Send your thoughts on the Proposed 34-Hour Restart

[beachbum]

Good morning!
"(q) Attendance on commercial motor vehicles containing Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 explosives. Operators who are required by 49 CFR 397.5 to be in attendance on commercial motor vehicles containing Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 explosives are on duty at all times while performing attendance functions or any other work for a motor carrier. Operators of commercial motor vehicles containing Division 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 explosives subject to the requirements for a 30-minute rest break in §395.3(a)(3)(ii) may use 30 minutes or more of attendance time to meet the requirement for a rest break, providing they perform no other work during the break. Such drivers must record the rest break as on-duty time in their record of duty status with remarks or annotations to indicate the specific on-duty periods that are used to meet the requirement for break."
Scope of rules in this part. - Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
& why do I needs to do all the googling around here...
or in other words, if you have explosives in the truck, and are a team drivers, you can choose to log it as line 4, rather then line one. long-haul/OTR carriers WILL take advantage of that prevision.
Yah, i know, its a bit complicated to understands how, but we already agreed that the scope of the HOS can get bit confusing.
wold you like some C-4 with that Oranges?

The way I read that it only works if its class 1.1 and 1.2 and 1,3 explosives. Plus it only would be for the 1/2 hour rest break would still be on duty, not of duty. Therefore, companies would gain nothing by putting this class of explosives on their trucks

Plus most companies don't allow any other freight to be put on with an explosive load. I know Landstar doesn't.

 

[layoutshooter]

This is not the only kind of freight that customers ship with the drivers having the duty to be in attendance of the load at all times. This exemption addresses only part of the problem because it addresses only part of the freight.

That is correct and points out part of the problem with cookie cutter regs.

 

[beachbum]

It seems most drivers are in denial about the new rules and seem to think that if they complain things will change. Well I'm here too tell you they won't be changing unless the courts overturn the regulation and as of right now the courts haven't given a court date yet that I've seen. Maybe someone here knows if that has changed.

 

[layoutshooter]

It seems most drivers are in denial about the new rules and seem to think that if they complain things will change. Well I'm here too tell you they won't be changing unless the courts overturn the regulation and as of right now the courts haven't given a court date yet that I've seen. Maybe someone here knows if that has changed.

It will never get to the courts unless people complain. The act of bringing it to the court IS a complaint. We are just complaining in here because we are not driving.

Sitting back and NOT filing complaints with the courts and blindly accepting dangerous or regs not based on any type of sound science just allows the regulatory agencies to control us further. They seem to forget that they are OUR employees. WE should be holding THEM responsible for bad regulations and, if it continues, see that the offending people are fired.

 

[davekc]

It seems most drivers are in denial about the new rules and seem to think that if they complain things will change. Well I'm here too tell you they won't be changing unless the courts overturn the regulation and as of right now the courts haven't given a court date yet that I've seen. Maybe someone here knows if that has changed.

You won't see any dates until it is actually a legal regulation. Hasn't got that far yet.

 

[beachbum]

You won't see any dates until it is actually a legal regulation. Hasn't got that far yet.

The safety groups, OOIDA and ATA have filed suit already, because these rules are in affect now, ever since they became a final rule in Dec 2011

 

[davekc]

The safety groups, OOIDA and ATA have filed suit already, because these rules are in affect now, ever since they became a final rule in Dec 2011

That is for the current in effect regulations, not the changes that are in the proposal stage.
More are likely to follow but on the medical side of things.

 

[beachbum]

That is for the current in effect regulations, not the changes that are in the proposal stage.
More are likely to follow but on the medical side of things.

What are you talking about, the HOS rule is not in the proposal stage it's a final rule the took affect last December 2011. Some of the rules took affect in feb. and the rest start in July of this year

 

[davekc]

What are you talking about, the HOS rule is not in the proposal stage it's a final rule the took affect last December 2011. Some of the rules took affect in feb. and the rest start in July of this year

Read what I said. I didn't say HOS rule.
Here is what I said.

That is for the current in effect regulations, not the changes that are in the proposal stage.
More are likely to follow but on the medical side of things.

 

[jimlookup]

A few points:
Because of better equipment, and maybe better training. trucking is getting safer for the highway world. So why the need for a lot of regulations written by people (bueaurocrats and thinktankers) with only a "hearsay" relationship to the industry?
With a simple, "We're not authorized to regulate that", the FMCSA ran away from one fo the biggest problems in HOS; dwell time at shippers and receivers. To me, this indicates a lack of sincerity in dealing with the HOS problem.
As rates stay level, or fall, and expenses continue to rise dramatically, drivers have a lot of pressure to find a edge (cheat) just to maintain their income. FMCSA sure didn't offer any suggestions for this problem.
Stupid,silly regulations just contribute to the "us against them mentality". If FMCSA really wanted to improve safety they could have gone to congress and said, "pass the **** highway bill so we can fix the roads". Or they could go to state lesislatures and "Hey, easy on the taxes and tolls. You're pushing the trucks off the interstates onto local higways where they are less safe.
Now is the time to scream, shout and jump up and down. I gladly filled out the survey and I'll fill it out every time I'm at a different IP address.
Yes, you don't have to be super smart to understand the new rules if you take them one at a time. But, try to grasp the whole scenario of what is happening to our industry. A couple stupid rule changes, a new toll or tax, a congresspersons vote being bought by special interests (heavier trucks) and unsafe trucks crossing our borders. These are issues that FMCSA is on the wrong side of.
Please don't say, I understand the rules so I can just go ahead and obey them.

