. The program is currently in a transition stage. Two states have recently signed up to serve as system administrators, providing electronic vehicle identification database services and marketing support for NORPASS: Washington State for the western region and Kentucky for the eastern region. Interoperability is available to the extent that NORPASS transponders can be used in PrePass states. NORPASS has 25 operational sites and about 15,000 commercial vehicles with transponders.
Oregon’s Green Light system for electronic screening is discussed below in the State section.
Deployment
Status of Electronic Screening in Prototype and Pilot States as of
2000/2001
California has 35 inspection facilities equipped to handle E-Screening. The system utilized is the HELP, Inc., PrePass System. The state plans to implement the use of ISS2 as its on‑highway performance criterion for interstate carriers by December 2001. Intrastate carriers will continue to utilize an off-highway safety criterion in lieu of ISS2 until such time as a USDOT number can be assigned to intrastate carriers. California plans to use CVIEW snapshot information for enrollment and verification processes.
Colorado has 16 AVI sites and 9 WIM sites currently in operation. One additional WIM site will be implemented after major road construction is completed in the area. Electronic screening is not based on SAFER/CVIEW, but Colorado provides PrePass with the state’s credential database information on a monthly basis. The state supports the enrollment of Colorado-based motor carriers in its own and other states’ electronic screening programs, but the enrollment data are not shared with other states through snapshots.
Connecticut has made significant, widespread efforts in electronic screening. WIM, AVC, and AVI system hardware/software and fiber optic cabling have been installed at the Union, Connecticut, Weigh and Inspection Station. Model MACS screening software has been installed on the scale house computer, and MACS Central software, for entering enrollment data into Model MACS, has been installed in the MCSAP Office. Unit testing of the components has been completed and integration testing has begun. Modifications for accepting data from the WIM screening component and for providing screening capabilities in multiple (right most and center lane) highway lanes are being completed. Acceptance testing will begin after the integration testing is completed.
Connecticut is evaluating vendor responses to its RFP for the development of a CVIEW and a CVIEW interface with Model MACS. This integration will enable CVIEW to electronically provide up‑to‑date carrier/vehicle credentials/safety data, including IRP registration information, OS/OW permitting data, and IFTA status, to the Model MACS screening software.
Kentucky’s electronic screening system is not based on SAFER/CVIEW snapshots because of limitations of CVIEW version 1.6.8, which the state is currently working with. As Kentucky obtains and migrates to CVIEW 2.2, users will download directly to the roadside screening computers and receive data from various sources. In addition, Kentucky has contracted with a transponder administrator to enroll carriers in the screening program. The screening enrollment data will be shared with other states through snapshots when CVIEW 2.2 is functional.
Maryland has deployed all major aspects of electronic screening, including the implementation of screening systems at the Perryville Truck and Weigh Inspection Station and the use of SAFER/CVIEW snapshots for screening decisions. Maryland’s electronic screening program uses the FMCSA-recommended DSRC standards, and will distribute an integrated CVO tag that can be used for both electronic screening and electronic toll applications in the Northeast region. Distribution of the first 50 tags is under way.
Michigan has implemented electronic screening at one or more fixed or mobile sites, but the state is undecided in the remaining areas of the electronic screening process.
Minnesota’s electronic screening accomplishments include the reopening of the St. Croix weigh station. The transfer of the station computer and operator consoles to the testbed at the truck center for final integration testing will be followed by final installation at the St. Croix weigh station facility. Definition of a transponder registration process still remains an issue.
