Thursday, September 30, 2010
Carrier Alliance Pushing for Congress to Pass EOBR Mandate Next Year
A group of trucking companies is pushing legislation to mandate electronic onboard recorders.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Free Training - Cargo Security
Cyber Security in Transportation Summit
Strategies to Combat Emerging Cyber Threats to Transportation
NRECA Conference Center
4301 Wilson Blvd. | Arlington, VA 22203
October 21, 2010. No cost to attend!
This Cyber Security in Transportation Summit will provide a venue for open communication and collaboration between the public and private sectors to discuss strategies on tackling challenges as well as best practices and cyber initiatives within the transportation industry.
Program Topics
Contact bholm@nicb.org for more information.
Strategies to Combat Emerging Cyber Threats to Transportation
NRECA Conference Center
4301 Wilson Blvd. | Arlington, VA 22203
October 21, 2010. No cost to attend!
This Cyber Security in Transportation Summit will provide a venue for open communication and collaboration between the public and private sectors to discuss strategies on tackling challenges as well as best practices and cyber initiatives within the transportation industry.
Program Topics
Contact bholm@nicb.org for more information.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
FMCSA Makes Minor Technical Changes to EOBR Regs
1. Temperature range. FMCSA said it does not intend to require an EOBR be so rugged that it operates at extreme temperatures that realistically will not occur in a truck’s normal operating environment. The agency deleted the requirement for a specific operating temperature range from its final rule.
2. Defining the USB connector. A single USB compliant interface featuring a Type B connector, that the USB interface must comply with USB V1.1 and V2.0 USB signaling standards, and implement the Mass Storage class (08h) for software driverless operation.
3. Error codes. FMCSA determined there is a need to clarify thresholds and frequencies for the diagnostic events that would trigger fault codes for these various conditions. The agency determined it would be more appropriate to consider the fault-code reporting thresholds during the implementation period prior to the June 4, 2012, compliance date of the final rule.
2. Defining the USB connector. A single USB compliant interface featuring a Type B connector, that the USB interface must comply with USB V1.1 and V2.0 USB signaling standards, and implement the Mass Storage class (08h) for software driverless operation.
3. Error codes. FMCSA determined there is a need to clarify thresholds and frequencies for the diagnostic events that would trigger fault codes for these various conditions. The agency determined it would be more appropriate to consider the fault-code reporting thresholds during the implementation period prior to the June 4, 2012, compliance date of the final rule.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
From Transport Topics: Officials Say FMCSA May Seek Broader Mandate for EOBRs
Byline: Sean McNally, Senior Reporter
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is eyeing an even more expansive mandate for electronic onboard recorders than it indicated earlier this year, sources told Transport Topics.
The broader EOBR mandate would go beyond requiring the units for hazardous materials carriers and new trucking companies, which the agency has already indicated it would propose.
An official who asked not to be identified told Transport Topics that the agency was working to have a future mandate apply “to more carriers than were outlined” previously.
“I would say it is more than [a] 50% [chance] they can make it work,” the official said.
FMCSA published a final rule in April, mandating EOBRs for fleets that have a poor record of compliance with the hours-of-service rules, and said that, in a future rule, hazardous materials carriers and new trucking companies may be subject to an EOBR mandate because of the “potential safety risks” they present.
The unidentified official, along with other sources, told TT that the agency intends to go beyond those higher-risk groups and is looking at a mandate for even more fleets.
Another official, Larry Minor, FMCSA associate administrator for policy and program development, said he didn’t think the rule limited the agency to just applying a mandate to hazmat fleets and new entrants.
“Those were examples, but we’re not limiting ourselves to those,” Minor said. “We’re looking at [the National Transportation Safety Board’s] recommendations, which were for all carriers, and some of Congress’ proposals, which is for all trucks. We’re looking at all of that, and we expect to have a proposal out by the end of the year.”
NTSB first called for the installation of EOBRs on commercial vehicles in 1977 and recommended they be mandated on all commercial vehicles in 1990. The recommendation was added to NTSB’s most-wanted list in 2008.
“It is all a political discussion now,” the unnamed official said, adding that the agency feels “a broader mandate makes sense — it’s just whether they can justify the cost-benefit.”
That analysis “depends on the assumptions that you make,” that official said, indicating the agency believed that requiring greater use of EOBRs might reduce the cost of the technology.
The Department of Transportation said in an August report on important rules that the expanded EOBR proposal is slated to go to the White House for its review by the end of September and will be published in late December.
