Best Practices in Permitting
Oversize and Overweight Vehicles
Final Report
Notice
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange.
The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information
contained in this document.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.
Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because
they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality
information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that
promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure
and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information.
FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and
processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
i
TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
1. Report No.
FHWA-HOP-17-061
19. Security Classify.
(of this report)
Unclassified
2. Government Accession No.
20. Security Classify.
(of this page)
Unclassified
3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
21. No of
Pages
72
5. Report Date
Fe
bruary 2018
6. Performing
Organization Code
8. Performing
Organization Report No.
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
13. Type of Report and
Period Covered
18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions
11. Contract or Grant No.
DTFH61-16-F-00053
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
HOFM
4. Title and Subtitle
Best Practices in Permitting Oversize and
Overweight
Vehicles – Final Report
7. Authors
Leidos: Ron Schaefer (Leidos), Steven Todd (SC&RA)
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Leidos
11251 Roger Bacon Dr.
Reston, VA 20190
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
United States Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20590
17. Key Words
oversize, overweight, best practices, pilot car, permit, truck,
vehicle, permitting
16. Abstract
This final report for the Best Practices in Permitting Oversize and Overweight Vehicles is
the summary of a research study completed on State oversize – and overweight-permitting
practices, including automated vehicle routing and escort driver certification and identifies
the areas of best practices. This report is intended to fulfill a recommendation by the U.S.
Government Accountability Office (GAO).
22. Price
N/A
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized.
1
5. Supplementary Notes
John Berg (FHWA - HOFM)
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................1
Summary of Findings ....................................................................................................................... 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................3
3. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES .................5
4. INVENTORY OF STATE PERMITTING PRACTICES .......................................................................6
Status of Automated Permit Systems Nationwide ........................................................................ 6
Automated Permit Systems ............................................................................................................ 6
State Permit System Threshold ..................................................................................................... 7
5. REVIEW OF STATE OVERSIZE/OVERWEIGHT PERMITTING SYSTEMS ................................. 11
6. STATE CASE STUDIES ................................................................................................................ 13
Nebraska ........................................................................................................................................13
Maryland ......................................................................................................................................... 15
North Dakota ..................................................................................................................................18
Texas ...............................................................................................................................................20
Colorado ..........................................................................................................................................22
Kansas ............................................................................................................................................26
Iowa .................................................................................................................................................28
Illinois ..............................................................................................................................................31
Georgia ............................................................................................................................................34
7. STATE BEST PRACTICES FOR OVERSIZE/OVERWEIGHT PERMITTING ................................ 37
8. REVIEW OF OVERSIZE/OVERWEIGHT PERMITTING VENDOR SYSTEMS .............................. 40
Bentley Systems ............................................................................................................................. 40
Oxcart Permits Systems ................................................................................................................51
9. LITERATURE REVIEW FINDINGS ............................................................................................... 52
10. PILOT CAR TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS ..................................................... 55
11. PILOT CAR TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION BEST PRACTICES ........................................... 57
State Pilot Certification Programs.................................................................................................59
NATIONAL PILOT CAR ASSOCIATION ............................................................................................ 60
NORTH AMERICAN PILOT VEHICLE SAFETY ALLIANCE .............................................................. 62
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Oversize/overweight automated permit system – self-issue, single-trip permits –
U.S. data collected 2017. ................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2. Permit auto issue – 14’ wide, 14’ 6” high, 110’ long, 150K – U.S. ............................... 7
Figure 3. Maryland One automated oversize/overweight permit application screen shot. ........41
Figure 4. Real-time route analysis screen shot. ..............................................................................41
Figure 5. Historical route library function screen shot. ..................................................................42
Figure 6. Bentley Systems GotPermits system architecture. ......................................................... 43
Figure 7. GotPermits permit application data consolidation. ........................................................ 43
Figure 8. Company dashboard. ........................................................................................................50
Figure 9. Agency dashboard. ............................................................................................................51
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds. ............................................ 8
Table 2. State best practices for oversize/overweight permitting. ................................................ 37
Table 3. System components. ..........................................................................................................44
Table 4. Permit definition fields. ....................................................................................................... 46
Table 5. Summary of State information scan. ................................................................................ 53
Table 6. Proposed pilot car training and certification best practices criteria. ..............................58
Table 7. State pilot car certifications. .............................................................................................. 59
1
1.OVERVIEW
In May 2013, a commercial motor vehicle crossing the Skagit River Bridge along Interstate 5
(I-5) collided with the structure, causing a partial collapse. The subsequent National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation and U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) study identified safety issues and recommended the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) take certain actions. FHWA, through the “Pilot Escort Vehicle Training Materials and
State Certification Harmonization” project, addressed the key NTSB recommendations
1
for
action listed below. The GAO report contained a key recommendation for Executive Action:
“To improve stewardship over the nation’s highways and bridges, we recommend
that the Secretary of Transportation direct the FHWA Administrator to take the
following action:
Conduct a study on State oversize – and overweight-permitting practices,
including automated vehicle routing and escort driver certification, to
identify areas of best practice and share the results with States.”
2
This report, summarizing the FHWA-sponsored Oversize-Overweight (OS/OW) Permitting Best
Practices Research Project, is intended to respond to the GAO recommendation. The objective
was to conduct a study of State OS/OW permitting practices to identify best practices,
including the identification of best practices for automated permitting systems and pilot escort
certification.
The OS/OW Permitting Best Practices Research Project includes a comprehensive
environmental scan of all information available on current permitting practices with an
emphasis on conducting research into automated permitting services and on pilot escort
vehicle State certification programs. The objectives of this deliverable were to:
• Conduct a comprehensive environmental scan of information available on
OS/OW permitting.
• Develop criteria for best practices in OS/OW permitting.
• Develop criteria for best practices in Pilot Escort Vehicle Operator certification.
The environmental scan included the following:
1
See NTSB Accident Report NTSB/HAR-14/01 PB2014-10639. “Collapse of the Interstate 5 Skagit River Bridge Following a
Strike by an Oversize Combination Vehicle Mount Vernon, WA” p. 60-61 May 23, 2013 http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/
AccidentReports/Reports/HAR1401.pdf
2
See “GAO Transportation Safety Federal Highway Administration Should Conduct Research to Determine Best Practices in
Permitting Oversize Vehicles,” p. 24 February 2015 http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/668711.pdf
2
• A comprehensive web search to identify documents and other relevant information
sources.
• A meeting with the FHWA Office of Bridges and Structures to identify National Bridge
Inventory data of relevance to the research.
• Interviews with select States currently using automated OS/OW permitting systems.
• Interviews with select vendors who currently offer OS/OW permitting systems.
The study also looked at criteria for best practices. The subsequent report identified the
specific criteria that track to enhanced safety, to improved efficiencies, or to both. The criteria
were derived primarily from the results of State and vendor interviews.
This final State best practices report summarizes the research above and presents the
inventory and identification of the State best practices for OS/OW vehicles.
Summary of Findings
As States implement and enhance automated permitting systems at an increasing rate
nationwide, a consensus regarding the safety and efficiency benefits has also grown.These
benefits, as described by both government officials and industry leaders, include:
• The average permit turnaround time (PTA) decreased from several days and hours to
just minutes for most routine and some OS/OW permits.
• Nearly all States (30+) that have implemented automated systems report a moderate
increase in total permits applications and issuance.
• Increased automated permit volume has proportionally increased revenues.
• Accuracy of permits has dramatically improved.
• A higher percentage of carriers have ordered, obtained, and traveled on State-issued
permits following implementation of automated permit systems.
• Roadway safety for all motorists has improved.
• The infrastructure integrity, including the maintaining of bridges and overhead
structures, has improved.
• As a result of moving to automated permitted, States are able to achieve staff
efficiencies and reduce costs. Fewer people or less time is needed to review and
process OS/OW permits, freeing up employees to handle customer service inquiries.
• States have more flexibility with internal headcount issues.
The lightning speed at which technology develops is creating new opportunities for the
industry. Moving forward, specialized transportation will reap the benefits of accurate global
positioning system (GPS) data, geo-fencing, and software integration strategies. Similarly, as
the technology expands, the cost of using these applications should decrease. This will provide
State and local authorities with a broader list of options to serve carriers.
3
2. Literature Review
The literature review component of the environmental scan produced several documents
that either identified best practices or included recommendations on best practices for
improving the permitting of oversize/overweight (OS/OW) loads. The results were used to
identify key OS/OW permitting issues that are either being addressed through automation
or have the potential to use automation. This list of issues was incorporated into the
questions used to guide the interviews with officials from the States with automated
permitting systems selected for inclusion in the current study.
Reference #1: Government Accountability Office (GAO), Transportation Safety: The Federal
Highway Administration Should Conduct Research to Determine Best Practices in Oversize/
Overweight Permitting, GAO-15-236 (Washington, DC: GAO, February 2015). Available at:
http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/668711.pdf
The Joint Explanatory Statement of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year
2014 required GAO to review how the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and States
regulate the movement of oversize vehicles. This report discusses (1) how the Department
of Transportation (DOT) regulates and provides oversight of oversize vehicles and (2)
how States regulate oversize vehicles. Congress directed the development of this report
study as a response to the incident involving a bridge strike by an OS/OW load, resulting
in a collapse of a portion of the Skagit River Bridge in Washington State and significant
disruption to traffic and freight movement along the I-5 Corridor.
GAO conducted a comprehensive review of FHWA and State regulations, permitting
practices, and size and weight enforcement activities. The study’s primary conclusions
were that State permitting practices vary significantly and States would benefit from the
development of a best practices guidance document. The study’s primary recommendation
was that the Secretary of DOT should direct FHWA to conduct the necessary research and
develop a best practices guidance document with an emphasis on automated permitting
systems.
Reference #2: CPCS Transcom Ltd., Perkins Motor Transport, Inc., and Portscape, Inc.,
National Cooperative Highway Research Project (NCHRP) Report 830: Multi-State, Multimodal
Oversize/Overweight Transportation, (Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the
National Academies, 2016. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/read/23607/chapter/1#vi
This study, sponsored by the Transportation Research Board (TRB), included a
comprehensive review of State requirements for the permitting of OS/OW freight load
movements throughout the United States. The study examined existing challenges facing
industry, looking at both the intrastate (movement of loads on State and local roads)
and interstate (between States) movement of freight and estimated the public costs
resulting from the inefficient movement of OS/OW loads. The study also identified areas for
improving the movement of OS/OW loads, including:
4
• Improve the use of technology to facilitate route planning and permitting by automating
State permitting processes.
• Integrate local permitting processes so that carriers can obtain all permits needed for a
route that includes State and local roads.
• Communicate regularly with carriers that are using open permits, in order to provide
regular information on changes in permit status resulting from issues such as work
zones and construction, weather events, or traffic incidents. This will enable carriers to
know when to update and revise permitted routes, and
• Improve the availability of information regarding physical restrictions along proposed
routes to ensure improved permit accuracy and better alignment of the movement of
OS/OW loads along routes that are designed to accommodate the permitted loads.
Reference #3: D. Middleton, Y, Li, J. Le, and N. Koncz, Accommodating Oversize and
Overweight Loads: Technical Report, FHWA/TX-12/0-6404-1 (Austin, TX: Texas Transportation
Institute: July 2012). Available at: http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/
documents/0-6404-1.pdf
The Texas Department of Transportation-sponsored study resulted in a statewide map that
proposed primary and alternate OS/OW routes for the most commonly used origins and
destinations. The study included a comprehensive international and national review of the
use of technology to improve the movement of OS/OW loads, including such applications
as:
• Permit issuance and auto-route generation.
• Bridge safety assessments to support routing decisions.
• Enhanced en-route surveillance and notifications to carriers of changes in route
restrictions.
Reference # 4: Arora and Associates, P.C., NCHRP Report 20-68A, Scan 1201 Advances in
State DOT Superload Permit Processes and Practices, April 2014. Available at: http://onlinepubs.
trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP20-68A_12-01.pdf
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)/TRB-
sponsored scan focused on identifying the current processes and criteria used by States
for OS/OW permitting. The scan was designed to collect information on current practices,
identify best practices, and recommend potential improvements that could be made to
OS/OW permitting procedures. Key recommendations included promoting the use of
automated permitting systems that include the following functionality:
• Central database.
• Data entry and verification interface (graphical user interface).