Oregon’s electronic screening program is called Green Light. This system has demonstrated the time-saving benefits of using electronic screening systems for commercial vehicle operations. Oregon Green Light shows that DSRC technology can provide reliable communication between moving vehicles and roadside enforcement operations. Currently, more than 15,000 trucks and 1,000 fleets are using this system in Oregon. Between January and October 2000, more than 500,000 trucks bypassed weigh stations using DSRC transponders through Oregon’s Green Light program. Across the state, 21 weigh stations are equipped with high-speed WIM devices and transponder readers. The Green Light system allows the state to perform a quick check of each participating truck’s size, weight, height, and carrier credential and safety status. This system is constructed and administered by the Oregon Department of Transportation. Oregon offers preclearance to motor carriers at no charge. (source: www.odot.state.or.us/its)
Virginia is planning to implement electronic screening at several sites, with screening based on the SAFER/CVIEW snapshots. The Stephens City weigh station on I-81 was the first weigh station in Virginia to incorporate the infrastructure, data resources, and concepts proposed in the CVISN architecture. The Stephens City Level I prototype demonstrated the ability to electronically distinguish between illegal/high-risk vehicles and legal/safe vehicles using weigh‑in‑motion on a ramp.
The second site located at the Suffolk Weigh station on Route 58 uses weigh‑in‑motion scales on the mainline. Currently, this technology focuses on weight; however, plans are to enhance the screening to include safety and credential data by the end of the year. Transponders were installed in 55 Walmart contractor trucks (HUDD) and the program went live in early September.
Due to roadway construction in northern Virginia, the installation of a mainline weigh‑in‑motion electronic screening system slated for the Dumfries weigh station is being rescheduled. Three additional weigh stations (Alberta, Bland, and Sandston) are providing full Motor Carrier credentialing services.
Washington currently has five functional electronic screening sites out of 16. The other 11 sites are expected to become functional in the next four years. Screening is based on the SAFER/CVIEW snapshots. The state supports the enrollment of its carriers in other electronic screening programs such as NORPASS, Border Crossing, Green Light, and PrePass. Enrollment data are shared with other states through a regional database and CVIEW.
3.3
Electronic
Credentialing Deployment Status
CVISN Level 1 deployment for electronic credentialing is defined as
· Automated processing (application, state processing, issuance, tax filing) of at least international registration plan (IRP) and international fuel tax agreement (IFTA) credentials; readiness to extend to other credentials (intrastate, titling, oversize/overweight carrier registration, and hazardous material)
· Connection to IRP and IFTA clearinghouses
· At least 10 percent of transaction volume handled electronically; readiness to sign up more carriers; readiness to extend to branch offices where applicable (Richeson 1999).
Although most states are committed to deploying electronic credentialing, these systems have not yet achieved the same level of widespread deployment as have roadside systems. This result primarily stems from the many technical challenges involved in establishing interfaces between new and legacy, or archival, databases and software systems.
To date, four states, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, and Washington, have successfully demonstrated Level 1 capabilities for electronic credentialing. These states are now working with a limited number of carriers to test and refine the systems that were developed. Some additional development is continuing as issues are identified. The experiences of these states, as well as those of the other seven CVISN Pilot states, are being shared with others through mainstreaming efforts and training workshops sponsored by FMCSA.
States implementing electronic credentialing will need to decide (1) what data communications standards and policies should be adopted, and (2) which type of software system (specialized computer programs or web applications) are preferred by and acceptable to motor carriers. The first issue is focused on which of two standards should be used for data transmission: electronic data interface (EDI) or extensible markup language (XML). The updated CVISN architecture specifies ANSI X 12 EDI for computer-to-computer interfaces, in the near term. However, FMCSA is starting to explore the use of XML in place of the EDI standard. Although EDI is the standard for financial transactions, some believe that that XML may be more appropriate for web applications.
Originally, the CVISN architecture focused solely on the use of specialized computer‑to‑computer (also called PC‑based) software, such as the CAT system. Several states have developed stand-alone CAT systems for larger carriers. However, it is expected that eventually these systems will be implemented as modules in the carriers’ fleet management software systems. Also, there has also been interest in developing web-based systems that allow smaller carriers to conduct credentialing business through the Internet. The key advantage of this approach is that any carrier with access to a web browser can participate in electronic credentialing. Discussions with motor carriers and credentialing software developers suggest that all three approaches (stand-alone CAT, CAT module, and web-based system) will be needed to satisfy the variety of needs within the motor carrier industry.
