Monday, March 12, 2012
From the FMCSA:
The Unsafe Driving and Fatigued Driving (Hours-of-Service) BASICs have strong relationships to future crash risk. In fact, an independent evaluation by the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute found that carriers with either one of these two BASICs above FMCSA’s intervention thresholds had crash rates three times greater than those without BASICs exceeding FMCSA’s intervention thresholds.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
CSA
HEADLINE: Most carriers unranked as CSA launches
Byline: Avery Vise
Fewer than 14 percent of active motor carriers are ranked in any of the five safety categories within the new Safety Measurement System (SMS) that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration made public for the first time on Sunday, Dec. 12, according to an analysis by Commercial Carrier Journal. The SMS, which replaced SafeStat, is a key component of what FMCSA now formally calls Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) — not Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010. The agency published SMS data and metrics after a federal appeals court turned down an emergency request for a stay.
CCJ’s analysis of data published at FMCSA’s Analysis & Information website shows that only 92,184 of the 758,682 active motor carriers in the agency’s database are ranked in any of the five publicly available Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) — Unsafe Driving, Fatigued Driving, Driver Fitness, Controlled Substances and Vehicle Maintenance. The Cargo-Related and Crash Indicator BASICs are, for now, withheld from the public due to agency concerns that the data could be misleading.
Of the 92,184 carriers that are ranked in at least one BASIC, 52,967 carriers have at least one alert, meaning they exceeded the threshold for intervention. The greatest number of alerts, 29,207, are in the Fatigued Driving BASIC, followed by the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC at 21,791. The Controlled Substances BASIC had the fewest alerts at 3,605.
The majority of carriers are unranked because FMCSA set minimum thresholds of inspections to be considered within BASIC safety event groups. Those floors vary, but generally carriers must have three to five inspections in the past 24 months to be ranked in a BASIC. FMCSA plans to use those rankings to target intervention under its new graduated process, which starts with warning letters and escalates potentially to full-blown compliance reviews.
Byline: Avery Vise
Fewer than 14 percent of active motor carriers are ranked in any of the five safety categories within the new Safety Measurement System (SMS) that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration made public for the first time on Sunday, Dec. 12, according to an analysis by Commercial Carrier Journal. The SMS, which replaced SafeStat, is a key component of what FMCSA now formally calls Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) — not Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010. The agency published SMS data and metrics after a federal appeals court turned down an emergency request for a stay.
CCJ’s analysis of data published at FMCSA’s Analysis & Information website shows that only 92,184 of the 758,682 active motor carriers in the agency’s database are ranked in any of the five publicly available Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) — Unsafe Driving, Fatigued Driving, Driver Fitness, Controlled Substances and Vehicle Maintenance. The Cargo-Related and Crash Indicator BASICs are, for now, withheld from the public due to agency concerns that the data could be misleading.
Of the 92,184 carriers that are ranked in at least one BASIC, 52,967 carriers have at least one alert, meaning they exceeded the threshold for intervention. The greatest number of alerts, 29,207, are in the Fatigued Driving BASIC, followed by the Vehicle Maintenance BASIC at 21,791. The Controlled Substances BASIC had the fewest alerts at 3,605.
The majority of carriers are unranked because FMCSA set minimum thresholds of inspections to be considered within BASIC safety event groups. Those floors vary, but generally carriers must have three to five inspections in the past 24 months to be ranked in a BASIC. FMCSA plans to use those rankings to target intervention under its new graduated process, which starts with warning letters and escalates potentially to full-blown compliance reviews.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
New HOS result
Trucking
Key Points
• With the federal government set to announce, in a matter of days, a downward revision to hours of service (HOS) for truck drivers, we offer a few thoughts on ramifications, carrier responses and other elements. This Note does not exhaust all scenarios nor explore every element of HOS. Rather, it is a framework for investors on some of the key issues. In general, HOS changes have a much more dramatic impact upon TL carriers, although LTL carriers tend to benefit from tightening TL supply.
