Friday, October 28, 2011

FMCSA: Not able to meet today's deadline for new HOS

The FMCSA issued a statement this morning which said: 

“The petitioners have agreed to extend the October 28, 2011, deadline for publication of a final Hours of Service rule. FMCSA will continue to work toward publishing a final rule as quickly as possible. The parties to the settlement agreement will file their next status report with the Court on November 28, 2011.”

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

FMCSA will miss HOS deadline


The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration will not finish the final hours-of-service rule by the Oct. 28 deadline set by a U.S. court.  The final rule had not been sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget, which is required to review it before the rule can be published.  FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro said they continue to work toward the Oct. 28 date,  but “we have to be realistic.”

Dave Osiecki, ATA senior vice president, said that while there probably have been informal discussions between OMB and the Department of Transportation leadership, the formal OMB review has not begun. 

FMCSA said in December it was leaning toward cutting back driving hours to 10 from 11 and modifying the 34-hour reset provision.  ATA has threatened to file a lawsuit if FMCSA reduces driving hours. 

What Else Every CEO Needs to Know About the Cloud


Friday, October 21, 2011

Thank You for Helping Comment on the new HOS Rules

Thank you to our customers and friends who took the time and effort to comment to the Federal Register concerning proposed changes to the Hours of Service requirements for commercial truck drivers.  A special thanks goes to the National Star Route Mail Contractors Association for their comments.  And, the ATA has lead the way with legal and advisory resources. 

The deadline for the new rule is next week - October 28.  The rule has not even made it to the White House's OMB - and they have up to 90 days to review the proposed rule.  It's obvious that the deadline will be missed.  The collective efforts of industry have guided our political representatives to question this rule, normally matters such as this go unnoticed. 

Using LoadTrek.net to analyze data supplied by customers, it was clear that the economic impact is negative, and the safety impact is at best neutral - and in some cases negative as well.  A copy of LoadTrek's comments can be found here. 

ATA questions LaHood's claim that up-to-date data used to write new HOS


FMCSA will not fight ruling, moving ahead on new EOBR mandate


Friday, October 14, 2011

Postal Service Contracting: What Every Contractor Should Know

October 21; 0800 to 1615.  At the Renaissance Chicago Downtown; 1 West Wacker Drive, Chicago IL  60601

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Are you collecting all possible revenue?

LoadTrek.net clients are reporting to me that they are charging (and collecting) more accessorial charges than before.  Virtually all freight and bulk shippers agree to pay some accessorial charges other than fuel surcharge; detention, demurrage, extra stops, extra services, etc.  You just have to prove it and document it.  An article in the Journal of Commerce tells us the same thing. 

In LoadTrek's billing validation; make sure you are charging (or at least attempting to charge) for actual miles instead of book miles. 

Are you using "Tasks"?  These can be anything related to loading or unloading; extra hoses, pump charges, mall deliveries, hand-sort and stack, etc.  You'll make certain you are paying the driver correctly, monitor driver productivity, and correctly bill the customer. 

When you use the Analyzer to look at the profitability of loads and customers, add and remove distance and time to reflect the nature of these extra services you provide.  You'll clearly see what these extra services cost. 

I am not running a fleet any more.  But if I was, maximizing collection of accessorials would be a top priority. 

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Trucking Industry Mobility and Technology Coalition Annual Meeting

LoadTrek will be participating in the Trucking Industry Mobility and Technology Coalition annual meeting, held in conjunction with the American Trucking Association's annual conference in Grapevine, TX.  The TIMTC annual meeting will be October 17-18 at the Gaylord Texas Resort. 

If you are a fleet that is an active participant in fleet technology, we invite you to attend.

Contact us for more information. 

Friday, October 7, 2011

Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee to Review EOBR Tech Specs

Next meeting of the Motor Carrier Safety Committee (MCSAC) will be October 24-27.  They are going to review the technical specifications of the EOBR regulation; 395.16. 

Why review a regulation that is pending publication?  We are fairly certain that 395.16 will be delayed from its June 2012 date.

If you are waiting for the FMCSA to clarify things before you implement an EOBR system, you're going to wait for a while.  However, we are certain that the basic framework of the EOBR technical specification will remain in tact, so a reasonably modern system (such as LoadTrek) will meet both the current (395.15) regulation and the new (395.16) regulation.  

