Need to add description and describe/add link to Credentials Data Exchange Model (12-4A2)

Procurement Agency: Maryland State Highway Administration
Project Contact:  Marygrace Parker
Freight, Mobility, Safety & Security Coordinator
I-95 Corridor Coalition
Phone: (518) 852-4083
E-mail: i95mgp@ttlc.net

This effort originally was designed to determine the suitability of existing roadside enforcement and electronic screening models to accommodate the expanding safety and security roles played by roadside commercial vehicle safety personnel. The study also was intended to identify alternate enforcement and screening models that could accommodate the expanding roles of roadside personnel. The original scope of the study was based on the assumption that Coalition member states were not deploying electronic screening and roadside safety models because these systems did not meet the states’ needs.

In conducting the analysis for this study, it was determined that Coalition
member states have not deployed the electronic screening and roadside safety systems for a wide variety of reasons—not solely because the existing roadside models fail to meet their needs. As such, in consultation with the Program Track leadership and Coalition staff—it was determined that the study be recast to focus on the reasons why the Coalition member states are lagging behind in the deployment of electronic screening and roadside systems. The study also was tasked with recommending means to address these underlying causes.

View PDF file of Scope of Project.

Based on the state interviews and literature review that was conducted, the study team identified a series of key impediments to the deployment of electronic screening systems and roadside enforcement programs in the Corridor. These impediments include:
• Inability to Deploy Models—Many Corridor states do not have the required safety information systems (e.g., CVIEW) to support electronic screening. Safety information systems are required to integrate a state’s credential data, as well as credential data from other jurisdictions and make it available to the roadside. Without these basic systems in place, states cannot deploy/operate an electronic screening system.
• Geography and Truck Volume—Many of the New England states are considerably smaller than other Coalition states. As such, their infrastructure cannot accommodate fixed screening/inspection sites. Furthermore, these states question whether the volume of truck traffic on their routes is sufficient to warrant the expense and maintenance of fixed sites. To address both of these issues, states have been focusing their enforcement efforts on mobile inspection crews. Moving forward, these states will be more likely to deploy reliable, affordable virtual/mobile solutions than they will be to deploy traditional electronic screening systems.
• Integration/Compatibility of Programs – Many of the Coalition states participate in programs other than CVISN, including PRISM, FAST, U.S. Customs and Border Protection initiatives, and electronic toll collection. Competing priorities among these programs, limited resources at the state level, and questions/concerns regarding how these programs interact/should be integrated have prevented some states from proceeding with CVISN. Furthermore, program buy-in from industry (e.g., voluntary transponder enrollment) and/or senior management remains an issue with many Corridor member states.
• Policy and Legislative Issues—State-specific legislation/regulations govern the practices and procedures of state enforcement personnel. In some cases, these state statutes are incompatible with the electronic screening component of the CVISN program. For instance, enforcement personnel need to have probable cause, in order to pull a commercial vehicle over for a safety inspection. The current electronic screening models cannot accommodate this requirement, which has resulted in New York being unable to deploy an operational electronic screening program.
• Interoperability—Interoperability has been cited as in issue hindering the success of screening efforts in the Corridor. Numerous screening programs (e.g., PrePass, NorPass, and independent state screening programs) operate in the Corridor. While technological interoperability exists and progress has been made towards interoperability between the various screening program’s business models—states remain uncertain about the relationship of these programs and how best to deploy electronic screening.
• Funding—Most fixed weigh stations in the Northeast are open on a limited basis due to staff/funding constraints. This limits the viability of deploying electronic screening systems. Further, prior to the passage of the most recent Highway Reauthorization bill in August 2005 there was no dedicated Federal funding source to support the states deployment of CVISN functionality. This lack of funding also slowed deployment of electronic screening in some states. It is hoped that the funding provided to states under the Highway Reauthorization bill will address this issue in the future.

There are many varied barriers to the states in deployment of CVISN screening and roadside programs. Continued efforts to coordinate with FMCSA, ITSA CVFM, JHU/APL, Expanded CVISN Ad Hoc Teams is critical to properly supporting the states in determining solutions best for each as well as for the corridor as a whole.

We recommend pursuing the recommendations that were produced under the Credential Data Sharing Model study—in order to improve the current condition of e-screening practices in the Corridor. This recommendation will serve as the foundation for member states’ additional CVISN-related deployments, including the deployment of electronic screening and roadside enforcement systems.

Further recommendations include:

• Continue to research technologies which can assist in augmenting the existing electronic screening programs (e.g., wireless technology);
• Use the Coalition as a testbed for new screening models, especially those that consider commercial driver and cargo/freight factors in the screening algorithms/decisions;
• Continue to support the development of new electronic screening and roadside enforcement models through participation in FMCSA’s expanded CVISN ad hoc teams—which are discussing the next generation of CVISN capabilities; and
• Demonstrate tangible and economic benefits to industry in order to increase participation in voluntary programs, such as electronic screening.

Allocated $75K to Cambridge from Project 12-4A.

Original Project Budget:$75,000.00
Amended Project Budget: $83,400.00
Reason for change, if any:
Project extended to coordinate with Federal effort to assess barriers to deployment in Coalition states.