Transportation Commission TAC approves five policy decisions for road‑charge pilot testing

The Transportation Commission’s Technical Advisory Committee on (road) charges approved five high‑level policy decisions on the design of a statewide road‑charge pilot at a meeting in Monterey County, moving the project into a testing phase that staff and contractors will carry into June and July.

Shannon, a staff presenter, told the committee the decisions are intended to narrow options for measurement and reporting while keeping the pilot flexible enough to test interoperability and market approaches. “It just means that there’s an agreed upon set of communications protocols that states can use to share a reasonable amount of information,” Shannon said, describing interoperability as a way to allocate road‑use revenue based on where miles are driven rather than where fuel is purchased.

Why it matters: The votes put the pilot on a path to test multiple technical and administrative models — manual permits, automated in‑vehicle devices and smartphone/telematics options — and to evaluate whether the state should require systems that can work with other states’ pilots. The committee also approved a public outreach baseline — a statewide telephone survey and focus groups — to measure attitudes before and after pilot outreach.

What the committee decided

- Measurement and reporting methods to be carried forward: staff recommended, and the committee approved, manual options including time permits, mileage permits and odometer reporting (prepay and postpay) for further evaluation during the pilot. The committee moved and seconded the recommendation and it passed unanimously. No specific enforcement regime was adopted at the meeting.

- Automated technologies to be carried forward: the TAC approved testing device options that include a plug‑in device (sometimes called a “dongle”), smartphone‑based reporting and telematics supplied by vehicle manufacturers or providers. Committee members also agreed to remove engine run‑time options previously discussed.

- Inclusion of out‑of‑state vehicles in the pilot: the TAC approved including out‑of‑state motorists who drive on California roads in the pilot design so the state can study cross‑border measurement and revenue allocation. Staff noted inclusion can be simulated if other states’ pilots are not active at the same time.

- Testing interoperability: the TAC approved testing interoperability with other states (or simulating it), which staff described as using a common data message and shared data elements (for example vehicle identifier, miles driven and method of measurement) to settle where revenue should flow.

- Multiple account managers: the TAC approved testing a multiple account manager model rather than limiting the pilot to a single state account manager. Staff said multiple managers would allow testing of an “open system” approach, increase market participation and provide better lessons on privacy protections, data reporting and customer service, while acknowledging that a multi‑vendor pilot may be costlier.

Votes and procedure

Committee members moved and seconded each staff recommendation in sequence. The chair called for voice votes on each item; the meeting record shows each motion carried unanimously. The transcripts and meeting discussion show no formal roll‑call vote listing individual yes/no tallies.

Context and constraints discussed

Staff and committee members emphasized that the pilot will not collect cash flows during the test unless the legislature grants authority. “I don’t believe the legislation gave us the authority to actually collect revenue,” Norma Ortega said, noting the department’s intent to simulate billing and, if directed, to escalate to simulated payment exchanges rather than transfer of funds.

Shannon and others described how interoperability can be tested even if another state does not have an active program: by recruiting volunteers who commute across state lines or by simulating cross‑state account registrations in the pilot back office.

Staff also outlined operational requirements should the TAC pursue multiple account managers: solicitation and contracting of multiple managers, certification criteria (privacy, data security, mileage measurement and reporting), and a state capability to receive and process data from multiple providers. Staff noted that self‑certification is possible but would require a rigorous state audit function.

Public engagement and research

The committee approved a public baseline research plan to measure Californians’ attitudes. “We’re proposing talking to 900 residents across the state,” Sue Midg Hall, president of DHM Research, said. Staff said the telephone survey would run roughly 10 minutes with about 25 questions, include multi‑language interviewers, and aim to produce preliminary results in June with follow‑up focus groups in late June or early July. Focus groups (staff proposed four groups of eight‑to‑nine participants) will explore motivations, privacy concerns and message framing.

Speakers from the public and stakeholder groups urged robust education and outreach. Norm Groot of the Monterey County Farm Bureau said the pilot “affords an opportunity to determine how much of a paradigm shift we need to account for in educating the public.” Debbie Hale, executive director of a Monterey County transportation agency, thanked the committee for probing funding stability, equity and implementation issues and urged the committee to keep regional agencies involved.

Next steps

Staff listed six follow‑up items for future meetings, including monthly website analytics, a briefing from an NCHRP panel representative, a summary of Western regional projects, outreach to agricultural stakeholders, a privacy discussion at the next meeting, and renaming the term “UBI”/“dongle.” Staff also said they will return with more detail on Oregon’s pilot as that program approaches an early‑July launch.

Ending

Committee members emphasized that the decisions are not final: staff will use the pilot to learn which measurement approaches and market structures work best and will return to the TAC with refined recommendations. The meeting adjourned with the TAC scheduled to meet next in Fresno.