• Routing system module with geographical database that contains the network and
detailed link information (e.g., roadway and bridge widths, clearances, and other
information that would affect the routing decisions).
5
• Bridge structural analysis module with an application program interface.
• Payment and billing system with user interface.
3
3. Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridges and Structures
The Study Team met with representatives from the FHWA Office of Bridges and Structures
to discuss the study and the availability of relevant information from the National Bridge
Inventory. The purpose of the meeting was to identify:
• Information available by State and by location within each State on bridge height
restrictions.
• Information available on bridges with variable lane clearance heights.
The Office provided two datasets for reference by the Study Team:
• A summary list of total bridges by State that included a subset of bridges with a
“minimum of the maximum” clearance of 30 meters or less. “Minimum of the
maximum” refers to the minimum height clearance on a bridge with variations in lane
clearance height.
• A detailed list of bridges by height and location that match the above criteria for five
States identified for inclusion in the study – Kansas, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, and Nebraska.
This information was used to help frame specific questions on bridge height restrictions in
the eight States ultimately selected for inclusion in the study.
3
Information source: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP20-68A_12-01.pdf, p. 4-1.
6
4. Inventory of State Permitting Practices
For the purpose of this report, Automated Permit Systems were defined as systems which:
• Accept, analyze, process, and issue permits.
• Issue single trip permits for oversize/overweight (OS/OW) vehicles.
• Issue OS/OW permits for width, height, length, and weight.
• Are operational 24-hours per day, seven days per week.
• Operate on behalf of the State, without human involvement.
When asked to compare their permitting process both before and after implementation, State
officials reported the following positive results after implementation:
• Improved accuracy of permits issued.
• Increased number of permits issued/revenue to State.
• Decreased permit turnaround time (PTA).
• Increased time for State permit office staff to devote to analysis, processing, and
issuance of larger OS/OW permits.
Status of Automated Permit Systems Nationwide
Figure 1 identifies the 30 States currently using Automated Permit Systems, 6 States in
various stages of using Automated Permit Systems, and 13 States that have no imminent
plans to use Automated Permit Systems.
Figure 1. Oversize/overweight automated permit system – self-issue, single-trip
permits – U.S. data collectetd 2017.
7
State Permit System Threshold
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds is the U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto-issue
thresholds. It displays the following:
• Maximum width, height, length, and gross vehicle weight thresholds for which the
Automated Permit System will auto-issue single trip permits.
• Automated Permit System vendor name.
• Future plans, as reported by the State regarding the use of Automated Permit Systems.
Figure 2. Permit auto issue – 14’ wide, 14’ 6” high, 110’ long, 150K – U.S.
Automated Permit Systems
Figure 2 shows 20 States that meet or exceed industry recommended, harmonized minimum
thresholds for dimension and weight issued by Automated Permit Systems either provided by
vendors or developed in-house.
8
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds.
Table 1
Jurisdiction
Auto/
Self
Issue
Width Height Length Weight
Current
System Future Plans
AL - Alabama N
Internal
System
Ability to Auto/Self-Issue with
Bentley System
AK - Alaska N
AR - Arkansas Y 14' 14' 90' 120K Bentley Not at this time.
AZ - Arizona Y 14' 16' 120' 250K Bentley Not at this time.
CA - California N
Internal
System
Not at this time.
CO - Colorado Y 14' 15' 110' 140K ProMiles Not at this time.
CT -
Connecticut
N Bentley Not at this time.
DE - Delaware N
FL - Florida Y 16’ 18” 150’
Tractor/
Trailer
-199K;
Crane
-140K
Internal
System
GA - Georgia Y 16’ 16’ 100’ 150K Promiles Not at this time.
HI - Hawaii N
IA - Iowa Y 11' 14' 6" 120’ 120K Bentley Not at this time.
ID - Idaho N
Internal
System
IL - Illinois Y 16’ 17’ 200’ 299K
GIS
Solutions
/ Bentley
(weight
analysis)
Local permitting option
IN - Indiana Y 16'
3” less of
lowest VC
on route
110' 200K
Internal
System
Indiana is exploring different
options for an updated or
new automated system.
KS - Kansas Y 16’6” 15’ 126’ 120K ProMiles Not at this time.
KY - Kentucky Y 8' 6" 13' 6" Legal 120K
Internal
System
Current auto issue applies to
Metal Commodity Single Trip
and Annual Permits only. All
other Annual Permits and
threshold (to be determined)
Single Trip permits will be
available July 1, 2018.
Bentley implementation is
currently underway.
Jurisdiction
1
9
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds. (continued)
Table 1
Jurisdiction
Auto/Self
Issue Width Height Length Weight
Current
System Future Plans
LA - Louisiana Y 16’ 15'6" 125' 232K Hexagon
Going live with new
automated system
December 2017.
MA -
Massachusetts
N ProMiles
New ProMiles system
launched 2016, no
auto issue yet.
MD - Maryland Y 12' 14' 6" 90'
150,00
0
Bentley Upgraded May, 2016
ME - Maine N ProMiles
New System expected
by end of 2017.
MI - Michigan *N * Bentley
Not at this time.
* mobile homes only
16' w, 15' h, 150' l
MN - Minnesota Y 14’6” 14’ 6" 110’
36K
tandem
; 54K
tridem
Bentley
New System RFP
2018, New System
Implemented possible
2019.
MO - Missouri Y 16' 16’ 150’ 160K Bentley 18’W on interstate
MS - Mississippi
Y-Daylight
Move Only
16" 15'6" 120' 180K
ProMiles
(pending)
ProMiles system to
launch October, 2018
and will auto issue up
to 20' wide, 17 high,
120 long and 190K
gross.
Y - 24 Hour
Movement
12' 13'6" 99' 150K
MT - Montana Y 18' 17' 150'
175K
non-
intersta
te,
250K
intersta
te
Celtic Dynamic Routing
NC - North
Carolina
N Bentley
ND - North Dakota Y 18’ 17’ 200’ 250k ProMiles Not at this time.
NE - Nebraska Y 16' 1" 16' 150’ 180K Bentley Not at this time.
NH - New
Hampshire
N ProMiles
New System expected
October 2018.
NJ - New Jersey Y
No
Trigger
15’ 100’ 250K Bentley Not at this time.
1
10
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds. (continued)
Table 1 C
Jurisdiction
Auto/
Self
Issue Width Height Length
Weight
(lbs.)
Current
System Future Plans
NM - New Mexico Y 16’ 15’5"
120'
(Trailer
not
greater
than 90'
170K
(No axle
width
greater
than 8'6")
ProMiles Not at this time.
NV-Nevada N No System
by 2017 – 250K;
12’W; 15’H; 110’L
long
NY - New York N
Internal
System
New Promiles
system spring
2018. Will self-
issue permits up to
14' wide, 13'-11"
high, 99' long that
do not need a
NYSDOT Structures
review.
OH - Ohio Y 14' 14'6"
No
Limitation
159,999 Bentley
Upgrade being
done.
OK - Oklahoma Y 16’ 15’ 110’
200K;
Weight –
as long as
they
match
OL-1
drawing;
Cambridge/
Intergraph
Not at this time.
OR - Oregon N
Internal
System
Not at this time.
PA - Pennsylvania Y 16’ 160’ 201K
Internal
System
Not at this time.
RI - Rhode Island N
Internal
System
Not at this time.
SC - South
Carolina
Y 14' 13'6" 100" 100K Bentley
New Hexagon
system to be
released early
2018.
SD - South Dakota Y 14' 18' 100' 130K Bentley Not at this time.
TN - Tennessee Y 16’ 14’6” 150K Cambridge Not at this time.
TX - Texas Y 16' 16’6” 110’ 180K ProMiles Not at this time.
UT - Utah Y 14' 14'6" 105' 125K
Internal
System
Not at this time.
VA - Virginia
Y
14’
14’
100’
115K
Bentley
Working towards
future upgrade.
Jurisdiction
1
11
Table 1. U.S. jurisdiction oversize/overweight auto issue thresholds. (continued)
Table 1 C
Jurisdiction
Auto/
Self
Issue Width Height Length
Weight
(lbs.)
Current
System Future Plans
UT - Utah Y 14' 14'6" 105' 125K
Internal
System
Not at this time.
VA - Virginia Y 14’ 14’ 100’ 115K Bentley
Working towards
future upgrade.
VT - Vermont N
Internal
System
Not at this time.
WA - Washington Y 16’ 16’ 125’ 200K
Internal
System
Not at this time.
WI - Wisconsin Y 14' 14'6" 125' 250K
Internal
System
Under consideration
- 16' W, 16' H, 160'
L, 270K.
WV - West Virginia Y 16’ 15’ 150’ 250K Bentley Not at this time.
WY - Wyoming N No System Not at this time.
1
5. Review of State Oversize/Overweight Permitting Systems
As noted, the results of the previous components of the environmental scan identified topics
and issues to explore with States that have implemented and are using automated permitting
systems. The automated permitting process comprised four components which were grouped
into the previously identified topics and issues. The resulting list guided the interviews with the
selected States.
The Specialized Carrier & Rigging Association identified the key States to include in the study.
The rationale for this is that the industry deals with State permitting agencies and automated
State permitting systems on a daily basis and has the most experience with those States and
systems that offer the potential for identifying best practices.
Once this list had been compiled, a subset of States were identified that included ones
using systems provided by each of the primary oversize/overweight (OS/OW) permitting
system vendors and one State that developed its own system. Using these combined
criteria, five States were identified as being highly representative for inclusion in the study:
Kansas, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, and Nebraska.
In addition, several States that met the additional criteria were identified in the Work Plan
for the study, in particular, those that offered a potential best practice for issuing OS/OW
permits for ports. Maryland issues permits for the Port of Baltimore and was therefore
included in the study.
12
The State of North Dakota was also selected for inclusion in the study. The threshold
limits that States set for auto-permitting systems vary significantly; there is a continuing
dichotomy between States interested in protecting infrastructure and those with industry-
driven interests in expanding permit thresholds available through automated systems.
North Dakota is a State that has set limits at much higher levels than most other States
and could thus serve as a potential example of a best practice in this area.
Finally, the State of Georgia issues permits on behalf of local agencies. A concern noted
by the industry was the challenge in obtaining local permits for moves off of the State
highway system. Some issues include identifying the point of contact to obtain the permit
or having access to information about permit requirements. The State of Georgia offered
an additional opportunity to identify a best practice; in this case, how the State and local
jurisdictions established the protocols for “one-stop-shop” permitting.
The four components and topics/issues included:
1. Automated Route Identification.
• Does the State route map include all State and local roads?
• How does the State coordinate, if at all, the State and local permit requirements?
∘ Does the State issue local permits?
∘ Does the State include hyperlinks to local permitting agencies?
• Does the State auto-issue route permits?
• Does the State identify route restrictions?
∘ Are permanent restrictions, such as bridge height or per axle and gross vehicle
weight (GVW) weight limits identified?
• Are temporary restrictions, such as construction, work zones, weather events, or traffic
incidents identified?
2. Thresholds.
• What is the threshold and how was it established (include height, weight, width, and
length)?
• What were the criteria for setting the threshold?
• What type of analysis was completed?
• Who was involved in determining the thresholds?
• Have the thresholds been changed since they were first established and if so, why?
• Have the established thresholds reduced the number of incidents involving OS/OW
loads such as reduced infrastructure damage or fewer hits related to height – or width-
related hits?
13
6. State Case Studies
Nebraska
Automated Route Identification
Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Identification of route
restrictions
The system map includes only State roads and does not show county
roads. The State indicated that there are plans to upgrade the State map
to include local roads.
If a carrier’s requested route passes over local roads, the carrier is
responsible for obtaining any local permits.
The State website has a listing of each local jurisdiction’s point of contact
but the carrier is responsible for contacting the local agency.
The system includes both permanent and temporary route restrictions.
The permit office receives updates on changes in route restrictions
on a regular basis from the Nebraska DOT regional offices. These are
uploaded to the system and posted on the State website.
Auto-issuance of permit The State noted that permit accuracy has improved significantly.
3. Application Process.
• User interface.
∘ Quality of graphics and maps.
∘ Ease of use.
• Edit checks.
• Library function – ability to store.
∘ Previous routes or permits.
∘ Company data.
∘ Power units and trailer configurations.
4. System Operations.
• Data quality.
