FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION

FMCSA Contact: Jeff Secrist, MC-RTT, (202) 358-5658

Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle

Information Systems and Networks

(CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative

Background

CVISN is a collection of information systems and communications networks, owned and

operated by governments, motor carriers, and other stakeholders, that support Commercial

Vehicle Operations (CVO). The CVISN program provides a framework or "architecture"

that enables government agencies, the motor carrier industry, and other parties engaged

in CVO administrative, safety assurance, and regulatory activities to exchange information

and conduct business transactions electronically.

Technologies used in CVISN include information systems and networks that provide

electronic links between motor carriers, state agencies, and various national clearinghouses

and databases. For example, CVISN information and communication technologies permit

roadside enforcement staff to direct drivers on the highway to either bypass or enter

weigh and inspection stations. They also provide enforcement staff with up-to-date safety

and credentialing information from state or national motor carrier databases.

The Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Network Model Deployment Initiative

(CVISN MDI) began in 1996 with two "prototype" states—Maryland and Virginia—and

eight pilot states—California, Colorado, Connecticut, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota,

Oregon, and Washington. The main purpose of the initiative is to demonstrate the

technical and institutional feasibility, costs, and benefits of the primary Intelligent

Transportation System (ITS) user services for CVOs. The evaluation of the CVISN MDI was

conducted by Battelle, under contract to the ITS Joint Program Office (ITS JPO), and

managed by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). 

An initial goal of the CVISN MDI is to have every state reach an "ambitious but achievable"

level of deployment, called Level 1. To accomplish Level 1 deployment, states must:

• Establish an organizational framework among state agencies and motor carriers for

cooperative system development

• Create a state CVISN System Design that conforms to the CVISN architecture and can

evolve to include new technology and capabilities

• Implement specific capabilities in the following three areas:

1. Safety Information Exchange

Facilitate the collection, distribution, and retrieval of motor carrier safety

information at the roadside. These data help Federal and state enforcement staff

focus scarce resources on high-risk carriers and drivers, which in turn helps to

reduce the number of crashes involving commercial vehicles.

2. Electronic Screening 

Allow commercial vehicles that maintain good safety and legal status to bypass

roadside inspection and weigh stations, saving time and money for participating

carriers, and allowing states to devote more resources toward removing unsafe and

noncompliant carriers.

3. Electronic Credentialing 

Assist in the areas of electronic submission, processing, approval, invoicing,

payment, issuance of credentials, electronic tax filing and auditing, and

participation in clearinghouses for electronic accounting and distribution of

registration fee payments among states.

The goal of the Federal Motor

Carrier Safety Administration

(FMCSA) is to reduce commercial

vehicle related fatalities, as well as

the number of persons injured in

commercial vehicle related crashes,

by 50 percent by the year 2010.

FMCSA's Research and Technology

programs encompass a range of

issues and disciplines, all related to

motor carrier and bus safety and

security. FMCSA defines a

"research program" as any

systematic study directed toward

fuller scientific discovery,

knowledge, or understanding that

will improve safety and security,

and reduce the number and

severity of commercial motor

vehicle crashes. Similarly, a

"technology program" includes

those that adopt, develop, test

and/or deploy innovative driver

and/or vehicle best practices, and

technologies that will improve

safety and security, and reduce the

number and severity of commercial

motor vehicle crashes.

Currently, FMCSA's Office of

Research and Technology conducts

programs in the area of Driver

Safety Performance, Commercial

Vehicle Safety Performance, Carrier

Compliance and Safety, Safety

Systems and Technology, CrossCutting Safety Initiatives, and

Security. The study described in

the following Tech Brief was

designed and developed as part of

FMCSA's Research and Technology

Safety Systems and Technology

Program. The primary goal of this

program is to improve the safety,

security, and productivity of

commercial vehicle operations.

Office of Research and Technology

400 Virginia Ave, SW

Suite 600

Washington, DC 20024

Tech Brief
Evaluation Goals and Methods

The CVISN evaluation strategy was developed in cooperation with state and Federal government agencies and

industry partners. The primary goals of the evaluation project were to document the benefits of CVISN when

fully implemented and to conduct a comprehensive benefit/cost analysis to determine if the investments in CVISN

are justified. Five states (Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, Oregon, and Virginia) were chosen to support the

data collection effort, as the rate of the deployment in these states was further along when the evaluation took

place. 

Overview of Key Findings

While the data from early deployments are limited, it is clear that CVISN is a good investment for the United

States because CVISN can:

• Produce substantial cost savings for states and motor carriers

• Improve the efficiency and fairness of commercial vehicle operations

• Save lives 

However, in order to achieve each of these benefits, it's important to recognize that CVISN must be deployed

nationwide, and according to consistent standards. In addition, its three major systems should be fully integrated

with one another.

Given those requirements, here's an overview of the key findings from the evaluation, from the perspectives of

Safety, Cost, Customer Satisfaction, and Benefit/Cost Analysis. 

