Trucks at Work Blog

“This questionnaire they’ve been giving to people who are thinking about signing up for a government job is extremely invasive.” –David Gergen, CNN senior political analyst

It’s being called “the most rigid presidential vetting process on record” in several stories on CNN .My question is this: why is everyone getting in such a breathless twist over it?

OK, so the Obama administration is requiring prospective candidates to complete a seven-page questionnaire that requires the disclosure of nearly every last private detail of their lives – going beyond the obvious (any criminal activity in your past?) to scour personal diaries, blog posts and any potential financial entanglements of extended family members, according to CNN. All of this is in ADDITION to what’s called the “invasive” FBI background check for government workers at the Cabinet and White House staffing level.

“I’ve never seen anything like this at the presidential level before,” the great David Gergen, a long time veteran of the U.S. political landscape and past adviser to four U.S. presidents. “The FBI asks these kinds of questions, but to have the presidential transition team asking these questions requires … great volumes of records that have to be checked out.”

Um, OK … so what? I mean, this kind of stuff is starting to occur for truck drivers, clerks, and dock workers people. More than a few worker-bee-wannabes are finding that the college party beer fest photos they put on their MySpace page are coming back to haunt them in job interviews. Don’t you think the same standard should be applied to, oh, say, the secretary of Commerce? Someone who’ll be meeting with foreign dignitaries and negotiating trade deals? It would be pretty poor form to discover foul-mouthed blog rants or risqué behavior on YouTube when the Cabinet officer in question is trying to remove tariffs for freer trade – so our economy can get back on the road to recovery.

One hilarious example came from – of all places! – the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders reality TV show on Country Music Television, where a prospective cheerleader gotten taken to task for suggestive photos of herself on her MySpace page. The best part is that, though she agreed to take the photos down, she didn’t understand why her “private” life was of any concern to her attempt to be Dallas Cowboy cheerleader.

That’s the very point: your private life now IS a concern … at least the parts that, today, are increasingly and willingly made “public” by millions of people via the Internet. We’re also beginning to realize that not just our behavior but those of extended family and friends make an impact as well. It would be kind of hard to convincingly position yourself as Treasury Secretary, for example, if your brother’s wife got convicted in a check kiting scheme and you knew about it and covered for her. Sure, stuff like that is sad and your own business … but if you want to then take the public reins of government, where your decisions affect hundreds of millions of people, let me tell you, you BETTER get vetted and grilled in detail about it.

Look, let’s be realistic here. Your job is not a wholly separate, hermetically sealed-off portion of your life. We all know this. Truckers know that if they get a DUI off duty, in their personal car, that’s going to impact their CDL. They know if they are convicted of felonies, that’ll affect their ability to get a hazmat certification on their CDL. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is trying to more closely link the CDL and the driver’s medical qualification file, because they know – as we all do – that health issues, be it obesity, diabetes, asthma, whatever, impact a trucker’s ability to drive.

In short, we’re demanding ever more scrutiny of truck drivers these days and are trying to hold them to more rigorous standards in both their professional and personal lives. We should – and apparently are – do the same for senior government officials. It’s only fair, folks – so you Cabinet officers, advisers and staffers up there in the White House better get used to it.

“The future productivity and mobility needs of the nation depend on surface transportation. Without a reasonable solution, our long-term economic competitiveness in the world economy is in jeopardy.” –Mortimer Downey, former Deputy Secretary of the Dept. of Transportation (DOT) under President Clinton and now candidate for the DOT’s top job under President-elect Obama.

So the list for the top job at the Department of Transportation (DOT) is now a short one, containing just four names: The above-quoted Mortimer Downey (who served in the DOT twice, under Presidents Carter and Clinton); Jane Garvey, the first woman to head up the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) from 1997 to 2002 and a veteran of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); Steve Heminger, executive director of the San Francisco Bay area’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission and a close ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.); and the one and only James Oberstar (D-Minn.), powerful chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Those are some pretty big guns if you ask me – each of them intimately familiar with the transportation pitfalls we face today across our nation. The question is, are they up to the task of not only fixing the problems we face today, but also preparing our transportation networks for the challenges of tomorrow?