• Types of payments accepted.
• Notification of real-time changes in route restrictions and changes in permit status.
14
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
The State uses the “minimum of the maximum” for any bridges or
structures with variances in height thresholds by lane. The State also
allows a buffer of 3 inches.
The State now requires that a permit request include a specific load
height number. Previously, the system threshold did not require a
specific number and carriers could state the requested height was legal
and under the State threshold of 14 feet 6 inches. Only four bridges in
Nebraska have a clearance less than 14 feet 6 inches but the system
was not accurately identifying routes that passed over these bridges.
A route survey is required for loads greater than 16 feet.
180,000 pounds
A combined length of 150 feet or greater requires district approval.
Width A load width exceeding 18 feet requires Nebraska DOT district approval.
Thresholds
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State indicated that the current map and graphics need to be
updated. As noted, the State is planning to implement these updates.
The system contains basic edit checks that verify permit applications
comply with State rules regarding axle weight, GVW. The system also
ensures the permit applications match the correct permit.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The system has a library function that permits carriers to store company
information, power unit and trailer configurations, and previous routes.
The system does not, however, automatically pull this data from the
library to populate fields in a new permit request. Carriers must enter
power unit and trailer information for each request.
Application Process
15
Component Description
Data quality
Ease of payment
The State noted that the development and implementation of the system
required significant improvements in the quality of data and information
sharing between Nebraska DOT regions.
The State accepts credit and debit cards on-line. Carriers may pay for
permits using checks or cash if applying in person.
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The State does not currently notify permit holders of changes in route
restrictions. These changes are, however, posted to the State’s website
and carriers monitor the website to determine if a newly posted route
restriction impacts their existing permits.
The State also operates a 511 traveler information system, which is
updated on a regular basis to include changes in route restrictions or
other information affecting permit status.
System Operations
Maryland
Automated Route Identification
Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Maryland’s system map includes State and local roads.
The only local jurisdiction in Maryland that requires a permit is the city
of Baltimore. The State system, known as Maryland One (MD1), is a joint
permitting system that issues all OS/OW permits within the State. The
city of Baltimore, having access and jurisdiction over their permits, is
now able to issue their permits in a more efficient manner through this
system.
The Port of Baltimore is a primary beneficiary of the MD1 system, as
it has greatly reduced the amount of time formally required to process
permit applications.
Maryland does not have jurisdiction over local roads. The State’s policy
is that carriers must contact a local jurisdiction to obtain permission to
use the jurisdiction’s road system. Maryland is actively working to add
the bridge data for two counties to the MD1 system as a pilot (Baltimore
and Montgomery counties).
16
Component Description
Identification of route
restrictions
Route and bridge restrictions are all included in the MD1 system. The
system is designed to auto-route carriers around any identified route
and bridge restrictions.
Maryland receives regular updates on changes on route and bridge
restrictions; these are entered into the system as received.
Auto-issuance of permit At present, about 70% of all permits are auto-issued. The State reported
that permit accuracy has increased since the automated system was
implemented. Permit processing time has decreased significantly and
processing time for non-auto-issued permits (200,000 pounds and
above) is now on average 2 days.
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
The Maryland One system is a Maryland DOT program operated by
the Maryland State Highway Administration (MD SHA). The system
incorporates multiple jurisdictions – MD SHA, Baltimore City DOT, the
Maryland Transportation Authority (toll roads and toll facilities), and
the Port of Baltimore – and each individual agency is responsible for
ensuring that the system has correct structural information for bridge
ratings, clearance and lane width are accurate, and other threshold
data. The State reported plans to add Maryland’s counties to assist
carriers with routing. Maryland is actively working to add bridge data to
the MD1 system as a pilot for Baltimore and Montgomery counties.
Currently auto issuing at 150K (looking to move to 200K).
Auto-issuing at 90 feet.
Width Auto-issuing at 12 feet.
Thresholds
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State indicated that the system’s maps and graphics were
acceptable. The State is working to upgrade the map data to a 2015
global information system (GIS) map and a hauling permit preferred
network.
The system has a knowledge base that includes all State rules. Each
permit request is checked against this knowledge base to ensure that
the permit is accurate. The application is also validated against route and
bridge restrictions prior to issuance.
Application Process
17
Component Description
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
Carriers are required to pre-register and establish an account with the
State. Once the account is approved, the carrier has access to a library
function that stores carrier data, power unit and trailer information, and
the carrier’s permit history. A carrier can pull previous permits and power
unit/trailer configurations to use in requesting a new permit.
The State also preapproved routes on State and county roads for which
carriers may request a permit.
Application Process
Component Description
Data quality
Ease of payment
The State noted that the implementation of the automated permitting
system has improved the quality and timeliness of information exchange
between State agencies and also with local agencies. The result has
been more accurate data available for analyzing and processing
permits. The State system has the data necessary to do real-time bridge
and weight analyses for every permit request received through the
automated system. Previously, the weight analysis was only conducted
for loads of more than 120,000 GVW.
An additional benefit was that all route restrictions were consolidated
into a single system.
The system also includes the functionality to match load dimensions
with requested routes to ensure that the carrier is applying for the
correct type of permit. The State is now able to capture better statistics
on permitted loads and is able to use this information for planning,
budgeting, enforcement, paving maintenance, and other program
activities.
Payments can be made by credit card, escrow account with bond, checks,
wire transfers, or irrevocable letters of credit. The State no longer accepts
cash payments.
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
Open permits are monitored to determine if a route restriction changes
the status of a permit. The system generates an automatic email notice
to each carrier with an open permit that has a status change, and the
carrier is asked to contact the permit office to revise the permit.
System Operations
18
North Dakota
Automated Route Identification
Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
The State route map shows both State and local roads. The State has
statutory authority to permit only on State roads.
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
The State route map shows both State and local roads. The State has
statutory authority to permit only on State roads.
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Identification of route
restrictions
There are 17 oil producing counties in Western North Dakota that
require a permit. The State’s webpage contains a link to the permit
application for these counties, and if a carrier has been issued a State
permit, the carrier simply enters the permit number into the county
application accessed through the web-link. The application pulls
information through an interface with the State system to populate the
application. The application is then processed, and if all criteria and
thresholds are met, the local permit for the 17 counties is issued to
the carrier. Presently, it is manual process but they are working towards
automation in near future
North Dakota noted that all route restrictions are shown on the State
map as red dots. If a requested route contains a red dot, the system will
auto-route the carrier around the restriction. The system is designed so
that if a carrier clicks on a red button, a pop-up will appear that explains
what the restriction is.
The State reported that information on changes in route restrictions –
construction, work zones, weather events, traffic incidents – is received
on a regular basis. The system automatically updates route restrictions
within approximately 15 minutes of receiving the information.
Auto-issuance of permit The State noted that permit accuracy has improved significantly with
automation. The State also noted that permitted loads are now using the
same routes more consistently and the State is better able to track the
movement of permitted loads.
19
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
The current height threshold is 17 feet with a buffer of 4 inches.
Up to 250,000 GVW depending on the route.
Up to 200 feet depending on the route.
Width Up to 20 feet wide depending on the route.
Permit Processing Components – Thresholds
The North Dakota system contains a database that includes all data on height, weight,
width, and length thresholds by road system. The system also includes an inventory and
operating rating for each bridge that was developed and maintained by the State bridge
engineers. When a State route is requested and load dimensions entered, the system is
capable of completing an automated bridge analysis to determine if the permit should be
issued; if not, the system auto-routes the permit around the bridge in question.
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State indicated they are happy with the overall system graphics and
the road map.
The system contains basic edit checks that match an application with
route restrictions and permit types. If an error is noted, for example an
axle weight that exceeds thresholds, the system will not process the
permit. The applicant receives a notice stating why the permit was not
processed and what the applicant should do next.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The State has a library function that is still under development.
Currently, carriers can store company data and information on power
units. Carriers may also pull up a previous permit and copy the route
information into the system when applying for a new permit on the same
route.
Permit Processing Components – Application Process
20
Component Description
Data quality The State noted that overall data quality and information sharing has
improved. The database developed to support the system is updated on
a regular basis to reflect route restriction and other changes received
from the North Dakota DOT.
Permit Processing Components – System Operations
Ease of payment
The State accepts credit cards and checking account transfers. In person,
applicants may pay using cash or check.
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The State requires that both the permit applicant and driver provide
email addresses.
Texas
Automated Route Identification
Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Identification of route
restrictions
The Texas system includes both State and local roads but has the
statutory authority to route carriers only on State roads.
Texas does not provide contact information for local agencies. The State
indicated that the individual carrier is responsible for identifying the local
agency and obtaining the necessary permits needed to travel on local
roads.
The Texas system includes both temporary and permanent route
restrictions.
The Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is the agency
responsible for issuing permits. The Texas DOT includes 25 districts
and all provide regular information on any construction, work zone, or
other activities that change route restrictions. The DMV requests at least
five days advance notice for any major change in route restrictions. The
DMV reviews and verifies all information received and then posts the
information to the system. The DMV indicated that most information is
posted within 30 minutes of receipt, which is very close to real-time.
Auto-issuance of permit Texas conducted extensive testing of the automated system before the
system went live. The result was that the system was debugged and the
State reports a permit accuracy rate for auto-issued permits of close to
100%.
21
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
The auto issue threshold is set at 16 feet 6 inches and has not been
changed since the system was first implemented.
The State does not issue permits if any variances in height clearance
between lanes exists. To this end, the system is designed to use the
“minimum of the maximum” height that is the lowest point of clearance.
If a requested permit contains a load height that exceeds a height
threshold on the route but is still under the system’s 18 feet 11 inches
threshold, the system will route the permit around the height restricted-
structure. The State may issue a permit for a structure with lane
clearance height variations, but the permit is not auto-issued.
Up to 180,000 gross pounds
Up to 110 feet
Width Up to 16 feet, 6 inches
Thresholds
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State is satisfied with the quality of the system graphics and user
interface.
The system contains basic edit checks that a carrier is applying for the
correct permit. This includes route selection, axle weight, GVW, and other
criteria that link the permit application to the correct permit.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The Texas system has a library function that enables carriers to store
company data and formation on power units. The system does not save
previous routes but does have a feature where each carrier designates
an Administrator who has the authority to create user-level accounts for
the carrier. Any user created by the carrier can access previous permits by
permit number and use them as a template in the creation of new permit
requests.
Application Process
22
Component Description
Data quality The State reported that data quality and data sharing have significantly
improved. The system required accurate data on permanent route
restrictions – height, weight, length, and width thresholds – to establish
the criteria for auto-issuing permits. The real-time transmittal of
information from each of Texas DOT’s 25 districts on changes in route
restrictions has established the procedures for improved data sharing
between Texas DOT and DMV.
System Operations
Ease of payment
The on-line system accepts credit cards and payments from escrow
accounts. In-person applicants also may pay with cash or a check.
A carrier can also establish an account with Frost Bank and receive
a debit card that can only be used to pay for permits. This prevents
unauthorized use of the card.
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The Texas system analyzes all open permits when a new route
restriction is posted. If the route restriction impacts an approved permit
the systems generates an email notice stating that the permit is no
longer valid and the carrier must contact the State to change the permit.
Colorado
Automated Route Identification
Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
The Colorado system shows both State and local roads on the State
map. The system will display local roads, but the State does not have the
statutory authority to issue local permits.
The State maintains a spread sheet on the Colorado DOT website that
has contact information for local permit agencies.
The State is also conducting a pilot test with the city of Denver to issue
a city permit through the State system. When a carrier submits a permit
application through the State that includes city of Denver roads, the
system will generate a pop-up telling the carrier that a local permit is
required. The pop-up allows the applicant to continue without purchasing
the local permit or select to proceed to the local permit page where the
applicant may apply and pay for a city permit on a real-time basis. The
city permit is issued through the State system. The pilot test will use the
State’s self-issue envelope vehicle thresholds for city-issued permits.
The city of Denver estimates that up to 70% of their permits will be
issued electronically through the new system.
23
Identification of route
restrictions
Permanent route restrictions are hard-coded into the system. The
system will route carriers around a route restriction as feasible.
The Colorado system also receives updates from the DOT districts and
the State’s 511 system on route restrictions created by construction,
work zones, weather events, incidents such as accidents, or rock falls.
