 |
|||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||
Updated: August 2005 |
|||||||||
<
back to Services & Technology list 
Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations Intelligent Transportation System applications are used to improve a range of freight and commercial vehicle operations with the aim of enhancing vehicle and fleet performance and reducing administrative costs. The information infrastructure enabled by ITS, combined with the institutional relationships from state to federal levels, allows the exchange of fleet information that is essential for sound and competitive commercial vehicle (CV) operations. ITS applications to CV fall into two categories:
Safety Information Exchange systems use software applications to monitor CVs by collecting driver and vehicle data, distributing safety and credential snapshots to roadside agencies, and checking safety history before granting credentials. State administrative offices and the state law enforcement agencies can use this information to make better-informed decisions about which vehicles to inspect at the roadside as well as who should receive credentials and permits based on safety performance history. Additionally, it helps focus inspection on high-risk carriers. Safety information is exchanged via two main applications: SAFER and CVIEW. Safety and Fitness Electronic Records system (SAFER) SAFER is an FMCSA communications nexus that works on a national level to provide users with timely electronic access to vehicle safety and credential data via one or more wide area network (WAN) communication links. It also provides standardized carrier and vehicle data in the form of data "snapshots" and reports. A snapshot is a concise electronic record of a carrier's safety report, identification, size of fleet, types of commodities transported, roadside out-of-service (OOS) inspection summaries, and crash information. Snapshots can also include carrier compliance review reports, safety inspections, citations, credentials, and tax information. State inspectors record safety inspection records using Aspen and the SAFER Data Mailbox. Aspen is a software application that a client uses to record and transmit inspections electronically from roadside stations to administrative centers; clients upload this data on a daily basis to their respective state systems and forward the data to the SAFER system. The SAFER Data Mailbox (SDM) facilitates the exchange of information between roadside inspection sites and administrative centers by acting as a temporary repository for data files and messages. Information is stored in the SDM for 45 days. SAFER automatically records vehicle inspection data and exchanges safety data among agencies within a state and among other states. Subscribers can request that specific "snapshots" be sent to them automatically when substantial changes occur. SAFER was developed by the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, is maintained by the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, and is under contract to the FMCSA. SAFER web site: http://www.safersys.org/ Commercial Vehicle Information Exchange Window (CVIEW) CVIEW is essentially identical to SAFER, except that it works on a state level. CVIEW
Information flows between SAFER and CVIEW as follows:
Source: CVISN Guide to Safety Information Exchange, Baseline Version V1.0, POR-99-7191, V1.0, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, February 2002. Link to Report Benefits of Safety Information Exchange
Implementation Barriers
Electronic Screening (or Clearance) is a roadway inspection system that allows trucks with good safety records to bypass screening sites, while requiring trucks with poor or questionable safety records to stop for further inspection. Each state decides upon the criteria it will use to determine whether a truck should pull off the road for confirmation of its safety compliance. These criteria are usually based on driver and vehicle safety records. The screening process can take place while the truck is in motion, thus saving time by eliminating the need for unnecessary detailed manual inspections. In fact, it is nearly impossible to physically inspect each truck that passes by a screening facility; most often this type of inspection process can cause long lines of trucks at the station's entrance, which can back up dangerously into highway off-ramps. Recognizing the need to enforce roadway safety, nearly half of the states in the U.S. and close to 7,000 motor carrier fleets currently participate in e-screening programs. Screening Processes and Technologies Used Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Tags Although this is a less common application, RFID is also used to track shipments by transmitting information via radio frequencies as vehicles move freight through gates and docks. Using RFID, fleets can ensure that the correct products are shipped at the correct times to the places where they are needed. While some fleets, such as Wal-Mart's, now use RFID to track shipments, RFID's application to tracking shipments has yet to become widespread. Studies have shown that RFID may not yet be ready for widespread application to shipment tracking due to accuracy and interoperability factors. Read a Commercial Carrier Journal article on RFID technology, http://www.etrucker.com/apps/news/article.asp?id=47339 Read the U.S. DOT's report on Freight Management and Operations standards http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/publications/sec_tech_appx/sec04.htm Dedicated Short-Range Communications