• Just because the government is likely to announce proposed changes does not mean they will occur by the July 2011 deadline. After the proposed regulation is published in the Federal Register, comments will be issued by the public and it could take weeks or months to sort through them, some of which might be incorporated into a tweaking of the final regulation. Even if the regulation becomes final next summer, there will be a transition period to allow for technological adoption, employee training and other adaptations. In short, HOS is likely to impact trucking supply and demand more in 2012 and beyond as opposed to 2011.
• What might happen? Current regulations limit truck drivers to 14 on-duty hours each 24-hour period, including a maximum of 11 hours behind the wheel. In addition, drivers are limited to 70 hours of drive-time in an 8-day period. At that point a driver must wait 34 hours before re-starting service. There is no clocking on and off duty during non-drive times (meals, breaks, loading, unloading, etc.) like what existed prior to 2004. While not finalized yet, the new regulations could entail something like this: 10 hours of drive-time in a 24-hour period; either a 44-hour or 48-hour restart period; and some sort of mandated break period. The latter could take many forms such as a one hour mandated break (or even two 30-minute breaks) while on-duty, although it is not clear whether the break would be on top of the 10-hour active duty or subtract from it. In other words, if it subtracts from the 10-hour drive time, then drivers would really only have 9 functional hours to drive. Finally, it is conceivable that the drive time could be cut below 10 hours.
• Such changes will likely hurt asset utilization and will require changes to minimize the impact. Possible remedies include, but are not limited to: a) raising speed limits by 3 to 5 MPH (many fleets restrict speeds to somewhere between 62 and 65 MPH); b) utilizing slip-seating, that is having more than one driver use the tractor during a set period; c) an expansion of driver relays; d) an increase in drop and hook operations, which theoretically allows a driver to drop off a load and pick-up another load more quickly. Not all fleets are comfortable with these potential solutions and some, like higher MPH, have negative fuel burn and safety ramifications. For many slip-seating is often used in under 5% of their OTR and regional trucks (dray service and short-haul dedicated are often higher percentages). Numerous fleets have told us that increasing slip-seating to 20% to 25% of OTR and regional trucks would be an ideal goal with fewer HOS, but that is easier said than done given today’s driver recruiting challenges. In addition, increasing detention fees and shortening equipment holding times (by reducing loading and unloading times) would be pursued by carriers and shippers. Also, some fleets would likely increase the trailer-to-tractor ratio, especially in the refrigerated and flatbed sectors. To be sure, some van carriers would do that, too, but so many van carriers shrunk their fleets this cycle faster than their trailers that there is still room to bring that ratio down before thinking about increasing it. Lastly, many loads don’t use the entire 11 hours to get delivered. Vulnerability exists on freight that consistently takes 9.5 to 10.5 hours to deliver. See page 2 for potential ramifications for earnings, consolidation and two charts with the latest inventory ratios.
Key Points
• With the federal government set to announce, in a matter of days, a downward revision to hours of service (HOS) for truck drivers, we offer a few thoughts on ramifications, carrier responses and other elements. This Note does not exhaust all scenarios nor explore every element of HOS. Rather, it is a framework for investors on some of the key issues. In general, HOS changes have a much more dramatic impact upon TL carriers, although LTL carriers tend to benefit from tightening TL supply.
• Just because the government is likely to announce proposed changes does not mean they will occur by the July 2011 deadline. After the proposed regulation is published in the Federal Register, comments will be issued by the public and it could take weeks or months to sort through them, some of which might be incorporated into a tweaking of the final regulation. Even if the regulation becomes final next summer, there will be a transition period to allow for technological adoption, employee training and other adaptations. In short, HOS is likely to impact trucking supply and demand more in 2012 and beyond as opposed to 2011.
• What might happen? Current regulations limit truck drivers to 14 on-duty hours each 24-hour period, including a maximum of 11 hours behind the wheel. In addition, drivers are limited to 70 hours of drive-time in an 8-day period. At that point a driver must wait 34 hours before re-starting service. There is no clocking on and off duty during non-drive times (meals, breaks, loading, unloading, etc.) like what existed prior to 2004. While not finalized yet, the new regulations could entail something like this: 10 hours of drive-time in a 24-hour period; either a 44-hour or 48-hour restart period; and some sort of mandated break period. The latter could take many forms such as a one hour mandated break (or even two 30-minute breaks) while on-duty, although it is not clear whether the break would be on top of the 10-hour active duty or subtract from it. In other words, if it subtracts from the 10-hour drive time, then drivers would really only have 9 functional hours to drive. Finally, it is conceivable that the drive time could be cut below 10 hours.
