OOIDA Asks Senate Panel to Nix Plans for Speed Limiters on Trucks

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) has asked the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations to exclude language from any federal spending measures that mandates the installation of speed limiters on heavy commercial vehicles.

The association says that to do so would undermine the regulatory process and take away the public’s ability to make informed comments to an already proposed rule.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced recently a notice of proposed rulemaking that would require U.S. trucks larger than 26,000 pounds be set at a maximum speed of 60 or 65 or 68 miles per hour.

OOIDA points out that language currently included in the Senate THUD bill would force the FMCSA and NHTSA to issue a final rule that mandates this policy, ignoring the sacrosanct ability of industry stakeholders to help shape the regulations affecting them through the traditional federal rulemaking process.

OOIDA says Congress should take time to understand the true impact this policy would have on highway safety and allow the rulemaking process to continue, rather than imposing a mandate through the appropriations process.

“Congress has never analyzed the effect of mandating lower speeds for heavy vehicles through any public hearing or forum,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA. “We believe the Senate’s first significant action on the issue should not be in the form of mandating something that decades of research has proven increases the likelihood of crashes between trucks and other vehicles.”

“The agencies making the proposal fully acknowledge the potential for increases in crashes between trucks and other vehicles, and only want to attempt to mitigate the severity of such crashes.”

“Such a mandate would have serious consequences such as promoting road rage among other motorists and creating ‘rolling roadblocks’ of trucks on highways,” said Spencer. “Many states that used to have lower, separate speed limits for trucks have realized this was not the best idea and changed their policies to the same speed limit for all vehicles.”

OOIDA wants the motoring public to know that this is a nationwide policy that would affect all who use the roads where large trucks travel. The association is opposing it and encourages the motoring public to join in opposition.

“Highways are safest when all vehicles travel at the same relative speed,” said Spencer. “This wisdom is backed by science. NHTSA’s messages have promoted the practice for years based upon their own research, going back decades.”

OOIDA is a national trade association representing the interests of small-business trucking professionals and professional truck drivers with more than 158,000 members nationwide.




Extract taken from goo.gl/rfMSVB

http://www.truckingnewsonline.com

FTR’s Trucking Conditions Index heads up from June to July

Freight transportation consultancy FTR’s Trucking Conditions Index (TCI) showed signs of improvement, the company recently reported.

The TCI reflects tightening conditions for hauling capacity and is comprised of various metrics, including capacity, fuel, bankruptcies, cost of capital, and freight.

According to FTR, a TCI reading above zero represents an adequate trucking environment, with readings above ten indicating that volumes, prices, and margin are in a good range for carriers.
For July, the most recent month for which data is available, the TCI headed up to 5.99, an improvement over June’s 2.92, and May’s 1.69, which is its lowest reading going back to 2011.

Reasons for July’s improvement cited by FTR included moderate economic growth, and a regulatory agenda that will tighten capacity utilization, with the firm adding that building regulatory drag over the next 18 months should increase pricing and margins for fleets that have capacity. And it added that TCI readings for the remainder of 2016 and into early 2017 are expected to be in the same range at July.

“The freight market is doing slightly better than just treading water, but there is still a disconnect between activity in the spot and contract markets,” said FTR COO Jonathan Starks in a statement.

“This is a result of the slow growth environment that we are in right now. You use your contract carriers whenever you can. There just hasn’t been enough extra freight to spill over into the spot markets. Plus, shippers were able to use the big drops in spot rates to help put pressure on their contract carriers. I believe that those conditions will soon be turning, especially for van freight. Van loads on the load boards are up this summer, and capacity has noticeably tightened. It isn’t extremely tight, but compared to last year it is a welcome relief for carriers. That should soon take root in contract rates, especially as shippers and carriers prepare for their 2017 negotiations.

Starks said that one note of caution is in the flatbed segment, as the big reductions in oilfield activity has continued to put too much carrier capacity back into the spot market, and pricing is still weak for this segment. And he noted that until oil prices move higher or housing and business investment rally, the long-haul flatbed market is going to continue to struggle for volumes and rates.”

Stifel analyst John Larkin observed on a conference call hosted by his firm this week that trucking continues be in a very difficult rate environment in 2016, especially on the spot market side of the sector, with current spot market pricing likely not sustainable.

Larkin added that smaller trucking companies are downsizing and dropping out of the market altogether, or experiencing some financial pain.

On the contract pricing side, which he said “held up beautifully in 2015,” has accelerated this year, with some shippers tossed aside talk of collaboration and reverted to aggressive pricing practices.

“Some of the big fleets are downsizing, which fits in nicely with smaller ones doing the same thing and ultimately will bring supply and demand into balance, as capacity-sapping regulations are rolled out from 2017-2019, that will further tighten supply and demand and improve the pricing outlook, but we don’t expect pricing to be any better than it is right now, until, at the earliest, in the second quarter of 2017, and it is not clear it will even improve then.”

Extract taken from 
By Jeff Berman   goo.gl/EYazzq
http://www.logisticsmgmt.com

Slow down! Feds want to put limiters on newly manufactured heavy trucks.

Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Anthony Foxx announced last week that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) want to propose equipping heavy-duty vehicles with devices that limit their speeds on U.S. roadways.

Although the government is not saying exactly what the top speed of the governors would be, the proposed ruling would require those devices be set to a maximum speed. Foxx says the safety measure that could save lives and more than $1 billion in fuel costs each year.

“There are significant safety benefits to this proposed rulemaking,” Foxx said.  “In addition to saving lives, the projected fuel and emissions savings make this proposal a win for safety, energy conservation, and our environment.”

The DOT proposal would establish safety standards requiring all newly manufactured U.S. trucks, buses, and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating more than 26,000 pounds to come equipped with speed limiting devices.  The rule would not require retrofitting of older trucks.

The proposal discusses the benefits of setting the maximum speed at 60, 65, and 68 miles per hour. But Foxx said the DOT “will consider other speeds based on public input.”
The American Trucking Associations (ATA) hailed the proposed rule as “a potential step forward for safety,” setting up a fight with the owner operators, who oppose the proposed rule.

“We are pleased NHTSA and FMCSA have, almost 10 years after we first petitioned them, released this proposal to mandate the electronic limiting of commercial vehicle speeds,” ATA President and CEO Chris Spear said.  “Speed is a major contributor to truck accidents and by reducing speeds, we believe we can contribute to a reduction in accidents and fatalities on our highways.”

Since 2006, ATA has adopted a policy in favor of limiting the maximum speed of new trucks to 68 miles per hour. Later that year, the ATA petitioned FMCSA and NHTSA to issue a regulation requiring their use. In 2008, as part of ATA’s 18-point highway safety agenda, the federation endorsed a national speed limit of 65 mph for all vehicles.

“As an industry, we cannot be afraid of technology, but we also must make sure that technology has proven benefits,” Spear said. “Carriers who already voluntarily use speed limiters have found significant safety, as well as fuel efficiency and equipment lifespan benefits with little to no negative impact on productivity. We will be carefully reviewing and commenting upon today’s proposal.”

Motor carriers operating commercial vehicles in interstate commerce would be responsible for maintaining the speed limiting devices at or below the designated speed for the service life of the vehicle under the proposal.  While the maximum set travel speed will be determined in the final rule, estimates included in the proposal demonstrate that limiting heavy vehicles will save lives.

“This is basic physics,” said NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind.  “Even small increases in speed have large effects on the force of impact.  Setting the speed limit on heavy vehicles makes sense for safety and the environment.”

Other government officials said the DOT proposal was an efficient compromise between improving truck safety and ensuring efficient surface freight transport around the nation.

“Safe trucking moves our economy and safe bus operations transport our loved ones,” said FMCSA Administrator T.F. Scott Darling, III.  “This proposal will save lives while ensuring that our nation’s fleet of large commercial vehicles operates efficiently.”

The proposed ruling sets up yet another fight between owner-operators, which are against the governors, and the organized trucking industry, which is in favor of the speed limiters.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) says it is against the speed limiters for various reasons.   OOIDA says it opposes anti-competitive measures such as speed limiters that are falsely promoted as safety initiatives. It says it is against the new rule for three reasons:

According to DOT data, less than 8% of fatal crashes involving trucks are speeding-related, compared to almost 30% for passenger vehicle crashes.

Speed limiters for trucks would result in a significant speed differential between cars and trucks on roads like Interstate highways.

Speed differentials lead to conflicts between cars and trucks, which lead to crashes.  Most states have done away with posted speed differentials due to increased accidents with cars and trucks.


Extract taken from  goo.gl/YodbI3
By John D. Schuldz
http://www.logisticsmgmt.com

Hanjin bankruptcy gives shippers crash course in risk mitigation

The bankruptcy of Hanjin Shipping will have shippers scrambling for transport alternatives during Peak Season, as global seaports also struggle to find ways of mitigating the impact of this colossal event.

Hanjin operates 98 container ships totalling 600,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs), 11 port terminals and 74 deployments.

The largest container line bankruptcy in history already has other carriers scrambling to accommodate shippers, too.

CKYHE Alliance partner, Evergreen Line, for example, is activating a “contingency plan.” According to spokesmen, no Evergreen Line cargo will be loaded on the vessels operated by Hanjin and Hanjin cargo will not be allowed to load on the vessels operated by Evergreen Line.

“Evergreen Line, as the Carrier to issue the Bill of Lading for the shipment under Evergreen Line's custody, will not prejudice to cargo owner's rights,” added spokesmen. “Evergreen Line undertakes all carrier's obligations and responsibilities under the governing Bill of Lading clauses will remain binding in all circumstances.”

As report in LM, the seventh largest maritime container line had been enduring a long period of economic distress before this collapse. Shippers who had not anticipated the event are now being schooled in risk management.

According to Rick Bridges of Roanoke Trade Insurance logistics managers should be cancelling bookings with Hanjin and look for space with other container lines.

Meanwhile, they should take the following precautions:

*The shipper should take all reasonable measures to protect the cargo and to ensure it is delivered to the intended destination should Hanjin fail to complete the voyage(s). In such cases, the shipper will likely be reimbursed for charges properly and reasonably incurred via the cargo insurance provider. 

*The shipper should confirm that insured cargo will continue to be covered for physical loss or damage even if insolvency is the cause of physical loss or damage.

“It is also suggested that your company consider the possibility of abandonment of freight and how to best protect against non-payment of demurrage and storage charges,” said Bridges.

Extract taken from   http://goo.gl/otwh82

By Patrick Burnson

http://www.logisticsmgmt.com