(DSRC)
Transponders Software
Applications
Source: CVISN Guide to Electronic Screening, Baseline Version 1.0, POR-99-7193 V1.0, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, March 2000. Link to report. Weigh-in-Motion Electronic
Screening Programs
Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate (HELP) PrePass™ is the largest North American electronic screening program. The PrePass™ Service Center manages pre- and post-enrollment verification checks of carriers and provides transponders for vehicles. At the roadside station, transponder-equipped vehicles are checked against a pre-clearance list and weighed using WIM equipment. More information can be found at the HELP PrePass™ web site: http://www.prepass.com/ HELP PrePass™ currently operates in: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. North American Pre-clearance and Safety System (NORPASS) sends safety and credential records via an enrolled vehicle list to roadside stations. Weight enforcement may be conducted using WIM or weight compliance history. A NORPASS transponder can be used in the NORPASS member and partner states named below. There is no charge for registration or participation in these states. To be able to participate in PrePass™ in addition to NORPASS, a PrePass™-compatible transponder must be obtained. NORPASS Web site: http://www4.norpass.net/index.htm NorPass currently operates in:
Green Light According to the Oregon DOT Web site, Oregon has made significant advancements related to electronic screening of truck traffic and is far ahead of most states in its deployment of intelligent transportation systems. The Oregon Green Light Weigh Station Pre-clearance System employs Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) transponders mounted on truck windshields. The transponders are compatible with PrePass™ and NORPASS and allow interoperability between the different systems. Benefits of Electronic Screening
Implementation Barriers The primary barrier to implementing electronic clearance is the lack of interoperability between different systems. This barrier has been partly overcome with the establishment of an interoperability agreement between PrePass™ and NORPASS. But it is a "one-way" agreement. Under it, qualified motor carriers enrolled in NORPASS can operate in the PrePass™ network, but not the other way around. Operating a commercial vehicle in the United States requires many different types of "credentials," or forms of evidence that indicate if a CV meets specified qualifications. Electronic credentialing is a cost-effective way to check the status of a CV’s credentials. It entails the use of software to send credentials applications to a given state and to retrieve credential status for evaluation at roadside stations. While many credentials are nationally recognized and required, some states have their own sets of credentials requirements. In general:
Credentialing Process and Technologies Used Credentials administration comprises electronic credentialing, interstate credentials data and fee exchange, and interagency (within a given state) credentials data exchange. The typical flow of information in an electronic credentialing system is as follows:
States exchange interstate credentials data with other states through Safety and Fitness Electronic Records (SAFER) snapshots. The states that use CVISN have implemented a state Commercial Vehicle Information Exchange Window (CVIEW) system that collects information from the state credentialing systems. CVIEW then forwards the credentials snapshot segments to SAFER, and SAFER distributes the snapshot data to subscribers. (See the Safety Information Exchange section for more information on these programs.) Benefits of Electronic Credentialing Electronic credentialing provides efficient retrieval and processing of credentials and promotes roadway safety by making it easier to ensure that CV operators are complying with credential requirements. Implementation Barriers
The Future of E-Credentialing In a 2004 report, the FMCSA outlined goals for the future of e-credentialing, specifically, that:
Where is Electronic Credentialing Implemented?