These updates are received by the permit office and uploaded into the
system as they are verified. Future permits are routed around these
restrictions and active permits are tracked and notified of any route
restriction changes.
Auto-issuance of permit The State noted that the permit error rate is close to zero and that
the time to process permits has been reduced significantly for those
movements that meet automated permitting criteria. Single trip permits
can be processed in 12 minutes and the State has also reduced the
permit processing time for loads that exceed automated permitting
thresholds. For example, loads between 200,000 and 500,000 pounds
can now be processed in less than 3 hours as compared to the previous
3 to 5 days under the old permit system and loads above 500,000
pounds can now be processed in 2 days or less as compared to 2 weeks
with the previous system.
The system is also designed so that any supporting documentation
required from a carrier to process a permit can be uploaded
electronically. The State noted that documents can be scanned or
emailed and that the State encourages electronic communications to
improve the efficiency of the permitting process.
The Colorado system is linked to the State’s Commercial Vehicle
Information Exchange Window (CVIEW) system. The State submits
the DOT number for every carrier applying for a permit to identify any
outstanding Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)-issued
out-of-service (OOS) orders. If an OOS is found, the application is flagged
and the permit rejected.
The State also has an application that is available to carriers who have
an established account and have obtained an annual permit. A carrier
accesses their account and enters the load dimensions, origin, and
destination, and the application identifies a safe route for the move
through the system’s routing component.
Component Description
24
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
Maximum height for a self-issued single trip permit is 15 feet 6 inches.
Maximum height for an annual permit uses the Colorado envelope
vehicle threshold, which is up to 16 feet.
Maximum for self-issued single trip permit currently is 140,000 pounds.
Annual permit maximum is 200,000 pounds.
Maximum for self-issued single trip permit is currently 110 feet. Annual
permit maximum is 130 feet.
Width Maximum for self-issued single trip permit is currently 14 feet. Annual
permit maximum is 17 feet.
Thresholds
The State noted that the height threshold has increased as the quality of the data on bridge
and other structure heights has improved. The State further noted that most bridge hits are
caused by violators either operating without a permit or deviating from a permitted route. This
information is used for enforcement purposes, and violators are notified that the State will
suspend any further permit applications until a violator completes a State size and weight
training program.
Annual permitted vehicles are self-routed and instructed to use routing tools made available
by the department. These tools includes maps (Bridge Weight Limit map, Pilot/Escort Map
and Height map), the routing component of our permitting system, departmental website
listing bridge vertical clearances, and the department listing construction related roadway
restrictions. Annual permitted vehicles may run on any State-maintained highway but must
meet the specific requirements of the roadway which may include such items as pilot/escort
vehicles or specific additional permit types (e.g., Chapter 6 Special permit) depending upon the
dimensions of the load and must also abide by any construction related highway restrictions.
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The – indicated they are happy with the system graphics and maps.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The system includes a library function that allows carriers to store
company information, power unit and trailer configuration information,
and previous routes. Previous routes can be copied into an application if
a carrier is applying for a new permit on the route.
Application Process
25
Component Description
Data quality Implementation of the system required all offices and regions within
Colorado DOT to improve the quality and quantity of data sharing
to ensure permit accuracy. The State reported that data quality has
significantly improved as a result of this action.
System Operations
Ease of payment
The State accepts credit cards and PayPal on-line. Applicants may also
mail in checks or pay with cash or check if picking up a permit in person.
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The Colorado system tracks open permits and generates an email
notice to a carrier of any change in route restrictions in the previous
24 hours. Each applicant must supply an emergency contact email
address, and the notice advises the carrier that there is a problem with
the route and the carrier must cease operations and contact the permit
office immediately. The text of the message is shown below:
“IMPORTANT NOTICE! Your load may now be affected by a new
restriction.
The route on permit number 14S60064761 issued to your company
starting on 12/2/2014 now violates one or more new restrictions. The
restriction(s) it violates is/are restriction number(s) 1009532 – REPORT
– I 76, MP 75.1 to MP 91.5, 12’0” Width.
To find more information of the restriction(s), go to the Colorado DOT
OS/OW Restriction Report at: http://www.coloradodot.info/business/
permits/truckpermits/restrictions.html.
If you have not completed travel for this permit or passed the restricted
area, it is very important for you to contact the Colorado DOT permit
office for routing guidance or for an amended route for this permit.
Failure to contact the Colorado DOT permit office may result in delay
of your trip or damages to the vehicle, load, or highway. Please call
between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. mountain time at303-
757-9539. Please have this permit number and the restriction
number(s) available when you call.”
26
Kansas
Automated Route Identification
System Component Description
Complete map of all suitable roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Identification of route
restrictions
The Kansas system has a complete map of State and local roads. The
map is provided by the system vendor, who obtains GIS data from the
TOMTOM product. Permits are issued to cover travel on State roads only.
Kansas does not issue permits on local roads. Some local jurisdictions
require permits, and if a permit either originates or terminates at a
site off of a State road, the State indicated it is the responsibility of the
carrier to obtain any local permits.
The Kansas system includes route restrictions and will reroute a carrier
around a route restriction.
Kansas DOT operates a 511 traveler information system that is updated
multiple times a day to show construction and work zones, planned
special events, weather events, and traffic incidents. This information
is provided to the permit office and uploaded as received. The State
has an application and hardware developed by the vendor to use in
updating the system, and permit office staff check for and provide route
restriction updates throughout the day. All updates pushed from the
511 system are reviewed and verified by the permit office before being
uploaded to the system.
The State requests that information construction, work zone, planned
special events, and other such activities be provided 20 days prior to the
scheduled start date so that the system can be updated and permitted
loads routed around these restrictions.
The State tracks all open permits and notifies each permit holder by
email if there is a change in their permit status. The notice states that
the permitted route is affected and the permit holder needs to contact
the State to update the permit.
Auto-issuance of permit The Kansas system has a link to the State CVIEW system and each
applicant’s status is checked on the SAFER system and the Unified
Carrier Registry. The State checks each carrier’s USDOT number and the
vehicle identification number (VIN) for each vehicle to verify credentials
and flag outstanding OOS orders or any other violations that may result
in a permit not being issued. The system automatically flags any permit
application, including auto-issued permits, for human intervention if the
check identifies enforcement or credentialing issue.
The State reported that approximately 70% of all permits are now auto-
issued.
27
A combination upgrade of data and technology provided improved data sharing opportunities
that helped with their overall planning process.
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
Kansas DOT provides information on all bridge and other structure
heights and clearances. For structures where there are variances
between lane clearances, the system selects the “minimum of the
maximum,” that is, the lowest clearance for the structure in question.
Loads with a GVW of 120,000 or less are eligible for auto-issued
permits if all other criteria are satisfied. Standard permits are also
available for loads up to 150,000 GVW. Any load above this GVW is
flagged for additional analysis.
Width Loads up to 16 feet 6 inches are eligible for auto-issued permits if all
other criteria are satisfied.
Thresholds
Kansas reported that while there has not been a significant reduction in bridge hits, most
bridge hits are caused either by non-compliant carriers without a permit or operator error.
For example, a carrier may not properly secure a boom or crane and the device opens and
hits a bridge or structure. The State also noted that some bridge hits were caused by carriers
deviating from an approved route.
Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State noted that the system has been improved on an incremental
basis with all agencies providing input. Overall, the State indicated that
they are happy with the quality of the user interface and graphics.
The system will verify that a permit application meets the specified
tolerances for the requested route. If, for example, the GVW is within
tolerances but the axle weight is too heavy, the system will flag the
application and notify the carrier that a different permit is required.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The State has a library function that allows carriers to store company
information, power units and trailer configuration data, and previous
routes.
Application Process
28
Component Description
Data quality The State noted that implementation of the system required improved
sharing of information between DOT offices and regions to ensure
system accuracy. The State also noted that data on the type and
number of permits issued is being used to support planning for corridor
management and freight operations.
System Operations
Ease of payment
The State accepts credit card payments and also allows carriers to
establish escrow accounts. The State no longer handles cash payments
for permits. Checks may be used to add funds to an escrow account but
not to make direct payments for permits.
Iowa
Automated Route Identification
System Component Description
Complete map of all suitable State
and local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
The State permit map includes local roads, but this is done as a
courtesy to help permit applicants identify and complete routes. The
State does not conduct any analyses of or make available the results of
any analyses on local structures. Permits are issued only for approved
State routes.
The State does have a separate ArcGIS (vendor) map on the DOT
website that identifies which counties have route restrictions. When a
carrier hovers over a particular county, a pop-up box appears that states
if a county has route restrictions and provides local agency contact
information. The State noted that the accuracy of the map is dependent
on local agencies responding to an annual request from the State that
updates route restriction and contact information.
Iowa County Route Restriction Map Link:
http://www.iowadot.gov/mvd/motorcarriers/systemmap.htm#county
Iowa is conducting a pilot test in partnership with Sioux City and
Woodbury County to assess the feasibility of the State issuing local
permits. The State will conduct all structure analyses and auto-issue
permits on approved city routes.
29
System Component Description
Identification of route
restrictions
The Iowa system identifies route restrictions on the State map and will
automatically route a permit applicant around any identified restrictions
on the requested route.
Auto-issuance of permit The State noted that the auto-issuance of permits has decreased the
permit error rate and the average permit turnaround time.
The State noted that as part of the automated permitting process, an
applicant’s credentials are checked using the State’s CVIEW system. A
motor carrier’s DOT number and vehicle license plate numbers to verify
credentials status, ensure the carrier has no outstanding OOS orders,
and other credentialing and safety information checks that would result
in a permit not being issued.
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
Iowa conducted an analysis of all vertical clearances for bridges and
other structures using Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR). This
information is used by the automated permitting system to identify route
restrictions based on height. The State noted that their maximum buffer
on vertical clearances is 2 inches above the permitted load height. The
State further noted that for any bridge with height variances by lane, the
State uses the “minimum of the maximum,” that is, the lowest vertical
clearance in any lane to set the height threshold.
Permit requests stating per axle weight of 20,000 pounds or less
and a GVW of 120,000 are approved for auto-issue under the weight
threshold limits established by the State if the carrier meets other
permit requirements. The automated process analyzes and permits
overweight loads to only cross those structures approved for the load.
120 feet.
Width
Height
11 feet.
14 feet 6 inches.
Thresholds
The Iowa DOT Bridge Office conducts the structural and pavement analysis that determine
auto-issue thresholds for per axle and GVW. The structural analysis includes bridges and other
infrastructure, such as intersections.
30
The State indicated that while the number of bridge hits in particular and incidents involving
OS/OW loads has not changed significantly since the automated system was implemented,
most reported hits are caused by operator error or by carriers who are not permitted or have
deviated from the permitted route. This, in turn, has helped the State to target enforcement
activities on non-compliant carriers.
System Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State is negotiating a renewal of their leasing agreement with the
vendor who provides the automated system. As part of this negotiation,
the State is requesting an updated map. The current map runs on a Java
application that is no longer supported by many browsers and the State
wants an updated map that is compliant with current web technology.
The current system performs edit checks to ensure that the permit
application is the correct permit for the types of vehicle(s) listed in the
application.
The State also checks a carrier’s International Registration Plan (IRP)
registration to ensure that the weight listed on the cab card matches
the permit requested weight. The system permits carriers to scan and
upload their cab cards.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
Carriers who establish an account with the State can upload company
information, number and type of power units, and trailer configurations.
The system will automatically populate carrier information for a permit
application and the carrier can pull power unit and trailer configurations
from the stored data. The system also allows carriers to save their
previous routes and pull route information from the stored data when
applying for a permit.
The State has also pre-approved routes for certain commodities and
makes this approved route data available to carriers moving these
commodities.
Application Process
31
Operational Component Description
Ease of payment The State accepts on-line credit card payments and allows account
holders to establish an escrow account for payment of permit
application fees. A permit applicant may also pay in cash or with a check
if applying in person.
System Operations
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
Iowa DOT maintains a 511 traveler information system that is updated
on a regular basis by the State DOT field offices. These updates include
construction activities, work zone locations, weather, and/or incidents,
and any changes to threshold restrictions. The 511 and Automated
Permit Systems contain an interface that provides hourly updates to the
permitting system. The permit system in turn tracks all active permits
and, if a 511 update is received that makes any changes in a permitted
load’s route, generates an email notice to the motor carrier notifying
the carrier. The permit notice advises the carrier that their permit status
has changed and they need to contact the permit office to update the
permit and reroute the load.