The International Registration Plan (IRP) and International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) clearinghouses, which are being developed to facilitate distribution of registration funds and tax revenues among states and provinces, are still in the early stages of deployment. The IRP clearinghouse currently has more than 25 states actively participating. The IFTA clearinghouse has data on hand from 18 participating jurisdictions, and agreements in place for four more.
Deployment
Status of Electronic Credentialing in Prototype and Pilot States as of
2000/2001
California plans to implement POS processing of IRP and IFTA credentials through the development of a PC CAT and an integrated CI/CVIEW platform. Contracts have been awarded for the PC CAT (April 2000) and the integrated CI/CVIEW (October 2000) platforms. Implementation for these systems is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2001. The state is currently participating in the IFTA Clearinghouse but not in the IRP Clearinghouse.
Colorado has not automated the processing of IRP or IFTA credentials. Colorado will provide a web-based interface for electronic credentialing with the carriers. The state is not currently participating in the IRP or IFTA clearinghouses, although they are planning for training soon. Colorado has replaced the outdated System 36 computers, created a new Port of Entry Business System, and gathered with various agencies of the federal government and the motor carrier community to share information. It is anticipated that electronic credentialing will be completed within several months.
Connecticut is evaluating vendor proposals for development of a CI/CVIEW, CVISN/PRISM‑compliant IRP and OS/OW Systems, and CI/CVIEW interfaces with credentialing systems. CI/CVIEW will allow carriers to electronically submit applications for IRP, IFTA, and OS/OW credentials, pay for the credentials, and receive the operating credentials. CI/CVIEW will allow authorized Connecticut users access to the credentials data. Connecticut‑based IFTA carriers will utilize the Internet-based electronic filing system application for quarterly tax returns currently under development by the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance. Connecticut has notified the IRP Clearinghouse of its intention to join and has begun development of its implementation plan. A letter of commitment was scheduled to be sent to the Clearinghouse in 2001.
Connecticut began its participation in the IFTA Clearinghouse in November 2000, providing the Clearinghouse with IFTA demographic information through the Regional Processing Center (RPC). Connecticut provides IFTA transmittal information using a frame relay system between the RPC and the Clearinghouse. Connecticut accesses Clearinghouse demographic data by various methods including using Clearinghouse-supplied software for connecting to the frame relay system at the RPC, using an Internet browser‑based interface, and using FTP for downloading the Clearinghouse “revoked, suspended, and inactive” file. Connecticut also reviews transmittal data by using the Clearinghouse-supplied software for connecting to the frame relay system at the RPC and by using an Internet browser‑based interface.
Kentucky currently has pilot carriers performing electronic credentialing for IRP transactions via the InterCAT system. The state intends to extend permanent credential issuance to some carriers in the next few months. In addition, Kentucky has electronic credentialing for IFTA registration and tax filing. The InterCAT system transmits transactions via e-mail to the Kentucky CI. Along with this EDI interface, Kentucky is developing a web application for IRP. This product is currently used in five pilot carrier offices for acceptance testing, and is scheduled to be provided to a large number of carriers in 2001. The state participates in the IRP and the IFTA clearinghouses. Less than 10 percent of the IRP or IFTA credentialing volume is being processed electronically at this time.
Maryland has partially automated the electronic processing of IRP credentials using a “turn and type” approach. This capability currently processes approximately 8 percent of the IRP credentialing volume. With the delivery of a new IRP back-end system, IRP electronic credentialing support will expand to provide fully automated, EDI (computer‑to‑computer) and web‑based interfaces to motor carriers operating in Maryland. Maryland has chosen to deploy IFTA registration services, which have been previously partially automated, via a web site that is currently under development.