GAO Issues its Report on CSA


Friday, September 16, 2011

Postal Service Contracting: What Every Contractor Should Know

Hursch Blackwell LLP and NSRMCA attorney David Hendel will be presenting a one day seminar on Contracting to the USPS.  You can obtain detailed information here. 

If you contract to the USPS, or if you are planning on contracting to the USPS, this is for you.  Register here. 

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Your company hauls US Mail - How Do You Plan Your Business?

Many of our customers haul US Mail for Highway Contract Routes.  If you were at the NSRMCA convention in Baltimore in August, today's news is no surprise.  You heard the PMG and surface transportation leadership describe coming changes.  Many readers of this blog contacted us to request a copy of the OIG's report on the new postal network.  This report, published by the USPS Office of the Inspector General, outlined the "new" USPS network.  There is one fact in this discussion - things must change for the USPS.  Change is no longer in doubt.  The question is the type of change, and the pace of change.   

Your company hauls mail.  What do you do and how do you plan?  Will you get more or fewer trips on your contracts?   What will contracts look like when they renew?  Will there be more trips, fewer trips, GPS required, etc?

We know that many of the USPS proposals require Congressional approval, but not all.  We can speculate that some, but not all, of these proposals will become reality.  We also know that many of these initiatives have already started.  Our clients are already reporting combined contracts, cut trips, elimination of mail processing facilities that in turn necessitate new contracts.


We know that the USPS leadership has stated their intention to dramatically change the network, increasing capacity utilization.  They wish to issue more area wide contracts - fewer contracts that require more resources from the successful bidder.  They wish to increase utilization, including dynamically combining or changing trips to respond to current volumes.  This means fewer miles within existing lanes of traffic.  However, the story does not end there. 

We also know they have already closed 145 processing facilities since 2006.  They wish to reduce the current number of mail processing facilities from 528 (FY 2010) to 135.  Fewer processing facilities means more miles in new lanes.  Further, they wish to shift mail from air to trucks - adding even more miles. 

The impact on your company will be determined by three things; your willingness to work with the USPS, your geographic areas of operation, and your ability to rapidly respond to service changes. 

You must decide if you wish to remain in the mail business in light of these changes.  If so, you must start preparing tomorrow to run your company differently.  Drivers must understand that there will be fewer "milk runs" where they execute the same routine for years on end.  Mechanics must understand that uptime, appearance, and response to downtime is more important than ever.  Dispatchers must understand there there will be fewer static runs, and they must come up with plans to respond to flexible demands for people and equipment.

Finally, owners must drive these changes - plus respond to their own set of challenges.  Be flexible yet precise when bidding new contracts.  Determine the true cost and benefit of handling extras.  Consider other revenue opportunities with your existing capacities - such as dedicated runs that can serve as backhauls for those postal "one-ways".

You would expect a technically-oriented blog to address the role and importance of technology.  Yet, it's pretty obvious what you must be able to do.  You must be able to instantly communicate with your drivers, and to see how each of your routes are performing in real time.  You must be able to perform proforma analyses of contracts you're bidding.  You must have the tools to dynamically dispatch equipment and people as needed. 


Contact us with any questions or comments.  We're in this business to stay, and we're interested in working with you and hearing your comments. 

Struggling Postal Service announces 'new reality'

Struggling Postal Service announces 'new reality'

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Why EOBR's?

Even though we have a modern technical guideline for the technical aspects of EOBR's in 395.16, there is uncertainty about the implementation of an EOBR mandate.  In fact, the only certainty is uncertainty.  We are fairly certain there will be a delay in the implementation of 395.16 - but how long is anyone's guess. 

We have focused on the regulatory aspects of EOBR's - now let's focus on the business aspects.  There is no widely-deployed, industry accepted pure EOBR.  Instead, systems include EOBR functionality but also include lots of other stuff.  It is this additional functionality that gives fleets their return on investment.  A very important side benefit is the safety and ease of regulatory compliance. 

I recommend you read this EOBR white paper.  It was written in 2006, and published on numerous web sites as well as in Transport Topics as an editorial.  Until we have a mandate, it's applicable to our current situation.