• Such changes will likely hurt asset utilization and will require changes to minimize the impact. Possible remedies include, but are not limited to: a) raising speed limits by 3 to 5 MPH (many fleets restrict speeds to somewhere between 62 and 65 MPH); b) utilizing slip-seating, that is having more than one driver use the tractor during a set period; c) an expansion of driver relays; d) an increase in drop and hook operations, which theoretically allows a driver to drop off a load and pick-up another load more quickly. Not all fleets are comfortable with these potential solutions and some, like higher MPH, have negative fuel burn and safety ramifications. For many slip-seating is often used in under 5% of their OTR and regional trucks (dray service and short-haul dedicated are often higher percentages). Numerous fleets have told us that increasing slip-seating to 20% to 25% of OTR and regional trucks would be an ideal goal with fewer HOS, but that is easier said than done given today’s driver recruiting challenges. In addition, increasing detention fees and shortening equipment holding times (by reducing loading and unloading times) would be pursued by carriers and shippers. Also, some fleets would likely increase the trailer-to-tractor ratio, especially in the refrigerated and flatbed sectors. To be sure, some van carriers would do that, too, but so many van carriers shrunk their fleets this cycle faster than their trailers that there is still room to bring that ratio down before thinking about increasing it. Lastly, many loads don’t use the entire 11 hours to get delivered. Vulnerability exists on freight that consistently takes 9.5 to 10.5 hours to deliver. See page 2 for potential ramifications for earnings, consolidation and two charts with the latest inventory ratios.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Government is getting very aggressive in HOS violations......
FMCSA Orders Trucker to Install 700 EOBRs
Meat-hauling JBS Carriers cited for multiple hours-of-service violations
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ordered JBS Carriers, Greeley, Colo., to install the EOBRs after finding "serious" hours-of-service violations.
JBS Carriers has until March to install the equipment or pay the fines.
It is the first and largest federal action of its kind announced since a final rule that allows the FMCSA to require carriers to install EOBRs took effect in June.
The Owner-Operator Independent Driver Association is challenging that regulation in court. The FMCSA is expected to respond to OOIDA's lawsuit this week.
In a settlement agreement reached with JBS Carriers last month, the agency cited the company for 102 counts of falsifying drivers' hours-of-service records.
It also cited the company for three counts of allowing drivers with a suspended, revoked or canceled commercial driver's license to operate a motor vehicle.
JBS must also train drivers on the use of EOBRs and develop a safety management system that incorporates EOBR data into hours-of-service oversight.
JBS Carriers is the U.S. trucking unit of multinational food company JBS, the largest beef supplier in the world, formerly known as Swift & Co. in the U.S.
Federal hours-of-service rules limit the amount of time drivers can spend behind the wheel to 11 hours a day. The rules are currently being revised by FMCSA.
-- Contact William B. Cassidy at wcassidy@joc.com.
HOS Cuts
Industry Fears HOS Losses When New Rule Is Issued
By Sean McNally, Senior Reporter
This story appears in the Oct. 25 print edition of Transport Topics.
PHOENIX — Trucking officials said they are preparing for what they believe will be a loss of productivity and flexibility when the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issues the revised hours-of-service rule.
“We’re not all that optimistic that this proposal will be something that we will like. We think it could shrink drive time, and we think it will perhaps have other unproductive changes,” Dave Osiecki, senior vice president for policy and regulatory affairs with American Trucking Associations, said here during the group’s 2010 Management Conference & Exhibition.
FMCSA Administrator Anne Ferro, speaking here, said only that the agency was “on schedule” to deliver the new rule later this month, and she was “looking forward to a very robust discussion beginning in early November.”
The rule currently is being reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget.
ATA Chairman Barbara Windsor, president of Hahn Transportation Inc., said she expects the industry to lose the current restart clause, which allows drivers to reset their weekly clocks following a 34-hour break.