Safety

CVISN roadside enforcement technologies are expected to have two types of impacts related to roadside safety:

1. The direct benefit of improved targeting of enforcement activities on high-risk carriers resulting in more outof-service (OOS) orders for the same number of inspections performed

2. The indirect benefit of increased compliance with motor carrier safety regulations resulting from better

enforcement

To date, CVISN utilizes the Inspection Selection System (ISS), used in combination with manual prescreening to

select commercial vehicles for inspection. This has already demonstrated an ability to increase the number of outof-service (OOS) orders issued by two percent compared to traditional (without ISS) screening methods. Based on

this data, a crash avoidance model was created which estimated that the use of ISS (without electronic screening),

would result in 84 fewer commercial vehicle crashes per year nationwide. Taken one step further, it was then

shown that if ISS were combined with electronic screening, approximately 600 commercial vehicle-related crashes

could be avoided per year. Using this data as a starting point, it would, therefore, not be unreasonable to expect

a modest 10 to 25 percent reduction in safety violations each year if CVISN were widely deployed, fully

integrated, and combined with innovative enforcement and outreach strategies. 

Cost

From the viewpoint of electronic screening and safety information exchange at the roadside, CVISN deployment

costs were found to be reasonable when viewed in the context of a state's existing roadside enforcement

operations. In addition, based on the initial deployments of CVISN, it is believed that electronic credentialing

could offer substantial cost savings to states as well as motor carriers, depending on the level of motor carrier

participation in the project, and that the savings gained, largely through lower labor costs, would be expected to

result in some state staff persons becoming available to work on other priority assignments. 

However, these cost estimates do have important limitations. First, they don't necessarily take into account the

level of experience with CVISN necessary to provide adequate data for this analysis. Second, is the fact that the

computers, infrastructure, and facilities are often maintained (and, thus, their operating costs are accounted for)

by agencies that may be different from those engaged in the CVO functions. Third, operation and maintenance

costs are often lumped together with other cost items, making it difficult to isolate those costs directly related to

credentialing and other CVO functions. And finally, it's worth noting that electronic screening and safety

information exchange do not offer states the direct economic savings and payback that electronic credentialing

does, except through improvements in transportation safety. 

Customer Satisfaction

The general awareness throughout the national trucking industry of CVISN-type initiatives is currently very low,

especially among the smaller trucking companies. Given that fact, some concerns have already been raised

regarding the standardization of rules, as well as the procedures that would be required across states, specifically
as they relate to which vehicles or firms most merit inspection among the motor carriers and drivers who are

aware of these technologies.

The following items were mentioned most often in the surveys that have been conducted to date:

• Responses to questions about electronic screening methods expressed concerns about cost-effectiveness for

the company and expansion of state regulation

• There was fairly universal condemnation of two practices that drivers regarded as inherently unsafe,

specifically:

1. Setting up temporary inspection sites at the side of the road for the purpose of pulling over trucks 

for inspection 

2. Long waiting lines (tailback) of trucks at scale houses extending back out onto the highway

• Among the drivers with personal experience of electronic screening, the opinions about it were markedly

positive, with time savings being given as the primary reason

• State CVO inspectors believe that Safety Information Exchange technology gives them greater credibility with

the motor carriers

• Computer-based inspections are seen to represent a significant improvement over previous, paper-based

systems, making the work of inspectors more efficient

• Most state CVO administrators are still generally enthusiastic about deploying CVISN as it has already become

integral to the jobs of their CVO roadside inspectors

Benefit/Cost Analysis

The results of the Benefit/Cost Analysis are summarized in Table 1. Specifically, for the three roadside

enforcement scenarios, the Benefit Cost Ratios (BCRs) range from 0.62 to 5.0, with a BCR less than 1.0 for the

simplest roadside enforcement scenario (the upgrade to Aspen without electronic screening—again, not

justifiable on the basis of economics alone). 

Moving up to roadside enforcement scenarios that involve electronic screening (RE-2, RE-3, and RE-3*), the BCRs

increase considerably, as do the present values (NPVs) of the net benefits of these improvements. Starting with

Scenario RE-2 which assumes no change in compliance behavior, the NPV is over $2.5 billion. As compliance

behavior hypothetically improves, the increase in the NPV is truly impressive, totaling nearly $6 billion for

Scenario RE-3* and over $10 billion for Scenario RE-3. 

In addition, the electronic credentialing scenarios (EC) are characterized by huge benefit/cost ratios. For Scenario

EC-1, the BCR is 12.5, meaning that the total benefits of electronic credentialing for states not using the thirdparty VISTA (Vehicle Information System for Tax Apportionment) are more than 12 times as large as the total

costs. For states using VISTA, such as those shown in Scenario EC-2, the BCR is over 40. Therefore, the electronic

credentialing elements of CVISN easily pass the important BCR criterion for determining whether such systems are

economically justified.