Case Study Washington Link to Washinton report: http://cvisn.fmcsa.dot.gov/WhatsNew/Washington/Washington.htm Hazardous Materials Incident Response According to the FMCSA, the transportation of hazardous materials poses the biggest security risk to the motor carrier industry. There are over 800,000 shipments of hazardous materials each day in the U.S. Daily there are about 300,000 shipments of large quantities of flammable liquids and gases such as gasoline and propane. Due to the routine nature of such shipments and the absence of a history of terrorists threats, security for these shipments has remained low. However, such shipments could be used to create major fires or explosions in the event of a crash. Shipments that pose a still greater risk are explosives and poisonous gases. Such shipments are less frequent and more closely guarded. The FMCSA has found that by applying technological solutions such as remote vehicle tracking systems, off-route alert systems, vehicle disabling systems, and electronic ignition locks, the security risks posed by transporting hazardous materials are significantly reduced. The FMCSA joined with the U.S. DOT to conduct a Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test in 2003 and 2004. The final report for the project was published November 2004. The test focused on four HazMat transportation scenarios: Bulk petroleum, bulk chemical, less-than-truckload and truckload explosives industries. Technologies tested were
Read the executive summary at http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/13844.html. The U.S. DOT and the FMCSA have also developed a Hazardous Materials Program. The goal of this program is to enforce hazardous materials regulations and identify and evaluate high-risk and non-compliant carriers. Compliance with program rules was required beginning January 1, 2005. Under this program
Read the FMCSA Final Rule for hazardous materials safety permits http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/rulemakings/04-14654-hazmat-safety-permits.htm ITS Solutions for Enforcing HazMat RegulationsIndividual carriers can complete a Hazardous Materials Assessment and file the results in SAFESTAT, a data-driven analysis system that determines the current relative safety status of individual motor carriers. Learn more about it here, http://www.ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/SafeStatMain.asp Application of ITS Solutions to Emergency
Management Benefits of Hazardous Materials Incident Response
Implementation Barriers
Where Is Hazardous Materials Incident Response Implemented? SafeStat and Emergency Response Systems are in use across the U.S. Links:
International Border Electronic Clearance The International Border Clearance (IBC) program was initiated by the U.S. DOT to facilitate faster, safer vehicle inspections at border crossings by reducing the need for manual inspections and evaluations of trucks entering the U.S. Without some form of automation, inspections become necessarily rushed at peak travel times, making it easier for customs and safety violations to go undetected. Electronic Border Crossing Process and Technologies Used 1. Declarations: Before a commercial vehicle arrives at a border, trading firms (typically through customs brokers) electronically file the appropriate declarations to U.S. Customs through the North American Trade Automation Prototype (NATAP) in Wachington, D.C. In current tests, the Freight and Trade Processing System (FTPS) receives this data and makes it available to state motor vehicle enforcement agencies that perform credentials and safety screening of the carrier, vehicle, and driver. Each agency returns its pre-arrival screening results to the border via the FTPS. 2. Screening and Credentialing: When a commercial vehicle arrives at a border crossing, a dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) transponder onboard transmits its unique identifier to a roadside reader. This reader communicates with the local trade processing system, which forwards the unique identifier to NATAP. NATAP then retrieves the appropriate pre-arrival screening results and returns the results to the customs inspector. The inspector may use that information to determine if further inspections are necessary. Benefits of Electronic Border Crossing
Implementation Barriers
Where Is Electronic Border Crossing Implemented? ITS technologies have been deployed at border crossings in the U.S., including:
The Ambassador Bridge International Border Crossing