The biggest near-term yet also long-term challenge is the Highway Trust Fund – the financing vehicle for building roads, bridges and transit networks. As we’ve come to know, it’s woefully inadequate for the job. Created in 1956, the fund relies on gasoline and diesel fuel taxes to generate the monies necessary to repair and expand transportation infrastructure. But the roughly $50 billion it collects every year is nowhere near the $90 billion in annual expenditures necessary just to bring current roads and bridges up to snuff, according to the final report filed by the bipartisan National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission in January this year.

That 12-member commission – chartered by Congress in 2005 and chaired by current DOT secretary Mary Peters – went on to state that significant increased investment in surface transportation would be required to upgrade to an advanced surface transportation system capable of sustaining strong economic growth. THAT recommendation alone came with a $225 billion ANNUAL price tag from all sources (Federal, state, local, and private) for the next FIFTY years. [I don’t want to even begin doing the math on that one.]

This is a challenge Oberstar in particular is well aware of. “The federal government has played a central role in the development of our nation’s infrastructure since the late 1700s. Our forefathers knew that in order for our fledgling nation to prosper, trade, and commerce had to thrive. So, the federal government invested in roads, locks, inland waterways, and harbors,” he said in a speech last year.

“As history has shown, these leaders got it right because not only did our nation’s economy thrive due to their wise investments; it grew into the strongest economy in the world,” he stressed. “Our nation’s intermodal transportation network continues to serve as the backbone of our economic security and competitiveness, as well as our quality of life. It facilitates the movement of people and goods and links our communities to each other and the world. It is the foundation of America’s economy.”

While the U.S. transportation network remains the envy of the world, Oberstar believes we are losing ground. “Without a renewed commitment to providing the vision and leadership to rebuild and expand these systems, this situation will continue to get worse,” he explained.

Yet to fund all this “necessary” investment requires one critical and unavoidable ingredient: MONEY … lots and lots of it. The Commission recommended a slew of new revenue strategies, including increasing the Federal gas tax between 25 and 40 cents per gallon (adding 5 to 8 cents per gallon, per year), with the rate increase indexed and phased in over time.

“The fuel tax was the primary recommended user fee in the near term since it will continue to be a viable revenue source for surface transportation for some time to come,” the Commission noted. “The most promising alternative user fee revenue measure is a vehicle miles traveled fee, provided that substantial privacy and collection cost issues can be addressed. “

Other user-based fees also should help address the investment shortfall, the group said in its final report, such as: more tolls; the deployment of peak-hour “congestion pricing” on Federal-aid highways in major metropolitan areas; a freight fee for freight projects; and ticket taxes for passenger rail improvements. “Tax policy also can provide incentives to expand intermodal networks,” the Commission added. “Governments on all levels should encourage public-private partnerships as a means of attracting additional private investment to the surface transportation system, provided that conditions are included to protect the public interest and the movement of interstate commerce.”

Heminger – head of the MTA since 2001 – signed off on these plans as well as an effort to streamline the way the federal government allocates those tax dollars. “I group our principal findings into the three R’s,” he told the “Rails-to-trails” conservancy earlier this year. “The first is that we need to reform the way we do transportation, from how we select the projects to how we deliver them. Second, we need to restructure the federal program, which now has more than 100 different spending categories. We proposed a dramatic consolidation of those categories into 10 new areas that we think meet the test of national interest. And the third is revenue, where we recommended a significant increase in the federal gas tax.”

He’s also a huge proponent of improving highway safety – and providing more funds to do it. Right now, for example, only 3% of Highway Trust Fund monies go to highway safety initiatives, whereas 82% go to road and bridge repair and construction, with 15% earmarked for transit needs.