Scenario Total

Benefits

Total

Costs

Net Present

Value

Benefit/ Cost

Ratio (BCR)

RE-1. Upgrade to Aspen only

RE-2. Electronic screening with no

change in safety violation rates

RE-3. Electronic screening with a 25

percent reduction in safety violation

rates

RE-3*. Electronic screening with a 10

percent reduction in safety violation

rates

EC-1. Electronic credentialing in

states without VISTA

EC-2. Electronic credentialing in

states with VISTA

69

5,301

12,995

8,379

558

339

112

2,636

2,601

2,622

45

8

-43

2,665

10,394

5,757

331 40.4

12.5

5.0

2.0

0.62

513

3.2

Table 1: Summary of CVISN Benefit/Cost Analysis (BCA) Results

$, in Millions (rounded)
U.S. Department of Transportation

Researcher

This study was performed by

Battelle, 505 King Ave.

Columbus, OH 43201-2693.

Contract No. 

DTFH61-96-C-00077. 

Key Words

Benefit/Cost Analysis, CVISN,

Cost, Customer Satisfaction,

Deployment, Electronic

Credentialing, Electronic

Screening, Safety, Safety

Information Exchange.

Notice

This Tech Brief is disseminated

under the sponsorship of the

Department of Transportation in

the interest of information

exchange. The Tech Brief

provides a synopsis of the

study's final publication. The

Tech Brief does not establish

policies or regulations, nor does

it imply USDOT endorsement of

the conclusions or

recommendations. The U.S.

Government assumes no liability

for its contents or their use.

Web Site

All FMCSA Tech and Analysis

Briefs may be accessed at:

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov.

Technical Writer

Craig Steinberg

C2 Technologies, Inc.

November 2002

Publication No. FMCSA-MCRT-03-006

Implications of These Findings

To address the concerns of all the primary stakeholders about the relative costs and

benefits of investments in Intelligent Transportation Systems, it's important to recognize

that the CVISN Benefit/Cost Analysis presents a comprehensive economic comparison of

costs (including start-up and recurring costs) versus the value of the total benefits. It's also

important to realize that the analysis was performed for two different scenarios involving

electronic credentialing, and three scenarios for roadside enforcement.

Given these facts, the analysis of credentialing operations demonstrates that electronic

credentialing is, in fact, a worthwhile investment. Even at 50 percent deployment (i.e., 50

percent of credentialing transactions handled electronically), the benefits (i.e., cost savings)

exceed the costs by factors of 6 to 20, depending on certain operating features.

Furthermore, the benefit/cost ratio is expected to be even larger once states deploy

electronic credentialing for special permits, because the costs to deploy those additional

systems will be relatively small since the special permit systems are actually built as add-in

modules based on the IRP infrastructure. In addition, the benefits for special permits can

be substantial, especially to the motor carrier who requires fast turnaround on such

applications. 

The Benefit/Cost Analysis of CVISN roadside enforcement technologies also demonstrates

the need to integrate safety information exchange and electronic screening technologies.

From a development perspective, while it would seem to make sense to think of safety

information exchange and electronic screening as separate systems, these systems are

actually designed for integrated application, meaning it may not actually be practical to

select vehicles for inspection without also having some automated means of identifying

vehicles and making decisions.

Another factor affecting the success of electronic credentialing is the recruitment of motor

carriers. While the CVISN motor carrier survey suggests that most carriers are receptive to

the idea of end-to-end electronic credentialing, questions still remain about how the

carriers will communicate with the states electronically. Currently, the following three

distinct approaches are being pursued, and it appears at this time that all of them may be

utilized to meet the needs of a diverse population of motor carriers:

1. A web-based system that uses a standard Internet browser to connect to the states'

web site to submit and retrieve credential applications and responses

2. A stand-alone PC-based program called a Carrier Automated Transaction (CAT)

system

3. A system that involves making special modifications or upgrades to existing fleet

management systems to communicate directly with state registration systems

Finally, it's important to point out that the benefits of CVISN roadside enforcement

technologies could be greatly enhanced in the following two ways. First, as illustrated in

Scenarios RE-3 and RE-3*, would be for the carriers to invest more in vehicle maintenance,

and for the drivers to improve their compliance with safety regulations in order to avoid

inspections and (more importantly) out-of-service orders. And second, by improving the

quality of data and analysis algorithms upon which inspection selection decisions are

ultimately based.

References

Evaluation of the I-95 Commercial Vehicle Operations Roadside Safety and SAFER Data

Mailbox Field Operational Tests, Draft Evaluation Report from Battelle to USDOT ITS Joint

Program Office, June 29, 2000.

Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI), Survey of Motor Carrier Safety Activities—

Interim Technical Memorandum 2 (Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA),

January 2000.

Radin, S., Tracking State Deployments of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and

Networks: 1998 National Report, EDL No. 13082 (USDOT, Washington, DC), May 30, 2000.

Richeson, K.E., Introductory Guide to CVISN, The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics

Laboratory, report to U.S. Department of Transportation, POR-99-7186, Preliminary Version

P.2, Laurel, MD, www.jhuapl.edu/cvisn, February 2000.

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, EDL No. 11316, pp 107-126, (USDOT, Federal

Highway Administration, Washington, DC), www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov, December 2000.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration