Comments on FTPBP #1 - 2017
Jurisdiction Position Comments

ALABAMA
Support

ALBERTA
Support

BRITISH COLUMBIA
Support

CONNECTICUT
Support

ILLINOIS
Support

INDIANA
Support

KANSAS
Support

MAINE
Support

MANITOBA
Support

MICHIGAN
Undecided Currently, we utilize and encourage our carriers to obtain a Temporary Decal Permit (R650), which adequately addresses this issue.  The temporary decal permit is vehicle specific and provides a document trail for audit.  We are not necessarily opposed to the ballot at this time, but would like to evaluate it's necessity.

MINNESOTA
Support Minnesota is supportive of the ballot proposal and the effective date.

MISSISSIPPI
Support

MONTANA
Support Support if ballot #2 passes requiring serialized decals.

NEVADA
Support

NEW BRUNSWICK
Support

NEW HAMPSHIRE
Support

NORTH CAROLINA
Undecided By not affixing the decal to the vehicle, there is concern carriers could move unaffixed decals between vehicles and not properly report. It may be more difficult to track vehicles and mileage that should be reported.

NOVA SCOTIA
Support

ONTARIO
Support

PENNSYLVANIA
Support

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND
Support

QUEBEC
Support

RHODE ISLAND
Support

SASKATCHEWAN
Support

SOUTH CAROLINA
Support

Stakeholders
Support 6-2-2017 ATA Robert Pitcher
This seems like common sense, but only given that IFTA requires decals at all.  Decals no longer make any sense.

TENNESSEE
Support

UTAH
Support

VERMONT
Support

VIRGINIA
Support

WASHINGTON
Support

WEST VIRGINIA
Support

WISCONSIN
Support
Support: 31
Oppose: 0
Undecided: 2
View Ballot Comments