“Put bluntly, our track record on highway safety in America is a national tragedy,” he said in Congressional testimony earlier this year. “Every year 40,000 of our fellow citizens die on the nation’s highways – that’s equivalent to a 9/11 every month, month after month, year after year In addition to the horrible human cost, the economic consequences are enormous. According to a study released … by AAA, the annual cost of traffic crashes in lost earnings, medical bills, and other economic impacts is nearly two and a half times the annual cost of traffic congestion in the nation’s urban areas — $164 billion for traffic crashes vs. $68 billion for congestion.”

He said that though we constantly hear federal officials claim that safety is Job #1, the carnage continues. “With the exception of many rural roads that need to be upgraded, our highways themselves are pretty safe – it’s the drivers who are dangerous,” Heminger stressed. “Driver behavior is where we need to devote much more attention than we have in the past, just as countries very similar to ours – like Great Britain and Australia – have done so and achieved much lower fatality rates than our own.”

Heminger noted that every state should have a primary seat belt law, but only half do. Every state should have a motorcycle helmet law, but only 20 do. Every state should have an ignition interlock law that prevents repeat drunk drivers from starting their car if they’re not sober, but less than a handful do. And once those laws are passed, they need to be vigorously enforced to ensure compliance, he said.

“Our commission report proposes an aggressive but achievable goal of cutting traffic fatalities in half by 2025,” Heminger explained. “We can reach that goal, but only if the combined might and muscle of our federal, state, and local governments are brought to bear. If we do reach that goal, it would mean 20,000 more Americans every year would be able to tell their loved ones about their drive home from work each day.”

Getting our arms around a transportation strategy this big and getting everyone to buy into it is probably the biggest hurdle (DOT Secretary Peters, for one, disagreed with her own group’s call for higher fuel taxes). Jane Garvey knows all about that particular challenge – an issue she touched on in a speech back in 2000 while at the FAA.

“Yes, it still takes too long for things to get done. There is a real art to knowing when we have enough information to move forward,” she said. “In a large organization it’s a struggle sometime to create a sense of urgency — not impulsiveness, but urgency — because the issues are too important not to act. And frankly, at some point after you’ve heard the relevant arguments and considered them carefully — further debate or reflection becomes marginal and delay becomes a de facto decision.”

Doing all of that is no doubt going to be a struggle – and keeping the freight industry’s seat at the table while that struggle occurs is going to be no easy task. Mortimer Downey, for one, recognizes that freight must have a voice in all of this as it’s a vital cog in the economic engine of our country.

“Freight movements, whether by rail, truck, ship or air, are a crucial link in the $7 trillion commodity flow fueling the U.S. economy today,” he told Congress back in May. “The chokepoints that are developing along the nation’s highways only tell a fraction of the story. That strain on capacity is being felt along all of the nation’s major gateways and trade corridors. Congestion on these facilities is not only an environmental disaster; it serves as a trade barrier as well.”

Despite these compelling figures, Downey said we as a nation do not have consensus around a national freight plan or a coherent program to document, anticipate and provide for our economy’s goods movement needs.

“Infrastructure that was adequate in the first half of the twentieth century is still being relied on today, with some facilities utilized well beyond design capacity, while others are no longer as useful in today’s economic patterns,” he stressed. “We must focus on the system as a whole, rather than viewing the nation’s transportation infrastructure as several different systems that occasionally interact. We must see the entire network, interacting and interdependent. Only then can we begin to discuss real solutions to the issues this nation faces.”

Like I said, all four of the potential candidates to be DOT secretary recognize the enormous challenges ahead. We’ll see in the coming days who shall be picked to take them on.

“ A lot of people make sports stars out to be some kind of heroes. But if you ask me, people who don’t seek the limelight and risk their personal safety – perhaps even their lives – to save people they don’t know … that separates them as the real heroes.” –Officer Lou Gregoire, Gwinnett County Police Department, outside Atlanta, Georgia

Today, Officer Lou Gregoire is a police helicopter pilot in Gwinnett County – a job in an elite aviation unit that allows him to quickly come to the rescue of fellow officers in any number of bad situations. He’s probably been instrumental in saving more than a few lives and removing a slew of criminals from the streets over the years.