Illinois
Automated Route Identification
System Component Description
Complete map of all suitable
State and local roads
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
The Illinois system contains both State and local road maps. If a carrier
requests a route that includes local roads, the system will include these
in the route but the carrier may be required to obtain a local permit.
The State will issue a permit even if the route includes local roads. The
State does not issue local permits but does notify local agencies that
a permitted load will pass through their jurisdiction at the time when
the State permit is issued. The State reported that this has helped with
enforcement against non-compliant carriers and served as an incentive
for carriers to obtain any needed local permits.
The Illinois system provides carriers with local agency contact
information if a local permit is required. A pop-up box with the contact
information appears when a carrier hovers over the local road included
in the permit requested route.
32
System Component Description
Identification of route
restrictions
The Illinois system routes a carrier around route restrictions. The system
also provides the carrier with an explanation of what the restriction is
and why the carrier’s requested route was rerouted.
The Illinois DOT provides regular updates on any changes in route
restrictions, such as construction, work zones, planned special events,
weather events, and traffic incidents. The State requests 21 days
advance notice for construction, work zone, and other events that result
in a route restriction. All permanent and temporary restrictions are
posted on the State route map, as shown in the link below:
http://www.gettingaroundillinois.com/gai.htm?mt=tpr
Auto-issuance of permit The State reported that the automated system has significantly reduced
permit error rates and reduced permit turnaround time. The State
reported that there also is no permit backlog.
Threshold Description
Weight
Width
Height
Up to 299,000 gross pounds.
Up to 17 feet
120 feet.
Length 11 feet.
Thresholds
System Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The Illinois system is a web-based interactive mapping site that provides
the ability to search and display several sources of transportation data.
You can find information on winter road conditions, annual average daily
traffic, road construction, trucking routes, and planned road projects.
The system contains edit checks that verify the vehicle and trailer
configurations and weights are approved for the requested route and
that the permit application is the correct application.
Application Process
33
Operational Component Description
Data quality
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The State noted that data quality has significantly improved. This
includes State-provided information on available routes and route
restrictions as well as carrier permit applications.
The State updates the permitting system on a regular basis throughout
the day. If any updates result in a change in route restrictions or any
other change to a permitted load, the carrier is notified that their permit
is no longer valid and they need to contact the State to update their
permit. This is done for all open permits. The State noted that as part
of the permit application, carriers are required to provide an emergency
contact to receive a permit change notice.
System Operations
Ease of payment
Carriers may pay for permits using electronic funds transfer or credit
cards. Carriers may also establish an escrow account. A carrier
obtaining a permit in person may also pay cash.
System Component Description
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
The Illinois system contains a library function that allows carriers to
store company information, power units, and trailer configurations.
When a carrier applies for a permit, they can pull this information from
the database to populate the permit request.
The system also saves previous routes and permits. A carrier can pull a
saved route from the database for a new permit request.
34
Georgia
Automated Route Identification
System Component Description
Complete map of all suitable
roads
• State roads
• Local roads
Auto-issuance of permit
Coordination of State and local
permit requirements
• State has ability to issue State
and local permits
• State map contains hyperlink to
local jurisdiction
Identification of route
restrictions
The State of Georgia has the statutory authority over both State and
local roads and includes all roads.
The State noted that 80% of permits are now auto-issued.
The State of Georgia also has the statutory authority to issue permits
that cover both State and local roads. The permits cover all routes
traveled from load origin to destination.
GeorgiaPro was developed to include route restrictions. The State road
map shows all route restrictions in red and will generate a message
explaining the route restriction if an applicant hovers over the identified
restriction. The software is designed to route around restrictions. The
State noted that the software will default an application for review by
permit office personnel only when a route accommodating a load that
meets State threshold requirements cannot be established.
Information on temporary route restrictions is provided by Georgia DOT
and pulled from the State’s 511 traveler information system. The State
noted that because permits in Georgia are valid for 10 days, in general
the State only posts temporary route restrictions that exceed 10 days.
All information on route restrictions – incidents, minor construction, and
inclement weather – is posted on the State’s 511 system. The State
noted that updates on temporary route restrictions are posted to the
GeorgiaPro system on a real-time basis and that carriers contact the
permit office to revise permits on an as-needed basis.
35
Threshold Description
Height
Weight
Length
GeorgiaPro is developed to include bridge clearances height plus a
3-inch buffer for every bridge in the State. Georgia DOT maintains
all bridge data and provides updates on changes in bridge data as
necessary.
GeorgiaPro does not issue permits for bridges that have variable
clearances by bridge lane. The system is designed to either route loads
around these bridges or the application can be sent to the permit office
for manual processing.
150,000 pounds.
110 feet.
Width 16 feet.
Thresholds
Georgia DOT is responsible for maintaining a comprehensive inventory of infrastructure for
all routes that permitted loads utilize. This includes maintaining a detailed database on
bridges. Georgia has established an envelope vehicle that includes the height, weight, and
length thresholds noted above and the height thresholds approved for the requested route. An
automated permit will be issued for any load that meets route-approved height clearances and
the other envelope vehicle threshold requirements.
System Component Description
User interface
• Quality of graphics and maps
• Ease of use
Edit checks
The State is satisfied with the current graphics and user interface. The
State noted that the development of the updated State road map was
significantly improved by the incorporation of GIS data.
Will not let carrier proceed if a particular value entered is not correct –
hovering over field generates message explaining what the issue is.
Library function
• Company data
• Power unit and trailer
configuration
• Saved routes
Each carrier establishes an account that includes a library function
for storing company data and information on power units and trailer
configurations. A carrier can download an Excel spreadsheet at the time
the account is established. Every company has a dashboard on the
account that shows prior routes, can store company, power unit, can
drop data into excel spreadsheet, and store data. Stored routes can be
retrieved.
Application Process
36
The State indicated that they are very happy with the quality of the new vendor offered platform
to integrate Georgia GIS data into the State road map and gave a comprehensive map showing
all roads with route restrictions.
All threshold data also were provided – data were current and are maintained routinely.
Operational Component Description
Data quality
Notice of real-time changes in
route restrictions
The development of the GeorgiaPro system required that all information
on permanent route restrictions be included, in particular on bridge
clearance heights. The State also noted that this significantly improved
the quality of the initial data and that data quality is maintained by the
addition of major temporary route restriction information. The State also
noted that the development of the new State road map incorporating GIS
data significantly improved the quality of the route map display.
The Georgia system has the functionality to generate email notices, but
the State does not utilize this on a regular basis. Permits in Georgia are
valid for 10 days and the State posts information on temporary route
restrictions on the Georgia DOT 511 system. This information is available
to the industry and traveling public.
System Operations
Ease of payment
The State accepts payments via credit cards, electronic funds transfers,
or carrier-established escrow accounts. Payments can also be made by
check if a carrier applies in person or mails in payments.
The State offers weekly classes for industry on how to use the GeorgiaPro system. Georgia
also has posted a series of educational videos on YouTube that provide a carrier with
information on how the permitting process works and what steps are needed to complete an
application. Links to these tutorials are shown below:
• GAPROS Creating Accounts Video Tutorial
• GAPROS Using the Company Dashboard Video Tutorial
• GAPROS Ordering Permits Video Tutorial
• GAPROS Combining Multiple Permits Video Tutorial
• GAPROS How to Set Axle Weights and Groups Video Tutorial
• GAPROS Modifying a Trip Using VIA Points Video Tutorial
• GAPROS Saving a Trip Video Tutorial
37
7
. State Best Practices for Oversize/Overweight Permitting
Based on all of the State interviews conducted, the following table highlights the best
practices for OS/OW permitting.
Table 2. State best practices for oversize/overweight permitting.
Safety BenefitCriteria
Automated Route Selection
1. The State system has the authority to issue most
or all nonstate jurisdiction permits (e.g., local, toll,
turnpike, private port) as well as State permits.
2. The State system’s map includes comprehensive
road system, including State, local, toll, turnpike,
private port, etc. road systems.
3. The State system’s map has embedded links
that provide point of contact information for local
permit agencies.
4. The State OS/OW permitting webpage has a link
that connects to local permitting portals.
5. The State OS/OW permitting webpage has a link
that provides point of contact information for local
agencies.
6. The State system enables carriers to generate
route maps both for purchase and for purpose
of preparing for potential moves (e.g., bid
proposals).
7. The State system includes and displays
permanent and temporary route restrictions along
the user’s preferred/requested route.
8. The State system includes a hyperlink that
provides information on the restriction.
9. The State system will auto-route carriers around
restrictions.
• Improved permit
accuracy, safety for
all motorists.
• Industry more likely
to obtain all permits
with one-stop-shop,
resulting in fewer
carriers moving
without permit.
• Automated system
accurately routes
permitted loads
around permanent
and temporary route
restrictions and
bridges.
• Permitted loads
directed onto
appropriate routes
and reduces
potential for
infrastructure
damage.
• Permitted loads
directed away
from potential
congestion, which
reduces potential for
traffic incidents.
• One-stop-shop for
industry.
• Local permits issued
at same time as State
permits.
• Reduces permit
turnaround time
• Cost savings to
carriers,
manufacturers, etc.
• Increased permit fee
revenue to States and
locals.
• Frees up permit office
staff time to focus on
more
complicated OS/OW
load movements.
Efficiency Benefit
38
T
able 2. State best practices for oversize/overweight permitting. (continued)
Safety BenefitCriteria
Thresholds
1. Height restrictions
a. The State system contains information on
all bridge and other height restrictions.
b. The State system automatically routes
carriers around bridge and height
restrictions.
c. The State uses the “minimum or the
maximum” criteria for issuing permits on
bridges with variations in lane clearance
heights. Permits include specific language
as to which lane(s) may be used to clear
height restrictions.
d. Auto-issue permits for a minimum
14 feet 6 inches high.
2. Weight restrictions
a. The State system automatically routes
carriers on routes that are approved for
State weight thresholds.
b. Auto-issue permits for a minimum 150,000
pounds gross (46,000 pounds tandem,
60,000 pounds tridem, 80,000
pounds quad).
3. Length restrictions
a. The State system automatically routes
carriers on routes that are approved for
State length thresholds.
b. The State should auto-issue permits for a
minimum 110 feet long.
4. Width restrictions
a. The State system automatically routes
carriers on routes that are approved for
State width thresholds.
b. The State should auto-issue permits
for a minimum 14 feet wide.
• Permitted loads
are routed around
threshold route
restrictions.
• Permitted loads
directed onto
appropriate routes
and reduces potential
for infrastructure
damage.
• Reduced permit
turnaround time.
• Frees up permit office
staff time to focus
on more complicated
OS/OW load
movements.
• Automates bridge
analysis for OS/
OW loads that
meet established
thresholds.
• Reduces number
of oversize loads
incorrectly hung up in
construction zones.
• Cost savings
to carriers,
manufacturers, etc.
Efficiency Benefit
39
Ta
ble 2. State best practices for oversize/overweight permitting. (continued)
Safety BenefitCriteria
Application Process
1. The State system includes edit check functions
that link the requested OS/OW load movement
route to the correct permit for the particular load.
2. The State system includes a library function
that enables carriers to store company
data, information on power units and trailer
configurations, and previously issued permits.
3. The State system includes pre-approved routes
for the movement of particular OS/OW loads.
Other Best Practices
1. The State system has the authority to issue
permits for a port.
2. A vendor system has the functionality to issue
permits for multiple States for a single OS/OW
load. The State permits are only issued along a
route where the requested permit and proposed
route are in compliance with each State’s
threshold requirements.
3. A vendor system has the ability to issue local
permits for carriers whose OS/OW load includes
local as well as State roads.
4. A vendor system has the ability to notify local
governments of State permit loads traveling
through their local jurisdiction.
System Operation
1. The State system includes electronic payments
options – electronic funds transfer, credit/debit
cards, escrow accounts.
2. The State system updates route restrictions in a
timely manner and tracks all open permits. All
open permit holders are notified if a change in a
route restriction changes the status of a permit.
• Permitted loads
directed onto
appropriate routes
and reduces potential
for infrastructure
damage.
• Industry more likely to
obtain State permits
with one-stop-shop.
• Industry more likely to
obtain local permits
with one-stop-shop.
• Permitted loads
directed onto
appropriate routes
and reduces potential
for infrastructure
damage.
• Local agencies know
when a permitted
load is using their
road system.
• Permitted loads
directed onto
appropriate routes,
which reduces
potential for
infrastructure damage.
• Permitted loads
directed away from
potential congestion,
which reduces
potential for traffic
incidents.
• Reduced permit
turnaround time.
• One-stop-shop saves
public and private
sectors time and
money.
• Enhances operating
efficiencies for public
and private sectors.
• Promotes
harmonization in
movement of OS/
OW loads between
States.
• Permitted loads
avoid congestion and
delays.
• Electronic payments
save State and
industry time and
reduce transaction
costs.
Efficiency Benefit
40
8. Review of Oversize/Overweight Permitting Vendor Systems
This section of the report highlights the oversize/overweight (OS/OW) permitting vendor system
available in the market today.
Bentley Systems
B
entley Systems provides an OS/OW permitting software package called SUPERLOAD.
41
SUPERLOAD functionality includes:
• Routing software that conducts real-time route analysis that ensures that the permit
request is compliant with the State-specified thresholds on particular routes.
• Automated issuance of OS/OW permits.
• A roadway restriction software application that enables a State to enter permanent
and temporary route restrictions and update the routing software as notice of route
restrictions are received and processed by a State permitting office.
• A live-load bridge analysis software application that enables real-time analysis of the
specific permit vehicle configuration over each structure. The analysis is based on State-
established thresholds and temporary and/or permanent route restrictions.
The Bentley system is designed to include local roads on a permit route if State business rules
provide for this. The Bentley system is currently being used by the State of Maryland to issue
local permits for the city of Baltimore as well as permits for the Port of Baltimore.
Additional functional features include:
• Tracking open permits and notifying permit holders of changes in permit status.
• Electronic payments – credit cards, electronic funds transfer, escrow accounts.
• Library function that stores company data, power unit and trailer configuration
information, and previously issued permits and routes.
Several screen shots from the Bentley system are shown below. The first shows the Maryland
One (MD1) application screen that carriers must complete to establish an account with the
State. The second shows the results of a requested permit route that was not approved due
to an existing bridge height route restriction. The system generated a notice to the applicant
explaining the restriction and a map showing the location of the restriction, in this case a
bridge that did not meet State thresholds for the requested OS/OW load movement. The third
screen shot is historical routing data, showing a heat map of where the permitted trips had
occurred. This historical routing data can be filtered for a variety of factors, such as timeframe
and vehicle configurations.
4
The information on the SUPERLOAD product is adapted from: https://www.bentley.com/en/products/brands/superload
41
Figure 3. Maryland One automated oversize/overweight permit application screen shot.
Figure 4. Real-time route analysis screen shot.
42
Figure 5. Historical route library function screen shot.
Bentley Systems has also developed an innovative product called GotPermits. As noted
on the Bentley webpage, GotPermits enables a carrier to submit a permit application for
a multistate route. The application is entered into a user interface that in turn links to all
States participating in GotPermits. The permit application is processed in compliance with
each State’s requirements and if the requested load meets each State’s requirements and is
within thresholds, GotPermits then issues the carrier permits for each of the States along the
requested route. A screen shot of the historical route library function in GotPermits is shown
above in Figure 5.
The Bentley webpage provides the following information on specific GotPermits functionality:
• “Maintain information a
bout your entire fleet and use that information to request
permits from all the agencies supported by the site
• Make requests for more than one agency via a single application process, addressing
all permit and routing requirements
• Perform your own routing using a variety of different routing techniques
• Perform your own job/bid reviews without any cost
• Track your job numbers with specific agency permits
• Request a variety of reports to assist with your accounting and reconciliation
• Pay for any permit with an escrow account or credit card
• Receive immediate, system issued permits for most permit requests.”
51
The GotPermits system architecture is shown in Figure 6. As the figure shows, the user
interface is linked to each State system and processes the permit application according
to each State’s requirements. An example of how this works is shown in Figure 7, which
shows how GotPermits consolidates the information required by each State from the
carrier’s application so the permits can be processed and issued in accordance with State
requirements and thresholds.
5
Information source for GotPermits: https://www.bentley.com/en/products/product-line/asset-performance/gotpermits
43
Figure 6. Bentley Systems GotPermits system architecture.
Agency
Data
Permit & Routing
Rules & Processes
Agency
Data
Multi-Agency
Request Data
Permit & Routing
Rules & Processes
Agency
Data
Permit & Routing
Rules & Processes
User
Interface
User
Interface
User
Interface
PermitXML
PermitXML
Multi-Agency
Rules & Processes
New Methods for Multiple Permits
Multi-Agency
User Interface
Agency Official Multi-Agency
Carrier Permit Site
Source: Bentley
Figure 7. GotPermits permit application data consolidation.
A “Minimum Superset” Application
GotPermits.com will require the
following minimum superset
application data for movement
through States A & B.
Source: Bentley
State A/B App
Truck Make
Truck Model
Truck License
Truck VIN
...
# Axles
Axle Loads
Axle Spacings
# of Tire/Axles
Tire Sizes
Truck Make
Truck Model
Truck License
Truck VIN
...
# Axles
Axle Loads
Axle Spacings
# of Tire/Axles
Tire Sizes
State A Requires State B Requires
Truck License
Truck VIN
...
# Axles
Axle Loads
Axle Spacings
Truck Make
Truck License
Truck VIN
...
# Axles
Axle Loads
Axle Spacings
State C Requires
44
ProMiles Software Development Corporation
ProMiles Software Development Corporation (PSDC) is one of the two primary vendors
providing States with automated OS/OW permit systems. The PSDC solution consists of a
commercial off the shelf (COTS) system that was originally developed for Texas. PSDC has
utilized this same system as the basis for each of the other nine systems it has developed.
PSDC customizes its system to meet the exact needs of the client and does not require the
client to change their processes to fit the system. Because of this, each State or province
utilizes a separate code base. The code in each code base is very similar, but has been
modified to meet the needs of the State or province. Table 3 summarizes the system
components of the ProMiles system:
Component Name Description
Web Interface
Tile Server
The Web Interface is a .NET web-based application that provides the End
User functionality for all system interfaces except mapping.
The Tile Server is a .NET application that provides the base mapping and
the restriction mapping for the system.
Table 3. System components.
Route Server
Runtime Files
The Route Server is a .NET application that provides routing and route
endpoint location lookup for the system.
The Runtime Files are binary files that the Route and Tile Servers utilize
to route trips and create maps.
Runtime File Creation Software
GIS Import Application
Integrated Bridge Analysis
This software component consists of .NET applications that together
take GIS datasets built by the GIS Import Application to make the
Runtime Files utilized by the Route and Tile Servers.
This software pulls in the Department GIS data, and GIS data from other
sources, and combines it into a single GIS dataset. PSDC GIS Specialists
ensure the data is routable and correct.
The Integrated Bridge Analysis is a port of Alberta Transportation’s
FORTRAN or similar Moment Comparison tool into the OS/OW
application.
Drag Route Server
Aerial Imagery/Topo Maps/Etc.
The Drag Route Server is a .NET application that provides support for
the Drag Route function. Once the Drag Route Server has been set up
with a session, it interacts directly with the user.
These are aerial imagery base tiles and other base tiles provided by the
State, province, or other services.
45
Component Name Description
External Bridge Analyses
Database Tables
Restriction Data Import Program
External Bridge Analyses are optional integrations with external Bridge
Analysis Systems.
The database is a standard Microsoft SQL Server relational database
that stores all data except the Runtime Files.
This software component will consist of one or more .NET applications
that will import the restriction data and record it in the Restriction
Database.
Alberta Transportation Bridge
Rating Data Source(s)
Restriction Manager Application
Bridge Rating Data Sources are State or provincial DOT systems that
provide bridge rating data to both internal and external Bridge Analysis
Systems.
The Restriction Manager Application is a web-based application that
provides Agency Users access to the OS/OW routing restrictions.
Reroute Notification Application
CVIEW/SAFER
Email/Fax Services
The Reroute Notification Application is a .NET application that runs as
a scheduled task. This application identifies active permits that violate
restrictions and sends notifications to the Department and to the
customer.
This is an integration with SAFER data using either the jurisdiction’s
CVIEW system or a file from the USDOT SAFER database. The integration
includes carrier and credential information pulled from these sources as
well as permit data pushed to these sources.
The Email/Fax Services are either provided by the State or province or by
PSDC for delivering communication.
Restriction Data Sources
Credit Card Payment Interface
IFTA/IRP, Other Jurisdiction Data
Sources
Restriction data sources are travel alert systems that provide real-time
data for OS/OW restrictions.
This interface in integrated with a credit card processing system.
This is integrated with various State systems to obtain carrier and
credential information for these systems and to push permit data to
these systems.
Table 3. System components. (continued)
The PSDC system has the capability to generate maps that show all State and local roads in a
State using GIS data. The decision to include local roads on State road and individual permit
route maps is up to the State or province.
PSDC’s OS/OW Permit and Routing Systems are designed with a flexible Permit Definition
Interface. This easy to use interface allows Administrative Users to create new Permit
Definitions, deactivate Permit Definitions, and change existing Permit Definitions without any
46
programming. All Permit Definition configuration settings are stored in the database. The
permits can have very complicated fee calculation methods that can be changed by authorized
users without programming. PSDC’s systems utilize this web interface to define permits within
the system instead of using a business rule middleware system. The permit definition fields are
defined in Table 4.
Item Description
Permit name
Template Number
The name of the permit that is displayed on the screen when selecting
the permit type.
The template number that is used for the permit
Table 4. Permit definition fields.
Printed name
Permit description
Effective date and final date
The name printed on the permit. This allows a template to be used for
multiple, similar permit types.
A description of the permit. This description will not be displayed to the
end user.
The dates the permit type becomes valid or the date the permit type
retires. Allows for the creation of a permit type in the system before it
has been authorized for use.
Duration
Min, max, preset width, length,
height, overhang, gross vehicle
weight (GVW)
Commodity type
Width, length, height, overhang
entry allowed flag
Permit end date can be
changed flag
How long the permit is valid. This can be expressed in days, months, or
years, or can be fixed start and end dates.
Minimum, maximum, and preset values for each of width, length, height,
front overhang, rear overhang, and GVW.
If the commodity type is fixed or is one of a set of options.
Flag governing whether the user can enter dimension values.
Flag stating whether the user can shorten the duration length of the
permit. This is used in Texas for routed permits so that a load can be
completed before a restriction starts.
Load description
Width, length, height, overhang
entry required flag
Number of days the permit can be
ordered prior to effective date
Combined length, weight limit
If the load description is fixed or is one of a set of options.
Flag governing whether the user is required to enter dimension values.
Number of days in advance a permit can be ordered.
Combined length and gross vehicle weight limit.
47
Item Description
Axle weight limits
Registration, fuel selection
options
Flags for selecting the axle weight and spacing limits for the permit type.
Flags controlling whether temporary registration or temporary fuel
permits can be added to the permit.
Table 4. Permit definition fields. (continued)
Trailer, truck selection options
Error messages
County selection flag
Flags governing whether the user can or must enter truck and/or trailer
information and the number of trailers that can be added to the permit.
Note: If the permit is for a company or is not vehicle specific, the truck
entry flag will be set to not display a vehicle selection or entry option.
Customizable error messages to display if the user exceeds dimensions
for the permit. Messages can be set for individual dimensions. For
example, a different message can be displayed if the user attempts to
enter a height or a length that exceeds the permit type limits.
Flag stating whether the user must select counties with the application.
has been authorized for use.
Error selection permits
Must mail flag
Self-issue flag
Western Association of State
Highways and Transportation
Officials (WASHTO) flag
Used in conjunction with the error message. This allows the user to
change the permit type if he enters a value that exceeds the requested
permit type limit.
Flag stating whether the permit portable document format (PDF) can be
created by the customer or must be created by an agency user. This is
used for permits that must be printed on special paper or forms, or if a
valid decal must be included with the permit.
Flag stating whether the permit type can be self-issued.
Flag stating whether the permit type is for the Western State Regional
permit. A similar flag can be used to denote multiple agency permits.
Routing required flag
Insurance requirements
Multiple permit selection flags
Flag stating whether the permit type requires routing.
Codes stating what type of valid insurance is necessary for the permit
to be issued.
