Electronic Credentials Task Force (ECTF)

Transcription

1 Electronic Credentials Task Force (ECTF) The Brown Hotel, Citation Room August 1 2, 2017 Attendees: Jeff Hood, IN, Chair Jay Sween, WI, Vice-Chair Tim Adams, IRP Inc. Lonette Turner, IFTA, Inc. Steven Haywood, BC Deann Williams, KS Mark Bell, KY Brian Beaven, KY Garry Hinkley, ME Scott Greenawalt, OK Peter Hurst, ON Robert Pitcher, ATA Anne Ferro, AAMVA Mekala Joy, AAMVA Allison Fradette, CCMTA Collin Mooney, CVSA Tom Kelly, FMCSA Jeff Speigel, Penske Truck Leasing, A meeting of ECTF met on August 1 and 2, 2017 at the Brown Hotel in Louisville, KY. The agenda was established to provide definition and direction to the electronic credentialing project by gathering experts and stakeholders in the motor vehicle registration, licensing and law enforcement communities. A definition of an electronic credential was put forth, as An electronic IRP and IFTA record that improves compliance and enforcement in North America. System and Project Needs Lists of system and project needs for the establishment of an electronic verification system. System needs include: Accurate data Uniform specs Data quality control Validation or verification of edits of data Clearinghouses For the project, the following needs were identified: Skillsets Communication o Crafting the message o Creating storylines to support the groups target Marketing Political IT

2 Education Training Plan and Agreement expertise Support Industry Manufacturers Political Enforcement Financial Organizational leadership (boards) Expertise needed Technical Legal Roadside Enforcement Deskside Administration Deskside audit U.S. and Canadian Industry UCR Challenges Challenges were identified that could impede the successful implementation of the project. One institutional challenge lies in incorporating the opportunities and limitations from jurisdictions in the United States and Canada into a single functioning electronic verification system. Other challenges include: Privacy concerns Data quality Stakeholder buy-in Gaining financial support Securing political support Time and resource justification Connectivity issues Organizational support o Financial o Political Managing expectations Current systems presentations

3 Presentations of existing systems were made by Brian Beaven (Kentucky), Scott Greenawalt (Oklahoma), Tom Kelly (FMCSA) and Allison Fradette (CCMTA). The benefits and challenges of each system were discussed, as well as the applicability of the systems to the ECTF project. The group decided that a vehicle s VIN might be used as a single identifier. The VIN will have to be linked to an associated IFTA account to verify active credentials. Systems comparison presentation A presentation by Mekala Joy from AAMVA detailed the alternatives available from a technological standpoint for the ECTF. Mekala provided an overview of a centralized database, a non-centralized database and a pointer system. After some discussion of the three system types, a distinction was made between a centralized database, based on the existing SAFER system, operated by the FMCSA and a new centralized database, likely operated by IRP and/or IFTA. In addition, the possibility of a hybrid system was discussed. A hybrid system could include elements of systems already in place in the U.S. and Canada with a pointer system interface between them. ECTF Parameters The ECTF developed guiding principles and business requirements for consideration in the development of an international electronic verification system. The guiding principles and business requirements were reviewed to ensure that the lists did not contain contradictory items. Guiding Principles North America inclusiveness Governance o Liability o Control Data quality Security Improve efficiency and accuracy for key stakeholders Meets business requirements Cost Timely data retrieval Stakeholder buy-in Minimize duplication Flexibility/scalable Leverage existing technology Reporting ability Business requirements

4 Accurately tie IFTA license to IRP registration at vehicle level Consistent identifier-universal electronic identifier-by vehicle Standard data field validation Adhere to data specifications by detailing a common data format Real-time data updates or at least one update per business day Data security User-friendly application Acceptable response time Deskside accessibility, 24 hours/7 days, including system notifications Canned and ad hoc reporting capabilities Respect for jurisdictional sovereignty Mobile device accessibility Scalable to access other data sources in the future, phase 1 focus on IFTA/IRP Address requirements to access historical data Evaluation of alternatives Once the guiding principles and business rules were established, the system alternatives were evaluated to determine whether any of the alternatives could be eliminated by these guidelines. During this evaluation, the use of the current SAFER centralized database and a non-centralized database were eliminated as alternatives. The remaining alternatives, a new centralized database and a hybrid system based on a pointer system were discussed. The working group will establish a sub-group to study the alternatives. The parameters of these systems are detailed below. New Centralized Database Owned or operated by a non-governmental entity, such as IRP and/or IFTA New uploads would be necessary to provide the credentialing verification data Uploads include only information necessary to verify current credential and registration status Would not eliminate the possibility to screen for intra-state and intra-provincial uses Possibility of Canadian disagreement with data currently uploaded to a central database being used for alternative use Hybrid System with a pointer system For each VIN number, the index would point to the source location designated by the home jurisdiction of that VIN to return the relevant information Could point to jurisdictions system or a vendor system, it could point to SAFER or any other source Contains an index that directs query to the correct system The pointer is maintained by some entity

5 Jurisdictions must update data for pointer index with new plate and VIN details User does not have to know the jurisdiction to query Could help to identify fraud, if a plate exists in multiple jurisdictions ECTF planning To further acceptance of the ECTF, the working group supports the development of the following communication guidelines for the working group: Start with a high-level, controlled message Avoid overpromising When asked questions, solicit perspectives, rather than offering opinions Present ultimate goals: o Single point credential verification o Level playing field o Support IRP and IFTA enforcement o Eliminate paper (IRP cab card and IFTA license and decals) o Improved compliance o Positive revenue impact o Reduced cost for jurisdictions and industry, over time o Reduction in fraud o Improved, complete data quality o Improved accessibility to accurate data o Improved efficiency o Allow interface with existing systems o Flexible and scalable o Inclusive Opportunities for sharing the message: boxes to receive questions can be added to the IFTA and IRP websites FAQs developed from questions received can be distributed Attendees to the IFTA ABM industry meeting will reintroduce and discuss this topic Additional upcoming meetings include: o AAMVA meeting in October o CCMTA board meeting November o Managers and Law Enforcement meeting in September o AIS and AAMVA board meetings o AAMVA Region III meeting o CCMTA board meeting o IFTA/IRP Audit workshop o IRP annual meeting o CVSA meetings