Yet he would never have gotten the chance to do any of that if a truck driver named David Zorn hadn’t stepped in to save Gregoire’s life eight years ago during a traffic stop gone horribly, brutally wrong.

Back in 2000, Zorn – driving an 18-wheeler for the now-defunct Consolidated Freightways on U.S. Interstate 85 in Norcross, Ga., on the outskirts of Atlanta – spotted Gregoire under attack by a man stopped for suspicion of driving while intoxicated

Unbeknownst to Zorn, the man beating on Gregoire was a physical trainer at the local YMCA. The fight had gotten so bad that Gregoire tried resorting to deadly force – yet his Smith and Wesson semi-automatic pistol locked up because the clip ejected during the struggle. Even worse, police backup for Gregoire wasn’t immediately available because all the other officers had been tied up with two shootings and three bar brawls in the area. Dozens of motorists had slowed down to look at the scene as the beleaguered officer fought for his life, but they quickly drove on – leaving Gregoire to whatever fate awaited him.

“The whole time I was fighting him, he kept telling me, ‘I’m not going to jail…you’re making me kill you…since you’re not letting me go, I’m going to have to kill you,’” Gregoire said recently in recalling the incident. He found out later that the same man had assaulted an officer and escaped during a similar DUI stop nearly a year earlier.

Gregoire’s attacker had him pinned on the ground when Zorn arrived – and when Gregoire’s assailant got a look at the 6-foot, 2-inch, 250-pound truck driver coming at him brandishing a large flashlight, he fled. But like a blitzing linebacker, Zorn pursued and caught up to the man – pinning him firmly to the ground until additional police officers finally reached the scene. Gregoire’s assailant eventually received a 10-year prison term for the incident.

Zorn, who is now working as a regional driver for Yellow Transportation, still has a hard time seeing himself as a hero. Rather, he looks at himself as someone who was angry that no one else would stop to help a police officer in trouble. “I guess it was the way I was raised – you help people when they’re in trouble,” he recently said.

For his heroism, Zorn won the Goodyear North America Highway Hero Award in 2000. More importantly, though, is how that recognition changed his life in trucking – especially among his peers.

“Before this incident, I had been driving trucks for 12 years feeling somewhat disconnected from society. You know, it’s just the nature of the job since trucking is so demanding. So I was amazed at how many people knew who I was after I won the Highway Hero award,” he said.

“When I worked for Consolidated, I was routinely driving from Atlanta to the Pacific Northwest. I would be in Seattle or in Portland walking across the yard and co-workers who I didn’t know would smile at me and talk to me just like they knew me,” Zorn recalled. “Then, when I came over to Yellow Transportation a few years later, the same thing was happening.”

Look, I know I’ve referenced Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company’s award in this space more than once. [Nominations for the 2008 award, by the way, are still being accepted through Nov. 30. You can call the Goodyear Hero Hotline at 330-796-8183 or go to www.highwayhero.net and submit your candidate online.]

But this is important – going well beyond the Goodyear marketing that obviously surrounds an award like this. It’s about properly recognizing those truck drivers – the folks doing the real work in this industry – that really go above and beyond the call of duty; who step into the breach time and countless time again when many others that also share the highways do not.

Zorn, for one, sees the program as an encouragement to truck drivers to take more responsibility for helping others. “When this situation came up, it was an opportunity for me to do something for the neighborhood – and my neighborhood is the highway,” he explained.

These selfless acts by drivers – and there are so many, yet few are recognized for them – really go a long way towards changing the stereotypes they suffer under. Just ask Officer Gregoire. “After what David did for me and after meeting the other highway hero nominees at the [Mid America] trucking show [in 2001], I started seeing truck drivers more as professionals who are proud of what they do and how they really do care about their reputations and the safety of others,” he said.

No truer words can be spoken, I think.