System (ABIBC) Link to report on Border Clearance in Detroit, MI (PDF) Laredo, Texas Link to Briefing Paper on Border Crossing Project in Laredo, TX (PDF) Nogales, Arizona The EPIC system showed that border clearance times could be reduced and that administrative processes could run more efficiently. The average time saved is estimated to be between 8.8 and 12.9 minutes. The pre-clearance of vehicles reduced the average approximate travel time through the compound by over 80% (25 minutes). The ADOT is currently developing a joint state-Federal port to improve coordination of border clearance. Commercial vehicle administrative processes help ensure that commercial vehicles operate legally on the roadways. These processes include the automatic collection and recording of travel distance, fuel purchase, and trip and vehicle data by jurisdiction. This information is useful in preparing fuel tax and registration reports for affected jurisdictions. Electronic administration for commercial vehicles can replace manual paperwork processing, thus greatly reducing processing times throughout various segments of CV administration. In 1998, FHWA sponsored four Field Operational Tests (FOT) related to CVO administrative processes; three of these dealt with the electronic submittal, processing, and distribution of vehicle credentials and permits. The fourth focused on providing carriers and state agencies with a system for capturing apportioned mileage and forwarding it for use in the reconciliation of registration and fuel tax funds among states. Individual results and evaluations of these FOTs can be found in the ITS Cross-Cutting Study of Commercial Vehicle Operations. (PDF) One of the implemented FOTs was the Southwest Electronic One-Stop Shopping (EOSS). The EOSS system provided a PC-based application to be installed on carrier and state agency computers. Users could access either of the two functional modules–the Information module or the Credential module. Using the Information module, the user could access information regarding what credentials were required to operate legally in any given state. Using the Credential module, carriers or service bureaus could complete applications either manually or by uploading information from their internal system, identifying associated fees, arranging for electronic funds transfer to pay for the credentials, printing or submitting the application electronically, and printing certain credentials. Representatives from 15 motor carriers, and various agencies from the states of Arkansas, Texas and Colorado, participated in the operational test. In general, these FOTs demonstrated more efficient credential and permit application processes that reduced data entry and retrieval costs. Benefits of CVO Administrative Processes
Implementation Barriers
Where Are CVO Administrative Processes Implemented? Across the U.S. An onboard safety system senses and monitors the safety status of the vehicle, driver, and cargo of a commercial vehicle. Although these systems are not yet widely implemented, many commercial trucking companies and government-sponsored research groups have been testing prototypes. While truck manufacturers have focused their efforts on creating devices that monitor vehicle performance, government research groups have been investigating technologies that monitor driver performance. Vehicle Performance Several U.S. trucking companies are currently working on comprehensive designs that can:
Driver Performance Complementing technologies that strive to ensure vehicle functionality are those designed to measure driver alertness and fatigue. In the most comprehensive study of driver fatigue conducted to date, the Driver Fatigue and Alertness Study (coordinated by the Essex Corporation), a significant finding was that driver alertness and performance were more consistently related to time-of-day than to time-on-task; episodes of drowsiness were eight times more likely between midnight and 6 a.m. than during other times. Included in this study was the U.S. DOT’s research on technologies that could be used to detect driver fatigue. Of these, the most promising index of fatigue was PERCLOS, the video-based scoring of eye closures by trained observers. PERCLOS testing is still underway, as are most driver fatigue sensors. For more information on PERCLOS, see the U.S. DOT and NHTSA report Evaluation of Techniques for Ocular Measurement as an Index of Fatigue and the Basis for Alertness Management. Equally informative is the FMCSA Web Site on Driver Fatigue. Benefits of Onboard Safety Monitoring
Implementation Barriers Drivers fear that electronic monitoring of their vehicles’ performance is an invasion of their privacy; vehicle monitoring technologies are primarily created within the development units of private, truck manufacturing companies, so that widespread implementation is dependent on CV companies choosing to invest in safety monitoring research and testing. Where
Is Onboard Safety Monitoring Implemented? As more and more trucking businesses are becoming technologically integrated organizations, they are requiring more sophisticated and cost-effective information systems to remain competitive. With an eye towards safety and productivity, these companies are looking for ways to more closely monitor individual vehicle and driver performance. The widely implemented ITS/CVO programs in safety information exchange, electronic screening, and electronic credentialing propose lower-costing means of maintaining safe roadways by focusing inspections on high-risk vehicles. Similarly, the growing number of electronic border clearance initiatives can limit time-consuming inspections at borders to those vehicles with non-compliant or questionable