“I think [the time required before a restart] is going to be extended and we’re going to lose an hour of driving,” she said. “For [Hahn Transportation], as a regional carrier, the 34-hour restart has been wonderful because our guys can come home and have a five [days] on, two [days] off schedule and have a regular life.”
”
“We think we know what it is going to be, and it bothers the hell out of me,” said Charles “Shorty” Whittington, president of Grammer Industries and the outgoing chairman of ATA’s executive committee.
Whittington predicted the restart clause would be extended to between 44 and 48 hours. In addition, he thinks there will be a mandatory rest break included, but it is not clear yet whether that would count as on-duty or off-duty time.
James Burg, president of James Burg Trucking Co., said that an improving economy is making these potentially disruptive HOS changes easier to handle.
“It could have been devastating a year ago in the economic environment, but it seems like we have the capacity on our side,” Burg said. “While it is going to be difficult, if we have any new restrictions, it is going to be much more manageable.”
Still, ATA Chief Counsel Robert Digges did not rule out a legal challenge after the rule is released.
“I think we will be in a very good position [to litigate] if there are draconian changes made to the hours-of-service rules,” he said during the meeting, because it will be “very hard” for FMCSA to justify the changes in light of trucking’s improving safety record.
He added that courts are “often a little suspicious” when an agency that had been defending a regulation reverses course.
Last October, FMCSA dropped its defense of the HOS rule and said it would review it as part of a court settlement with a number of advocacy and labor groups. That settlement called for the agency to issue a final rule this October.
FMCSA has also been ordered to issue a rule specifying what paperwork fleets must retain in order to verify their driver logs, one the agency has said will include a renewed, and probably expanded, electronic onboard recorder requirement.
Ferro said such a proposal will be sent to the White House soon, and, “OMB will get that back to us by the end of the year.”
Windsor said she has been “quite surprised about how many [ATA] members have already switched over to electronic logging.”
Her own company will be making the switch during the next six months because, she said, “It is such a better way of doing business.”
Windsor also suggested that if enough carriers voluntarily adopt EOBRs, that could help strengthen trucking’s case in any HOS legal challenges.
Still, ATA Chief Counsel Robert Digges did not rule out a legal challenge after the rule is released.
“I think we will be in a very good position [to litigate] if there are draconian changes made to the hours-of-service rules,” he said during the meeting, because it will be “very hard” for FMCSA to justify the changes in light of trucking’s improving safety record.
He added that courts are “often a little suspicious” when an agency that had been defending a regulation reverses course.
Last October, FMCSA dropped its defense of the HOS rule and said it would review it as part of a court settlement with a number of advocacy and labor groups. That settlement called for the agency to issue a final rule this October.
FMCSA has also been ordered to issue a rule specifying what paperwork fleets must retain in order to verify their driver logs, one the agency has said will include a renewed, and probably expanded, electronic onboard recorder requirement.
Ferro said such a proposal will be sent to the White House soon, and, “OMB will get that back to us by the end of the year.”
Windsor said she has been “quite surprised about how many [ATA] members have already switched over to electronic logging.”
Her own company will be making the switch during the next six months because, she said, “It is such a better way of doing business.”
Windsor also suggested that if enough carriers voluntarily adopt EOBRs, that could help strengthen trucking’s case in any HOS legal challenges.
| 1 2 |
|
Friday, October 29, 2010
Friday, October 8, 2010
Capacity
from Thom Albrecht of BBT Capital Markets (TTopics 4 Oct 10, Pg 49):
"Number of Class 8 tractors in operation in the US has dropped 12% or 270,000 units since 2006 and the number of tractors eight years old or newer has dropped by 16%. Average age of fleets is the oldest I've ever seen."
"Number of Class 8 tractors in operation in the US has dropped 12% or 270,000 units since 2006 and the number of tractors eight years old or newer has dropped by 16%. Average age of fleets is the oldest I've ever seen."