Industry officials said that based on their discussions, they believe FMCSA will press industrywide adoption of electronic onboard recorders.
“I’ve heard its going to be more of a full mandate,” David Heller, director of safety and policy for the Truckload Carriers Association, said Aug. 30. “And that matches up with Oberstar’s blueprint.”
Last year, Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, introduced a proposed highway bill that included a universal EOBR mandate. The bill has languished in his committee.
“It’s either going to come out of Congress or the agency,” Heller said of a mandate.
Dave Osiecki, American Trucking Associations senior vice president of policy and regulatory affairs, said Aug. 30 he’s been told that “the application will be fairly broad, much broader than what was originally suggested earlier.”
How many carriers are subject to a new EOBR requirement “depends on how elastic they can make the numbers,” Osiecki said.
In order for federal rules to be approved, agencies must analyze their costs and benefits and are prohibited from issuing regulations whose costs outstrip their benefits.
Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, said Aug. 30 that a mandate “would not surprise us in the least.”
“A broader proposal has been mentioned several times by the agency,” he said. “We know full well that we have lawmakers and we have the NTSB that think these things are the answer to all our safety issues. We don’t share that perspective.”
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is eyeing an even more expansive mandate for electronic onboard recorders than it indicated earlier this year, sources told Transport Topics.
The broader EOBR mandate would go beyond requiring the units for hazardous materials carriers and new trucking companies, which the agency has already indicated it would propose.
An official who asked not to be identified told Transport Topics that the agency was working to have a future mandate apply “to more carriers than were outlined” previously.
“I would say it is more than [a] 50% [chance] they can make it work,” the official said.
FMCSA published a final rule in April, mandating EOBRs for fleets that have a poor record of compliance with the hours-of-service rules, and said that, in a future rule, hazardous materials carriers and new trucking companies may be subject to an EOBR mandate because of the “potential safety risks” they present.
The unidentified official, along with other sources, told TT that the agency intends to go beyond those higher-risk groups and is looking at a mandate for even more fleets.
Another official, Larry Minor, FMCSA associate administrator for policy and program development, said he didn’t think the rule limited the agency to just applying a mandate to hazmat fleets and new entrants.
“Those were examples, but we’re not limiting ourselves to those,” Minor said. “We’re looking at [the National Transportation Safety Board’s] recommendations, which were for all carriers, and some of Congress’ proposals, which is for all trucks. We’re looking at all of that, and we expect to have a proposal out by the end of the year.”
NTSB first called for the installation of EOBRs on commercial vehicles in 1977 and recommended they be mandated on all commercial vehicles in 1990. The recommendation was added to NTSB’s most-wanted list in 2008.
“It is all a political discussion now,” the unnamed official said, adding that the agency feels “a broader mandate makes sense — it’s just whether they can justify the cost-benefit.”
That analysis “depends on the assumptions that you make,” that official said, indicating the agency believed that requiring greater use of EOBRs might reduce the cost of the technology.
The Department of Transportation said in an August report on important rules that the expanded EOBR proposal is slated to go to the White House for its review by the end of September and will be published in late December.
Industry officials said that based on their discussions, they believe FMCSA will press industrywide adoption of electronic onboard recorders.
“I’ve heard its going to be more of a full mandate,” David Heller, director of safety and policy for the Truckload Carriers Association, said Aug. 30. “And that matches up with Oberstar’s blueprint.”
Last year, Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, introduced a proposed highway bill that included a universal EOBR mandate. The bill has languished in his committee.
“It’s either going to come out of Congress or the agency,” Heller said of a mandate.
Dave Osiecki, American Trucking Associations senior vice president of policy and regulatory affairs, said Aug. 30 he’s been told that “the application will be fairly broad, much broader than what was originally suggested earlier.”
How many carriers are subject to a new EOBR requirement “depends on how elastic they can make the numbers,” Osiecki said.
In order for federal rules to be approved, agencies must analyze their costs and benefits and are prohibited from issuing regulations whose costs outstrip their benefits.
Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, said Aug. 30 that a mandate “would not surprise us in the least.”
“A broader proposal has been mentioned several times by the agency,” he said. “We know full well that we have lawmakers and we have the NTSB that think these things are the answer to all our safety issues. We don’t share that perspective.”
Deaths from large truck crashes drop to the lowest level since 1950.
The U.S. DOT released 2009 fatality and injury data. Highway deaths fell to 33,808, the lowest number since 1950. Estimated vehicle miles traveled in 2009 increased by 0.2 percent over 2008 levels.
Last year’s fatality and injury rates were the lowest ever recorded: 1.13 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2009, compared to 1.26 deaths for 2008.
Fatalities of large truck occupants dropped from 682 in 2008 to 503 in 2009, a 26 percent decline. The total number of fatalities involving large trucks decreased 20 percent from 4,542 in 2008 to 3,380 last year. The number of injuries in large truck crashes also fell 26 percent from 23,000 in 2008 to 17,000 in 2009.
Last year’s fatality and injury rates were the lowest ever recorded: 1.13 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2009, compared to 1.26 deaths for 2008.
Fatalities of large truck occupants dropped from 682 in 2008 to 503 in 2009, a 26 percent decline. The total number of fatalities involving large trucks decreased 20 percent from 4,542 in 2008 to 3,380 last year. The number of injuries in large truck crashes also fell 26 percent from 23,000 in 2008 to 17,000 in 2009.
International Conference on Commercial Driver Health and Wellness
November 8–10, 2010, in Baltimore, Maryland.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Trucking Among the Most Dangerous Jobs
Truck drivers have a fatality rate in the US of 18.3 per 100,000. You always have to pay attention, watch your rest and your health, think ahead, and anticipate. From CNNMoney.com.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Does this stuff actually pay for itself?
Our clients have been getting hit by mandates left and right lately; a GPS requirement from the USPS for some of their contracts, the new EOBR rule, and CSA's impact. I have been using onboard truck technology since 1990, many of our clients have been with us for a long time. Why do they use it?
Fuel Savings:
Controlling Engine Idle. According to the Argonne National Laboratories, the average truck wastes 2196 gallons per year idling. A large diesel engine idling under no load will burn approximately 1 gallon/hour.
Controlling Speed. According to multiple tests by Kenworth, Firestone, and the American Trucking Association, fuel consumption increases by 2.2% for every 1 MPH increase over 55 MPH. If your trucks are averaging 6.6 MPH while running 65 MPH, that will increase to 7.5 MPH if they slow down to 55 MPH.
Controlling shifting and stopping habits. Hard braking is one of the largest contributors to excessive fuel consumption on "governed" trucks where speed is kept lower than normal using the ECM.
Driving Efficiency:
You are able to pay drivers for all work they do, cutting waste and overlapping tasks when possible.
Maintenance Savings:
I was talking to one of our clients last week, who runs his trucks 1 million miles before trading with no major maintenance. The reason, those habits that contribute to fuel economy also help your maintenance costs. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH increases tire wear 5% to 16%, depending on GVW. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH decreases miles to overhaul by 10% to 15%. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH increases oil consumption 15%. Idling for 6 hours = 42 miles of engine wear.
Dispatch Efficiency and Vehicle Utilization:
Each company is different. However, up to 42% of an average fleet's total costs are in vehicle depreciation acquisition costs. A recent Aberdeen Group survey found that reporting fleets averaged an increase in vehicle utilization of 13%
Fuel Savings:
Controlling Engine Idle. According to the Argonne National Laboratories, the average truck wastes 2196 gallons per year idling. A large diesel engine idling under no load will burn approximately 1 gallon/hour.
Controlling Speed. According to multiple tests by Kenworth, Firestone, and the American Trucking Association, fuel consumption increases by 2.2% for every 1 MPH increase over 55 MPH. If your trucks are averaging 6.6 MPH while running 65 MPH, that will increase to 7.5 MPH if they slow down to 55 MPH.
Controlling shifting and stopping habits. Hard braking is one of the largest contributors to excessive fuel consumption on "governed" trucks where speed is kept lower than normal using the ECM.
Driving Efficiency:
You are able to pay drivers for all work they do, cutting waste and overlapping tasks when possible.
Maintenance Savings:
I was talking to one of our clients last week, who runs his trucks 1 million miles before trading with no major maintenance. The reason, those habits that contribute to fuel economy also help your maintenance costs. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH increases tire wear 5% to 16%, depending on GVW. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH decreases miles to overhaul by 10% to 15%. Increase in speed from 55 MPH to 65 MPH increases oil consumption 15%. Idling for 6 hours = 42 miles of engine wear.
Dispatch Efficiency and Vehicle Utilization:
Each company is different. However, up to 42% of an average fleet's total costs are in vehicle depreciation acquisition costs. A recent Aberdeen Group survey found that reporting fleets averaged an increase in vehicle utilization of 13%
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)