 

[davekc]

If it was about safety, it would not have taken a 55 page report to get there.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regu...rulemakings/final/HOS-Final-Rule-12-27-11.pdf

It is all about the illusion and the people that profit from it. It really is that simple. Half the time they can't explain it themselves.
Look at the new CSA program. The thing is an absolute disaster.
And again, they still can't figure a large portion of it out.

 

[beachbum]

Read what I said. I didn't say HOS rule.
Here is what I said.

Were talking HOS and those rules are final, unless the courts overturn them, not any other Regulation that is at the proposal stage.

 

[beachbum]

If it was about safety, it would not have taken a 55 page report to get there.
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regu...rulemakings/final/HOS-Final-Rule-12-27-11.pdf

It is all about the illusion and the people that profit from it. It really is that simple. Half the time they can't explain it themselves.
Look at the new CSA program. The thing is an absolute disaster.
And again, they still can't figure a large portion of it out.

The reason there are 55 pages comes from the fact that they had to answer the comments and also they had to put in writing their biases for the rule changes.

 

[jimlookup]

The rules they are changing in July used to be final. Our organizations and lobbists must stay active and noisy. If you don't squeak you don't get any grease.

 

[davekc]

The reason there are 55 pages comes from the fact that they had to answer the comments and also they had to put in writing their biases for the rule changes.

That is my point. If it takes 55 pages to explain and answer comments then that should tell you something.
But...I hope you aren't defending that piece of work. But if you are, I guess it will provide some cheap entertainment for others reading pleasure.

 

[Turtle]

​

Look close. See if you can spot yourself.
​

 

[ATeam]

It seems most drivers are in denial about the new rules and seem to think that if they complain things will change. Well I'm here too tell you they won't be changing unless the courts overturn the regulation and as of right now the courts haven't given a court date yet that I've seen. Maybe someone here knows if that has changed.

I am not one to give up hope so easily. While you may turn out to be correct about no rule changes, I think the door remains open; not because truckers have the voice and power to effect a change but because shippers do.

Certain classes of freight are shipped by companies who have huge amounts of influence in Washington. I do not know why it has not happened already, but when they get it that these rules require drivers to stop protecting secure loads that they used to be able to protect under the old rules, I would think that these companies would become energized.

Rules can be changed by the courts when they are contested in court. But the rule making agency or a higher power can change them too, and that, I believe, is where the powerful companies will exert their influence, when the time comes.

I may be wrong about this, but it is inconceivable to me that the shippers of high-risk freight will remain quiet and the higher powers will allow this ridiculous situation (mandatory 30 minute break) to continue once they finally get it about what the rules require. If they do not change the rules, they should be re-titled the "Cargo Thief and Terrorist Assistance Act."

 

[beachbum]

I am not one to give up hope so easily. While you may turn out to be correct about no rule changes, I think the door remains open; not because truckers have the voice and power to effect a change but because shippers do.

Certain classes of freight are shipped by companies who have huge amounts of influence in Washington. I do not know why it has not happened already, but when they get it that these rules require drivers to stop protecting secure loads that they used to be able to protect under the old rules, I would think that these companies would become energized.

Rules can be changed by the courts when they are contested in court. But the rule making agency or a higher power can change them too, and that, I believe, is where the powerful companies will exert their influence, when the time comes.

I may be wrong about this, but it is inconceivable to me that the shippers of high-risk freight will remain quiet and the higher powers that be will allow this ridiculous situation to continue once they finally get it about what the rules require. If they do not change the rules, they should be re-titled the "Cargo Thief and Terrorist Assistance Act."

Look the FMCSA made the new rules and there is no change at the top in this country and won't be for 4 more years, therefore these rules are here to stay.

You do know that the ATA and OOIDA and every other trucking group tried to have these changed before they became final and nothing happened. That is why these groups and the safety groups have filed suits against the rules. Now like I've said before, it's up to the courts now.

Until the courts make a decision people in trucking need to prepare for the changes to be in affect in July.


What other freight other then 1.1 1.2 and 1.3 have to have 24 hour watch. Plus under the rules we have now there was no provision for watching the freight when the driver left the truck unattended. That is one good thing about fuel and go we have now with comdata cards.

 

[beachbum]

​

Look close. See if you can spot yourself.
​

It's not a question about being a sheep or anything else. These are the rules we have and unless the courts overturns the regulation then those are the rules will have to live under for the foreseeable future.

 

[zorry]

24 hour watch could be required of anything high value.
Electronics. Medicine. Art. Proto-type cars. Even proto-type toilet paper !
If it's valuable enough,it gets watched.