1 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated One Stop Shop Permitting Dan Vogen, Bentley Systems

2 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting - Historically Carriers must apply directly with each jurisdiction –Each application requires re-keying, effort duplication –Applications may be processed & issued “out of order” –Cross-border routing issues may invalidate first permits OR Carriers go through a service to get their permits –Work is reduced for the carrier but the service has the same duplication and other issues as described above OR Applicants use a “regional” permit (where available) –Routes and vehicle size options are limited –One jurisdiction issues on another’s behalf The issuer may not have all the latest data The agency being issued for does not get permit data for enforcement or historical tracking Agencies build “accounts payable” with the receiving agency having no data to validate

3 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated New Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting Approaches Consolidated (Integrated) System –Goal: Provide one system with combined permitting rules, routing data, fee collection, permit issuance –Pros: Users use one system – all app entry, routing, and payment is consolidated Agencies purchase / build and maintain one system –Cons: Multiple agencies must work together to “combine” permit rules, routing data, permit output, … Agencies must collaborate regularly on data maintenance, restriction management, … versus Interfaced (Connected) Systems

4 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Consolidated (Integrated) Systems Permit Services Carriers Various Agency Users All Integrated into One System Carriers

5 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated New Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting Approaches Consolidated (Integrated) System versus Interfaced (Connected) Systems –Goal: Each jurisdiction maintains control over their system with a “front-end” system interfaced, one-stop approach –Pros: Users use one system (the “front end”) – all app entry, routing, and payment is consolidated Jurisdiction’s maintain control over their own systems and don’t need all the inter-agency personal data & rule coordination –Cons: Agencies must purchase / build and maintain their own systems All systems must be able to “talk” to the front-end (interface / connect) The interfaced system is dependent on all systems being available

6 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Integrated Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting Permit Services Carriers Front- End Agency Carriers & Services can interact directly with the individual agencies

7 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting Approaches Consolidated (Integrated) System - examples –WV – State DOT with all county roads & Turnpike –MD – State HA & Baltimore City –NC – State DOT with all county roads –MB – Province IT, Winnipeg & Brandon –NJ – State DOT & Turnpike –IA – State DOT with all county roads & all local roads (w/o granting permission for local road travel yet) versus Interfaced (Connected) Systems - examples –GotPermits – AL, OH, MN, NE, NJ, SD, WI, WV…

8 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Multi-Jurisdiction Permitting Approaches Requirements / How To… –Consolidated (Integrated) System Legal or other MOU between the various agencies Determination of system “owner” Determination of “roles” of various agency users Integration or separate definitions of rules, fees, data, … versus –Interfaced (Connected) Systems Adhere to a common “communication protocol” Maintain a front-end that manages the communication with the standalone agency systems

9 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Interfacing / Connecting -> “PermitXML” Anyone can use PermitXML –Enables carrier direct entry from carrier systems –Enables permit service automation from permit service systems –Enables the creation of new multi-jurisdiction processes Results in Multi-Agency without Compromises –Full agency systems are used –All routing is done based on technology and data in the agency –Restrictions are all managed within the agency –Fees are collected immediately by the agency systems –Permit documents are stored / available in the agency

10 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Future Direction Both approaches - Consolidated (Integrated) & Interfaced (Connected) – have justification, benefits, and ideal situations for implementation An agency may use both approaches (WV is a good example) Either method results in a win-win for industry Bentley will support both approaches and will work with both agencies and industry in their implementations

11 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Questions

12 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated

13 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Additional Slides May be used for clarification and pictorial explanation

14 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated State-Specific Permit & Routing Data Current Individual State Permitting Permit and Routing Business Rules & Processes State-Specific and General

15 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Current Methods for Multiple Permits State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface CARRIER STATE OFFICES State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface

16 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface Current Methods for Multiple Permits CARRIER STATE OFFICES PERMIT SERVICE

17 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated Current Methods for Multiple Permits SASHTO / WASHTO / MASTO / Multi-State Agreements on May be processed by 1 state Based on “general” rules / restrictions for all other states Fees collected and disseminated to other states Where is our money? What is happening to our bridges? Where is my record of the permit? Can anyone else really keep up with our construction? BUT…

18 | | © 2014 Bentley Systems, Incorporated New Method for Multiple Permits STATE OFFICES CARRIER MULTI-STATE PERMIT SITE State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface State Data Permit & Routing Rules & Processes User Interface PermitXML Multi-State Request Data Multi-State Rules & Processes