Flags stating whether the permit type can be used to apply for multiple
permits for multiple vehicles on the same application.
48
Item Description
CVIEW validation flags
Feesoptions
Flags controlling whether the permit type requires CVIEW validation or
other credential validations.
Note: This permit definition field may require customizations for each
jurisdiction’s solution. All such customizations are included in this offer.
Permits that require money to be collected for their issuance will have
one or more fee items. A fee item has the following components.
Name Description
Description Description for the fee item. For example: permit fee,
registration fee, weight fee, etc.
Fund number An identifier that identifies the State/province fund
the fees for this item are to be deposited.
Fee amount The amount of the fee.
Note: If the fees for a permit are to be split between two or more funds,
but the description of the fee item is the same, the user would create
two fee item records for the permit type. For example, suppose the fee
for a permit is $60, the fee is to be described as the permit fee, and
$20.50 is to go to fund 367 and $39.50 is to go to fund 362. The two
fee item records would be as described below:
Description Fund Fee amount
Permit fee 367 20.50
Permit fee 362 39.50
In addition, since the description is the same, the two amounts will be
combined into a single amount on the permit. The order in which the
fees are listed on the permit is specified in the template.
Table 4. Permit definition fields. (continued)
Companion permits
This is used to indicate permits that can be, or must be, used in
conjunction with the permit type.
Curfews
Special items
This provides a method to put curfews on a permit that is not routed.
Curfews can be statements like: Houston City Limits: All loads over 8'6"
wide, 14'0" high, and/or over legal length; No movement; 6-9 am and
4-7 pm; Monday-Friday. Overweight only not affected. Curfews for routed
permits are added using restrictions.
Special items are additional questions or certifications that the permit
applicant must complete. For example, this is used to implement
information used with manufactured housing permits for property tax
reasons and is used to allow the user to certify that they understand
axle weight limits for special hauling permits.
49
Item Description
Permit conditions
Where a permit can be ordered
Sunday travel flag
Self-propelled equipment flag
Include in select list flag
This provides a configurable list of conditions that can be printed on
the permit. These conditions can be based on the vehicle dimensions
or other factors such as vehicle type and load description. Conditions
added to a permit based on the roads traveled are implemented using
restrictions. In PSDC's current systems, this is where the majority of
permit conditions are added to the permits.
A set of locations where the permit can only be ordered.
Flag stating whether the permit can run on Sundays.
Flag stating whether the only vehicle type that can be selected for the
permit is self-propelled equipment.
Flag stating whether the permit type is included in customer permit type
selection list.
Table 4. Permit definition fields. (continued)
Others as required by the State or
province
TBD
Holiday blackout flag
Saturday travel flag
Renewal letter template
Surety bond requirements
Flag stating whether the permit has an exception to holiday blackout
periods.
Flag stating whether the permit can run on Saturdays.
Template number for renewal letter if applicable.
Codes indicating what type of surety bond is required for the permit type.
PSDC noted that developing and testing the technical capability to electronically import an
OS/OW permit into an on-board navigation system represents the next significant step for
automated OS/OW permitting. This functionality will incorporate the permit route directly into
the on-board navigation system and provide voice-directions to the driver. While there are
liability issues involved with this practice (i.e., a permit error would place liability on the issuing
State), there is a potentially significant safety benefit offered by a driver being able to access
permit route information in a hands-free environment.
The following representative screen shots in Figure 8. Company dashboard and Figure 9 show
the Company Dashboard a customer accesses when logging into a PSDC OS/OW system,
in this case Colorado and Georgia, and the agency dashboard an agency user accesses,
respectively. Both screen shots include the functional links each type of user will be able to
access when using the system.
50
Figure 8. Company dashboard.
51
Figure 9. Agency dashboard.
Oxcart Permits Systems
Oxcart Permits Systems offers a web-based application that links local permitting agencies and
trucking companies in need of permits.
To utilize the Oxcart application, carriers and local government permitting agencies need to
establish a free account with Oxcart. For government permitting offices, the Oxcart application
is tailored to meet local ordinances and threshold requirements. Oxcart is developing a GIS
mapping system that will allow users to expand, collapse, and manipulate a map to identify
routes and restrictions. Local government agencies will be able to drag and drop permanent
and temporary route restrictions and the system will be updated to generate a notice to all
open permit holders of changes in route restrictions.
For carriers, they will submit all local permit applications, including the requested route through
the Oxcart Web-based application. Oxcart in turn processes and submits thepermit application
with the requested route and all other required permit information to the appropriate local
permitting agencies. Once the application is completed, Oxcart submits the permit application
to the local permitting agencies for review and approval. Once the permit is approved and
52
Oxcart receives notice, Oxcart in turn provides the carrier with the permit. The carrier may
download and print the permit or access the permit on a smartphone, tablet, or other
electronic communications devices.
The Oxcart application currently provides a vehicle library function where carriers can add,
delete, and clone an unlimited number of vehicles and combinations of vehicles.Oxcart
will have a complete route library function with the development of their new GIS mapping
system.Oxcart also allows carriers to store company information and payment data to speed
the submission process.Payments are routed through Oxcart via credit card, which is the only
form of payment that Oxcart currently authorizes.
Additional information on the Oxcart application is available at: https://www.oxcartpermits.com/
9. Literature Review Findings
The survey of State oversize/overweight (OS/OW) automated permitting systems identified
functionalities common to all or most States, as shown in Table 5. All States include
permanent and temporary route restrictions in their permit routing algorithms and all include
height restrictions. The States either use “minimum of the maximum” height thresholds for
bridges or other structures with variable lane heights or do not auto-issue permits for these
types of structures. All systems include edit checks based on existing State rules that ensure
permit applications are linked to the correct type of permit. Each State’s system also includes a
library function that allows carriers to store company data, power unit and trailer configuration
information, and information on previously issued permits. Some States have also developed
State-approved routes for certain types of loads that carriers may also use when requesting
permits. Where there is significant variation between States is with respect to local roads and
local permit requirements. While most States include local roads on their State road maps,
very few issue local permits. Most States do provide at a minimum a web-link to local permit
agency points of contact.
53
Table 5. Summary of State information scan.
Table 1 C
System Feature Kansas
North
Dakota Iowa
Colo
rado Nebraska
Mary
land Illinois Texas Georgia
Map with complete
State and local roads
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Ability to issue local
permits
Pilot
Test
Pilot
Test
Yes Yes
Imbedded link to local
permit information
Yes Yes
Separate link to local
permit information
Yes Yes Yes
Auto-routing around
route restrictions
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Permanent route
restrictions identified
on map
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Temporary route
restriction information
updated to system as
received
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Height threshold
included in system –
permanent and
temporary
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Edit checks linking
permit application with
correct permit type
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Library function
including carrier
information, power
units, trailer
configurations, and
previous permits
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Electronic payment –
credit card, PayPal,
escrow account
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Notice of changes in
route restrictions and
permit status issued to
all holders of open
permits
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1
54
The results of the environmental scan on OS/OW permitting best practices provide strong
support for the use of automated OS/OW permitting systems. All States interviewed for the
environmental scan indicated that:
• Data quality and information exchange between State agencies and districts/regions
has significantly improved as a result of implementing automated permitting systems.
The use of automated systems requires substantial baseline data on such issues
as route restrictions (bridge height, per-axle, and gross vehicle weight limits) so that
permits can be properly processed and issued within specified thresholds.
• Improved data quality has significantly improved permit accuracy for auto-issued
permits.
• The continuing updates of potential route restrictions – construction activities, work
zones, traffic incidents, weather events – provided to permitting offices by State
districts/regions ensures that new permits issued for OS/OW loads can reroute around
restrictions that change the status of a permit, thus avoiding potential safety issues and
infrastructure damage.
• The tracking of open permits and notification to carriers of changes in permit status
provides the same safety and infrastructure protection benefits. Carriers are able to
update permits and reroute around unexpected route restrictions.
• Most infrastructure damage, in particular bridge hits, is caused by carriers deviating
from a permitted route or operating without a permit with operator error cited as the
primary cause.
In addition, States are expanding the use of automated permitting systems to enhance the
safe and efficient movement of OS/OW loads:
• Maryland and Georgia both issue permits on behalf of local jurisdictions and Maryland
also issues permits for the Port of Baltimore. Colorado is conducting a pilot project with
the city of Denver to issue local permits on behalf of the city.
• Colorado and Iowa have established interfaces with each State’s CVIEW to check if a
carrier applying for a permit has any outstanding OOS or other violations that would
prevent the carrier from receiving an OS/OW permit. Colorado has further established a
program whereby a non-compliant carrier must resolve any outstanding OOS orders and
receive a training from the State before additional permits will be approved.
Based on the comprehensive environmental scan and State and industry survey responses,
the benefits of automated OS/OW permitting can be grouped under two primary criteria:
• Safety: for example, enhancing safety through improved information sharing and better
quality data, reducing permit error rates and, notifying open permit holders on a near
real-time basis of changes in route restrictions that require amendments to existing
permits.
• Efficiency: for example, reduced permit turnaround time for carriers and an increase in
the number of auto-issued permits that in turn allow State permit office personnel to
focus on the more complicated OS/OW load movements.
55
10. Pilot Car Training and Certification Programs
The pilot car training and certification programs environmental scan was conducted by:
• Reviewing the deliver
ables from the Pilot/Escort Vehicle Operator training materials
and model certification whitepaper project, in particular the following documents:
∘ 2016 Pilot/Escort Vehicle Operator (P/EVO) Best Practices Guidelines.
∘ 2016 P/EVO Best Practices Guidelines for Law Enforcement Escorts.
∘ 2016 P/EVO Model Certification Whitepaper.
∘ 2016 P/EVO Training Manual.
• Conducting an interview with the National Pilot Car Association.
Reference #1: Federal Highway Administration, P/EVO 2016 Best Practices Guidelines, FHWA-
HOP-16-051 (Washington, DC: FHWA, 2016).
The Best Practices Guidelines document summarizes the results of extensive research, review,
and analysis of existing P/EVO training materials, laws and rules relevant to P/EVOs, and case
studies and other information focused on the movement of oversize loads. The document
includes sections on:
• Pre-trip planning, including assignment confirmation, route review, escort vehicle and
equipment preparation, and driver document checklist.
• Pre-trip safety meeting, including a review of task assignments, communications
planning, communications equipment testing, and a review of load limitations and the
permitted route.
• Load movement, including knowing the load, knowing the laws and regulatory
requirements for each jurisdiction that is included along the route, knowing how to
position vehicles in compliance with State regulations and permit requirements, and
preparing for load movement.
• Traffic control, including knowing the laws about flagging and traffic control authority
in each jurisdiction, what equipment to have and how to use it, and defensive flagging
guidelines.
• Special challenges, such as railroad crossing, operating with a tillerman on a steerable
trailer, and tall loads and overhanging obstructions.
• Emergency planning and preparedness, including what to plan for and ensuring that
contact information is on-hand.
• Conducting post trip activities once the load is delivered.
• Conducting a post-trip evaluation and assessment.
The document was used to identify the technical content that State training and certification
courses should include to ensure that P/EVOs have the necessary core competencies to
operate safely and meet State certification requirements.
56
Reference #2: Federal Highway Administration, 2016 P/EVO Model Certification Whitepaper,
FHWA-HOP-16-052 (Washington, DC: FHWA 2016).
At present, there is neither a national certification program for P/EVOs nor any national
guidelines for States to follow to harmonize training and certification requirements. The intent
of the Model Certification Whitepaper is to provide States with a framework that can be used in
conjunction with the 2016 P/EVO Best Practices Guidelines and training course to harmonize
training and certification requirements. The Whitepaper is based on the use of the Best
Practices Guidelines as de facto national guidelines and outlines the process by which States
can use these and establish harmonized certification programs. The Whitepaper is designed
to be flexible to accommodate State-specific requirements and the use of the Whitepaper by a
State or States is voluntary.
The proposed model certification framework includes the following provisions:
Purpose
Program Governance
Initial Certification
Recertification
Voluntary program to promote harmonization of State pilot/escort
vehicle operator (P/EVO) training and certification requirements.
To encourage reciprocity among States based on consistent training
requirements.
State designates a lead agency responsible for program management
and oversight.
State establishes certification and recertification criteria.
The lead State agency is responsible for determining the delivery model
of training and certification programs – State personnel, third-party
service provider, or academic institution.