credentials. Hazardous Materials Incident Response systems can likewise safeguard the roadway by ensuring the safe transportation and storage of HazMat by closely tracking HazMat vehicles and responding quickly to HazMat-related accidents. The less common but equally notable onboard safety monitoring systems can automatically update drivers and fleet managers on the condition of their vehicles, thus reducing costs that can result from overdue maintenance checks. While some of the ITS/CVO technologies have become established in the motor carrier industry (i.e. CVISN is nationally implemented), others are still in their early stages (i.e. onboard safety devices are being developed by only a handful of private trucking companies). Widespread implementation of the any ITS/CVO Program seems to hinge on the success of institutional collaborations (i.e. state-Federal relationships) and user acceptance of new technologies. 2005 FMCSA Professional Capacity Building Program presentation on goals for CVO safety. http://www.pcb.its.dot.gov/T3/session18/T3_S18-19-20.PPT Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Highway Administration Highway & Vehicle Technology Group, Intelligent Transportation Systems Field Operational Test Cross-Cutting Study: Hazardous Materials Incident Response, McLean, Virginia, September 1998. http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/4vr01!.pdf Colker, David, Truckers hit high-tech road: On-board computers, satellite navigation and night vision are steering big-rig drivers toward the future, Los Angeles Times, October 11, 2001. http://ntl.bts.gov/card_view.cfm?docid=11387 Federal Highway Administration , CVISN Electronic Credentialing for Commercial Vehicles in Washington State: A Case Study, Publication Number FHWA-JPO-04-029 , September, 2004. http://cvisn.fmcsa.dot.gov/WhatsNew/Washington/Washington.htm Federal Highway Administration, CVISN Operations Rescource Guide 2004 http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/13947_files/body_sec5_cvisn.htm Federal Highway Administration, CVISN Safety Information Exchange for Commercial Vehicles in Connecticut: A Case Study, Publication Number FHWA-JPO-04-030, September, 2004. http://cvisn.fmcsa.dot.gov/WhatsNew/Connecticut/Connecticut.htm Federal Highway Administration, Evaluation of Techniques for Ocular Measurement as an Index of Fatigue and the Basis for Alertness Management, DOT HS 808 762, April 1998. http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/edlbrow/7D01!.pdf Federal Highway Administration, Intelligent Transportation Systems at International Borders: A Cross-Cutting Study: Facilitating Trade and Enhancing Transportation Safety, April 2001. http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/8V601!.PDF Federal Highway Administration, 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, December 2000. http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/@@201!.PDF Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative (Tech Brief), Publication Number FMCSA-MCRT-03-006, November 2002. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safetyprogs/research/briefs/CVISN_TechBrief.pdf Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test:Volume I: Evaluation Final Report Executive Summary (Part 1) http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/hazmat/fot/eval-rpt-summary-part1.htm Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration,
Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety and Security Operational
Test Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Motor Carrier Technologies—Fleet Operational Impacts and Implications for ITS/CVO (Tech Brief), Publication Number FMCSA-MCRT-00-008, March 2000. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/pdfs/tb00-008.pdf Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, CVISN Guide to Credentials Administration, Preliminary Version P.2, POR-99-7192 P.2, August 2000. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, CVISN Guide to Electronic Screening, Baseline Version 1.0, POR-99-7193 V1.0, March 2002. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, CVISN Guide to Safety Information Exchange, Baseline Version V1.0, POR-99-7191, V1.0, February 2002. Lantz, Brenda M. An Evaluation of the Impacts of ITS/CVO Technologies on Safety and the Associated Benefits Throughout the Supply Chain, Phase I: A Review of Literature and Case Study Analysis, North Dakota State University, August 2000. http://www.ndsu.edu/ndsu/ugpti/MPC_Pubs/pdf/MPC01-117A.pdf Richeson, Kim E. , Applied Introductory Guide to CVISN, POR-99-7186 P.2, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, February 2000. Texas Transportation Institute at the Texas A&M University System, Center for Transportation Research at the University of Texas at Austin, Briefing Document on Texas Model Border Crossing Project, January 2002. http://bordercross.tamu.edu/plans_docs/briefing_document.pdf Author: Carli Cutchin Updated: August 2005 |
Hosted by the California Center
for Innovative Transportation at
the University of California at Berkeley and Caltrans
Copyright 2005 UC Regents