CARB may loosen rules

paullud · Nov 8, 2013

This might be the result of pressure that CARB was feeling because if their restrictions but they are looking to loosen rules up for truck owners.

http://m.truckinginfo.com/news/1845...ng-some-emissions-rules#.Un0xqA8-Q2Q.facebook

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

I did not see anything about TCU's.

paullud · Nov 8, 2013

layoutshooter said:
I did not see anything about TCU's.

Someone may want to contact CARB about TCU's because it might be something that they need a reminder about. An email or phone call would probably be a good idea to make sure.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

paullud said:
Someone may want to contact CARB about TCU's because it might be something that they need a reminder about. An email or phone call would probably be a good idea to make sure.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

One would think that temp control carriers would be ALL over that one!

jjoerger · Nov 8, 2013

Wow, this is great news. We would be fine with the 5000 mile rule.

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

jjoerger said:
Wow, this is great news. We would be fine with the 5000 mile rule.

It would not be bad.

ATeam · Nov 8, 2013

As it happens, Diane and I are on an "I-5 shuffle" run now. 750 miles of our trip will be in CA to a delivery there. We are running this load at a loss because it gets us out of the Seattle area. Seattle is usually pretty good for us but not this time. We were happy to find a load on the Landstar board that pays us fuel plus a bit more to relocate to the Los Angeles area.

Now, under this new rule, if it is adopted, we'd be legal to run our 2006 truck in CA next year but we would also be mindful of our 5,000 mile limit. Would we be as willing to take a fuel-pay, relocation load with such a limit in place? Or would it be better to husband those 5,000 miles and use them for lucrative runs? I'd have to go back and see how often we drive more than 5,000 miles a year in CA but my sense is that it happens most years.

Regardless of our past CA miles history, it would be nice to see a little breathing room develop for older trucks. I presume that reefer carriers will be making their needs known loud and clear without individual expediters contacting CARB.

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

"Now, under this new rule, if it is adopted, we'd be legal to run our 2006 truck in CA next year but we would also be mindful of our 5,000 mile limit. I'd have to go back and see how often we drive more than 5,000 miles a year in CA but my sense is that it happens most years."

I think you may be right here, but as you say, it's a bit of breathing room. There are ways to limit the time, and miles, in CA. Then again, I can't say I miss going out there, except for the side trips to Casa de Fruta. We could drop a weeks pay in there, just on the nuts. SOOO good!

ATeam · Nov 8, 2013

Overdrive magazine has a more detailed story on this.

zorry · Nov 8, 2013

How do you think this makes a guy that sold a great paid-off truck with many years of life left in it to buy a compliant truck feel ?

About the same way Phil's been feeling about losing his ability to go into Ca.

I am also happy for you guys if it does pass.

Mixed emotions.

Like seeing your mother-in-law drive your new pick-up off a cliff .

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

ATeam said:
Overdrive magazine has a more detailed story on this.

Looks like TCU's are still restricted, unless I missed something.

ATeam · Nov 8, 2013

Our CA miles for the last three calendar years:

2012: 7,488
2011: 9,908
2010: 6,770

layoutshooter · Nov 8, 2013

ATeam said:
Our CA miles for the last three calendar years:

2012: 7,488
2011: 9,908
2010: 6,770

Not surprised but it gives a bit of leeway. It also allows for more runs to other states out that way.

zorry · Nov 8, 2013

Looks like you should save your Ca miles for premium paying loads

paullud · Nov 8, 2013

ATeam said:
Our CA miles for the last three calendar years:

2012: 7,488
2011: 9,908
2010: 6,770

Well for certain people those numbers will change to help I'm sure.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

ATeam · Nov 8, 2013

zorry said:
Looks like you should save your Ca miles for premium paying loads

The pay-for-fuel run we are on now is a rare exception. Most of our CA runs are lucrative.

zorry · Nov 8, 2013

zorry said:
Looks like you should save your Ca miles for premium paying loads

This wasn't aimed at anyone particular
I know a team running volume miles, a lot into and out of Ca.
In a fleet truck, so the driver's thought process is quite different than the one truck operation.
It's really not too hard to rack up miles once inside Ca. .

zorry · Nov 8, 2013

Does anyone read into this that you may need your carriers support to get into this program ?
Could a carrier say "We like the idea of newer, possibly safer, more dependable trucks coming into our fleet. With this thinking we are not going to help, or allow, these older trucks to run Ca freight for us." ?

jjoerger · Nov 8, 2013

As long as the truck is legal why would the carrier care?

paullud · Nov 8, 2013

zorry said:
How do you think this makes a guy that sold a great paid-off truck with many years of life left in it to buy a compliant truck feel ?

About the same way Phil's been feeling about losing his ability to go into Ca.

I am also happy for you guys if it does pass.

Mixed emotions.

Like seeing your mother-in-law drive your new pick-up off a cliff .

It sucks that people just traded in or sold paid for equipment to get a new one with a payment attached based on a law that might change now. I'm wondering how many traded up to the required new equipment that now have a massive liability hanging over them.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app