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
CSA Article
Ranking the Risks of CSA Poor Scores: Reasons Why Carriers Must Check DataCome this December, is the dawn of a new era in truck safety enforcement. Unfortunately, only a few carriers have taken an aggressive interest in the significance of the new system to them. According to agency Administrator Anne Ferro in comments at the annual meeting of the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, only 13,000 of the 500,00 active carriers went online at the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to check where they will stand in the new system. That's only 2.6 percent of the active carriers. Ferro urged the truck and bus safety enforcement members of CVSA to spread the word out to the drivers they meet on the road. Drivers and carriers need to know that it is up to them to correct their performance, Ferro said. To enforcement officials, why so few carriers have logged on is puzzling to them. The program has been hard to miss for the past year or so. "Game changer" for truck industry, is how the carriers that have been trying the system have described it. It's really hard to miss this for it has been extensively talked about at industry meetings and in industry media, and has been the subject of fierce, public dialogue between the industry and FMCSA – not to forget to mention the hearing on Capitol Hill. Officials came into conclusion the some percentage of the active carriers are not in the information loop or are extremely concentrated on their daily affairs to take notice of a deadline that, thus far, has been a few months away. California Highway Patrol's Capt. Steve Dowling, who becomes president of CVSA at this week's meeting, revealed he is perturbed but not totally startled. It has been the practice of many trucking companies to delay action as long as they can. He's seeing more interest from California trucking companies now that the December deadline is fast approaching. Ferro explained that even though CSA 2010 will start in December, the implementation will take place constantly over the next year as the states get their enforcement people warmed up in the new system. She also added that the CSA 2010 label will immediately be changed to plainly CSA, for Compliance, Safety and Accountability. FMCSA will be very busy on the month of December. The following will happen on this month: the CSA data that is now made available to carriers will be opened to the public; FMCSA will start mailing warning letters to carriers whose data does not measure up; and the agency will start discovering which unsuitable carriers will get field interventions. Ferro said that within the first half of the year the agency will publish a proposal for how it will decide safety fitness under CSA. This is a vital element of the new system that in effect will separate the Compliance Review from a carrier's safety rating and attach it instead with monthly performance data from the new Safety Management System. Bryan Price, senior transportation specialist at FMCSA, said a number of misapprehensions about CSA persist in the driver community. The agency is not producing a public driver scorecard, rating or ranking, he said. Furthermore, CSA will not result to mass CDL suspensions, and the agency has no plans to prohibit the ability to drive based on physical characteristics such as weight, body mass index or neck size. On the other hand, here are very valid reasons why should carriers pay attention to their standing in the new system. Forget the risk of intervention by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration for a little awhile. The FMCSA is just a speck compared to some other risks. David Mitchell, the Director of Risk Control/Safety Management at National Trucking Practice—Little Rock, Arkansas, have ranked the most serious risks of poor CSA scores using an enterprise risk management approach. Here are the risks of having poor CSA scores according to their ranks: Risk # 1) Adverse reaction by a shipper. When a shipper learns that carrier's scores are poor, they may transfer their business to another trucking company. The loss of revenue can be disastrous to your fleet. The largest risk is to any trucking company that has more than 5% of revenue from one shipper. Mitchell asks, "Who can survive with less revenue?" Risk # 2) Adverse reactions from insurance underwriters. Underwriters have followed safety compliance scores for years, and they are certain to utilize CSA scores when deciding coverage and pricing. Poor scores are almost certain to lessen subjective discounts for your fleet; premiums will increase. Mitchell, again asks, "Does anyone want to pay more premiums?" Risk # 3) Claims settlement values that rise because your fleet has poor CSA scores. This may only affect only the larger, debated claims where you are not ready to accept that your driver made an operating mistake. But these are the claims that may be worth millions$$. Again, Mitchell throws another question for you to ponder upon, "Aren’t claims expensive enough already?" Risk # 4) Poor driver recruiting results as drivers gravitate to fleets with better CSA scores. Many drivers may not give a hoot; some will be very choosy and will join your competitors. Mitchell inquires, "How many drivers might be chased away?" Risk # 5) Finally—–intervention by the FMCSA. This agency has a history of soft and discreet enforcement. They will assess your written plan and give you time to make improvements. Mitchell's final question is, "Haven’t you successfully managed enforcement risks in the past?" Mitchell advises the trucking companies to evaluate and rank the risks at their fleet; to educate their management team about the risks; and for them to create their own improvement plans. He also added that effective solutions create career security for the carrier. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)