Michigan has yet to perform any automation for the processing of IRP or IFTA credentialing. The state has decided to provide person-to-computer (web-based) interfacing for electronic credentialing with the carriers. They are currently not participating in either the IRP or IFTA clearinghouses, and there is no automated processing of IRP or IFTA credentialing, although two meetings have been held with the IRP clearinghouse project team to initiate efforts to connect to the clearinghouse. Michigan is gathering data to support their deployment efforts.
Minnesota has finalized the design specifications for the data transfer between the CVIEW and the interstate vehicle registration legacy system, and work on the interface is proceeding. In addition, a complete software demonstration was given to representatives of IFTA. Planned activities include final integration and user acceptance testing on the new IFTA back‑end system, the IFTA legacy system interface, the interstate carrier registration legacy system interface, and the intrastate vehicle registration interface. In addition, production-mode electronic credentialing with a selected group of pilot carriers is also planned. Work on the International Registration Plan (IRP) legacy system (VISTA) regarding the development and implementation of a CVISN interface is also ongoing.
Oregon stopped work related to electronic credentialing in 1998 because of the need to correct for Year 2000 date problems in existing systems. Oregon is now formulating its plans for “E‑Government” that would include electronic credentialing. State agencies are currently testing internet systems for transacting business. Because the stage is set for a centralized infrastructure for Oregon E-Government, the state Motor Carrier Division is not developing its own separate business solutions. The agency is, however, upgrading computer systems and planning to offer online business services. It has also conducted a survey of trucking companies to gauge the level of interest in the computerization of business transactions. In the March 2000 survey, it found 70 to 80 percent of the largest companies operating in Oregon, and 40 to 50 percent of predominantly smaller Oregon-based companies, either definitely would or probably would conduct their trucking related business online if they could (source: www.odot.state.or.us/trucking/its/cvisn/briefing.htm).
Virginia has automated processing for both IRP and IFTA credentials. Virginia’s web‑based system (WebCAT) for IRP, IFTA, and Virginia Motor Fuels Road Tax transactions was fully deployed in February 2001. As of May 31, 2001, 142 customers were enrolled in WebCAT. These 142 customers represent 98 IRP fleets, 108 IFTA accounts, and 19 Virginia Motor Fuel Road Tax accounts. As of the same date, 144 transactions had been processed using WebCAT. These transactions involved 812 IRP vehicles and the issuance of 162 IFTA or Virginia Motor Fuel Road Tax decals.
Washington has an automated electronic credentialing process for IRP and IFTA through the use of MVS Express. The state is providing a real time interface, through a web‑based interface, for the purchase of credentials, monetary exchange, and, in some instances, self issuance of vehicle license plates. Washington participates in the IRP and IFTA Clearinghouses.
3.4
References
Green Light (Oregon Green Light: Making weigh station stops a thing of the past!), www.odot.state.or.us/trucking/its/greenlight.htm (February 2001).
IFTA, Inc. (International Fuel Tax Agreement), Tempe, AZ, www.iftach.org (February 2001).
IRP, Inc. (International Registration Program, founded by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, AAMVA), Arlington, Virginia, www.aamva.org/irp (February 2001).
Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI), Survey of Motor Carrier Safety Activities – Interim Technical Memorandum 2 (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University, January 2000).
PrePass: A Nationwide Weigh Station Bypass Service, www.prepass.com (Phoenix, AZ: Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate, HELP, Inc., February 2001)
Radin, S., Tracking State Deployments of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks: 1998 National Report (Washington, D.C.: U.S. DOT, May 30, 2000), EDL No. 13082.
Richeson, K.E., Introductory Guide to CVISN, POR-99-7186 (Laurel, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, May 1999).
What Have We Learned About Intelligent Transportation Systems? Chapter 6, “What Have We Learned About ITS for Commercial Vehicle Operations? Status, Challenges, and Benefits of CVISN Level 1 Deployment,” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. DOT, Federal Highway Administration, December 2000), www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov, EDL No. 11316, pp 107‑126.