The lead State agency is responsible for issuing certification credentials
to P/EVOs and maintaining a database of certified P/EVOs in the State
both newly certified and recertified.
Certification is based on demonstrating understanding of training
materials and any State-specific requirements.
Certification is based on passing a post-course test that assesses
understanding of materials presented in each course module and
overall course.
Certification is valid for 4 years.
State will establish recertification criteria.
Recertification is based on demonstrating continued understanding of
training materials, State-specific requirements, and the passing of a
post-course test.
Lead State agency will oversee recertification program and issue P/EVO
recertification credentials.
57
Program Operations Training and certification program materials available to all States.
Best Practice Guidelines serve as nationally accepted guidelines for
training and certification.
Training is conducted using model training program materials.
Lead State agency will oversee distribution of training materials and
test bank questions to trainers – State personnel, third-party service
providers.
Lead State agency will review test results and other certification criteria
established by the State and issue P/EVO certification credentials to
successful applicants.
The model framework was used to identify best practices criteria for program governance and
certification/recertification requirements.
National Pilot Car Association Interview
An interview with the National Pilot Car Association included a wide-ranging discussion of many
topics, including the identification of States with training and certification programs that match
well with the Best Practice Guidelines and the Model Certification Framework. The States
identified were Washington State, Utah, Colorado, Oklahoma and Florida. The details of that
interview are provided in the next section of this report.
11. Pilot Car Training and Certification Best Practices
The Pilot Car Training and Certification Best Practices Criteria were developed using the
results of the National Pilot Car Association interviews and the reviews of the 2016 Pilot/
Escort Vehicle Operator (P/EVO) Best Practices Guidelines, the P/EVO Law Enforcement Best
Practices, and the P/EVO Model Certification Framework Whitepaper and are presented in
Table 6
58
T
able 6. Proposed pilot car training and certification best practices criteria.
Safety BenefitBest Practice
FHWA Pilot Car/Law Enforcement Best Practice
Resources
1. Best Practices Guidelines.
2. Best Practices Guidelines for Law Enforcement
Escorts.
3. Training Manual.
4. Student Study Guide.
5. Certification Course.
Reciprocity with Other States
Program Management
1. State had designated lead agency responsible for
program management and oversight.
2. State-established certification and recertification
criteria.
3. State-approved training and certification
program.
Enforcement
• Safer Roads.
• Preservation of
I
nfrastructure.
• Pilot/Escort Vehicle
Operator (P/EVO)
crossing State lines
have received training
in core competencies
and safe operations.
• Training satisfies
State certification
requirements.
• Law enforcement
are trained in P/EVO
operations.
• Enforcement
inspections of OS/OW
loads includes check
of P/EVO certification.
• P/EVOs able to
operate in multiple
States with approved
training certificate.
• Training is consistent
with and meets State
requirements.
• Law enforcement
are trained in P/EVO
operations.
Efficiency Benefit
59
Tab
le 6. Proposed pilot car training and certification best practices criteria. (continued)
Safety BenefitBest Practice
Training and Certification
1. Addresses core competencies.
• Pre-trip planning, including route surveys.
• Pre-trip safety meeting.
• Load movement and communications.
• Traffic control.
• Railroad crossings.
• Tall loads and overhead obstructions.
• Tillerman operations.
• Emergency procedures.
• Post-trip review.
2. Issuance of certificate contingent on passing final
course exam.
• P/EVOs are at a
minimum provided
with training on
all aspects of pilot
escort operations.
• P/EVOs must
demonstrate
at a minimum
understanding of core
competencies.
• Training can be
delivered by any
State-approved
provider as long
as training is
consistent with State
requirements.
Efficiency Benefit
State Pilot Certification Programs
Table 7 lists 14 States currently with some form of pilot training/certification programs. Column
two lists States that accept/honor certifications from other States. Column three lists the
websites for reference.
Table 7. State pilot car certifications.
State Reciprocity States Website
AL
AL
FL
MN
GA
CO
CO, FL, NC, UT, VA, WA
AZ, CO, GA, MN, NC, OK, PA, VA, WA, WI
CO, FL, NC, OK, UT, WA
AZ, CO, FL, NC, OK, OR, UT, VA, & WA. We
accept AZ, CO, UT but they do not reciprocate
with us. We reciprocate (it goes both ways) with
NC, FL, OK VA, and WA.
AZ, FL, MN, OK, UT, WA
http://www.codot.gov/business/permits/
truckpermits/pilot-car-certification-information.html
http://www.techtransfer.ce.ufl.edu/t2ctt/pe_faqs.
asp
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/cvo/oversize/escort_
vehicles.pdf
http://www.dot.ga.gov/ps/permits/
oversizepermits#tab-1
60
State Reciprocity States Website
NC
UT
WI
NY
VA
WA
PA
OK
Reciprocity: FL, GA, OK, WA. Accept
certifications: CO, MN, NY, NC, UT, VA
AZ, CO, FL, MN, NC, OK, VA, WA
No other certifications accepted.
FL, GA, MN, NC, OK, UT, WA
CO, GA, MN, NC, OK, UT, VA
Accept certifications in GA, CO/UT (RSA
Network), NC, VA
CO, FL, GA, MN, NC, UT, WA
https://connect.ncdot.gov/business/trucking/
pages/overpermits.aspx
https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/
f?p=100:pg:0:::1:T,V:393,26372
http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/dmv/com-drv-
vehs/mtr-car-trkr/osow-requirements.aspx
https://dmv.ny.gov/more-info/escort-driver-
certification
https://www.dmv.virginia.gov/drivers/#escrt/
index.asp
https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/
commercialvehicle/pilotcar.htm
Table 7. State pilot car certifications. (continued)
National Pilot Car Association
NPCA http://www.nationalpca.org/ and its representatives have played a significant role in
recent developments involving State pilot training/certification, including participation in
drafting the recently published FHWA Pilot Car Training and Certification Best Practices.
As part of this report, NPCA President Mike Morgan of Pit Row Services, Inc. was interviewed
and provided the following response:
“After the Skagit River bridge collapse in 2013, it was apparent that we as a
nation needed to revisit the idea of a National Certification Program for the
nation’s P/EVOs. The 2004 Best Practices material no longer met the needs of
an expanding industry. As the loads continue to grow ever larger, we must seek
ways to protect the public, infrastructure, and the loads themselves. The newly
released 2017 Best Practices is much more in depth as to the responsibilities
of all parties that are required to move the oversize loads across this nation. The
current dilemma we face now is getting all States on the same page and having
them require PEVOs to be adequately trained. There are currently only 12 States
that have some type of certification to ensure the safety of their motoring public.
This needs to change as quickly as possible.
61
The questions that face us now is how do we get the remaining States to buy
in and use the Best Practices to their advantage. Many new questions must
be answered, as to the amount of insurance and type of insurance. Currently,
States and trucking firms require General Liability and Auto Liability, which does
not provide enough coverage to instill a professional atmosphere. The current
PEVO bears no responsibility when accidents happen because their vehicle
must be involved in the accident. The PEVO industry realizes this and with no
responsibility comes a non-professional PEVO. The answer to this is to demand
that every PEVO carry Errors and Omissions Insurance, which simply means
that if due to deficient performance on the part of the PEVO they are tied to the
accident without being involved in the actual crash or the damage to the State’s
infrastructure.
Another question that has surfaced is how do we measure the knowledge of a
newly certified PEVO? Many programs currently allow for open book tests, and
it is my belief that this allows for sub-standard PEVOs to make their way into our
industry. Not everyone is able to become a PEVO and a closed book test would
ensure that future PEVOs would commit the knowledge to memory, which would
better serve the industry. We addressed the principal part of training, and the
industry for the most part has totally ignored the practical side of training. The
PEVO driver is not unlike the truck driver, they must understand how the load,
trailer, terrain, and many other areas affect the movement of the OS/OW load.
This can only be accomplished by some degree of actual hands-on training. The
evolution of the current truck schools, which has allowed for better truck drivers,
is a good example of where and how the PEVO education process should be
approached. I feel that the practical side of training will be an outgrowth of the
certification process as more and more States realize the dangers in moving OS/
OW loads.
The PEVO industry is deficient in several areas and two that are contributing to
accidents are the lack of training for High Pole loads and Route Surveys. The
conversation currently is leaning toward a tiered training program that would
allow separate training on each of these and for possible endorsements on
State licenses, not unlike a commercial driver’s license (CDL), which would help
trucking firms hire qualified individuals. The industry is experiencing entirely too
much infrastructure damage due to surveys being done on Google maps and
PEVOs not having the proper training on how to move high loads.
We at the NPCA strive to keep the 2017 Best Practices at the forefront of our
industry, and this in part and with the continued effort from the Best Practices
Advisory Council has led to a natural outgrowth of another newly formed
group known as NAPVSA – North American Pilot Vehicle Safety Alliance – a
group of stakeholders from all segments of the industry. This group of industry
representatives is striving to create an atmosphere of cooperation between
States, national government, trucking, PEVOs, manufactures, and others to
create a professional atmosphere for the benefit of the motoring public. They are
62
currently diligently working on an agreement that will benefit all concerned. This
agreement is clearly defining the responsibilities of all parties and what each
should expect from each other.”
Mr. Morgan is confident that the 2017 Best Practices is a good blueprint for advancing safety
in an industry that is ready to embrace a better way of doing things. As States move forward
with Best Practices and begin to realize that an effective way to improve safety, reduce
infrastructure damage, and bring about harmonization is through the combined effort of
certification. Another benefit is the PEVO industry will indeed begin to earn the respect it so
desires.
North American Pilot Vehicle Safety Alliance
North American Pilot Vehicle Safety Alliance (NAPVSA) was formed in 2016 as an
outgrowth of the Advisory Council of the FHWA Pilot Best Practices project. Organizers
report the organization is expected to eventually contain a diverse group of stakeholders
from industries of pilots, specialized transportation carriers, insurance, legal, law
enforcement, and government. Among NAPVSA’s goals and objectives include:
• To aid, support, and promote the safe movement of over-dimensional loads by providing
leadership to the Pilot/Escort Industry, Transportation Industry, Law Enforcement,
Governmental Agencies, and other affected Industries.
• To be recognized as the international entity relating to the safe movement of over
dimensional loads.
Leadership: To inspire, influence, and support all entities involved with the movement of over-
dimensional loads.
Integrity: Providing aid, support, and assistance to those involved with the movement of over-
dimensional loads.
Teamwork: Working together to achieve common goals and create partnerships to enhance
our effectiveness.
Organization & Goals:
Identify individuals within the various industries and agencies that can aid and assist with the
development of processes and procedures relating to the movement of over-dimensional loads
Develop a plan that would create a standardized format that will improve information
dissemination between this entity, the Pilot/Escort Industry, the Transportation Industry and
the effected Governmental Agencies.
Identify and utilize opportunities to convey the organizational message with the Pilot/Escort
and Transportation Industry, elected officials, regulatory leaders, media, and the public as a
whole.
63
Identify variations and or shortcomings in education and training requirements of all involved
with the movement of an over-dimensional load and develop and promote standardization for
North America.
Utilizing expertise, identify areas where information must be obtained so as to aid and assist in
the decision-making processes.
Identify a format and or path to assist in the collection and use of accurate real-time data to
drive insurance and risk issues.
Promote standardization of Laws, Rules, and Regulations relating to the movement of over-
dimensional loads.
Promote standardized enforcement of size and weight Laws, Rules, and Regulations and
education of Law Enforcement in compliance-related issues.
Promote the collaboration with national and international organizations with similar goals and
values.
Influence positive public and private entity direction in all aspects of the movement of over-
dimensional load throughout North America.
Charter members of NAPVSA include:
∘ Ed Bernard, General Manager, Precision Specialized Division Inc.
∘ Louis Juneau, President, NOVA Permits & Pilot Cars
∘ Maureen Mandich, President, New York Truck Escort & Permits
∘ Mike Morgan, President, Pit Row Services and National Pilot Car Association
∘ Rick Radcliffe, High Transit LLC
∘ Rob Simon, Vice President Heavy Haul, Bennett Motor Express
∘ Randy Sorenson, President, RSA Network Inc.
∘ Steven Todd, Vice President, Specialized Carriers & Rigging Association
∘ Dan Wells, Manager, Colorado Department of Transportation