“The outlook – especially for the U.S. market – is clear: we’re in for a rough ride.” –Andreas Renschler, head of the global truck division for Germany’s Daimler AG

It’s hard not to like guys like Andreas Renschler – executives obviously used to hobnobbing with really big names in the global community of business and politics that have absolutely no problem sitting down informally with low-level scribes like myself to talk shop. Armed with written remarks, Renschler — head of the global truck division for Germany’s Daimler AG — laid them to one side at our table and immediately asked for questions on anything – the U.S. political scene, the future of alternative fuels and emission regulations, how to restore economic vitality to world markets, the decision to shut down Sterling Truck Corp., you name it.

Renschler’s take on dealing with the current economic crisis, for example: “The biggest support government can do for the economy and truck markets is infrastructure investment. The roads have to be refurbished anyway and for us [as truck builders] stimulating such investment is the best help. There’s no economic growth without transportation and if our customers make money, we make money.”

On a possible delay for 2010 diesel engine emission mandates: “This is the wrong approach, for postponing these mandates sends the wrong signal to the market about the importance of the environment. We understand the concern about costs, so what we did in Europe was incentivizing the emission issue: offer incentives to buy the cleaner trucks. That does two things: stimulate the economy and clean up the environment. We like it, the customer likes it, and it works.”

On raising taxes on trucking: “My point of view is that it is fair to tax trucks – what is unfair is to tax ONLY one mode. You cannot tax just our customers – you must tax the railroads and the airlines when it comes to funding transportation needs. The issue is competitiveness – taxing just one mode of transport creates a competitive advantage for the others and that is what is unfair.”

On why infrastructure strategy is critical: “In Europe, we understand that we are losing competitiveness because we cannot efficiently move goods around. Yes, we put money into infrastructure but only in certain areas: the autobahn [the highway system] and high-speed rail at the expense of secondary roads and regular rail lines. That increased congestion and delays, which pose larger economic issues.”

On alternative fuels: “Understand this: there is no silver bullet when we talk about alternatives. Everyone uses trucks in different ways – that is why we are working on a wide range of vehicle technologies. A diesel-hybrid bus works well in the cities, in stop-and-go operation, whereas a refuse truck is better suited for natural gas. A highway truck, though, needs diesel and there the focus is one of improving that engine’s fuel efficiency. For us, though, the main thing is the customer must gain an advantage from alternatives.”

Renschler’s outlook for truck sales is none too rosy, as you can read in our lead story today. Yet he’s quick to note that Daimler doesn’t plan to throw its hands up over the situation. “Our ambition is clear: we won’t use this crisis as an excuse and we’re very busy controlling the things we can control,” he said. “It’s true we live in uncertain times. But in the truck business, one thing is still certain: there’s always the next upturn.”

Preparing for the current downturn cycle is why Daimler decided to shut down its Sterling subsidiary back in October, he added. “We found that there was a 50% overlap in products between Sterling and Freightliner,” he said. “And with demand falling we had to adopt a new position. It’s a question of being ready for the twists and turns in the road ahead.”

There are sure to be a lot of them over the next year – and it’ll be interesting to see how the truck makers cope.

[Just for fun, I’ve included a slick rock and roll video Daimler put together to highlight its global truck business. Hey, it IS Friday after all!]

“Any realistic discussion of the future of global transportation in this century … requires an understanding of the dramatic changes that have occurred in freight transportation during the past 25 years. A revolution has taken place, the general public is unaware of it, [and] far too many transportation professionals fail to understand its scope and significance.” –Gilbert Carmichael, founding chairman of the Intermodal Transportation Institute at the University of Denver

I’ve had the distinct pleasure to talk with Gilbert “Gil” Carmichael in person, a former U.S. Federal Railroad Administrator from 1989-1993 and founding chairman of the Intermodal Transportation Institute (ITI) at the University of Denver. Soft spoken and always well-poised, Carmichael is one of those forward thinkers in the transportation industry – someone that never stops looking to the future and asking “what if?” time and time again.

It’s because of that forward thinking that he helped found the ITI, for Carmichael realized far too few people entering the world of freight got a good, solid, in-depth understanding of transportation and logistics. Beyond mere theory, he wanted to make sure people entering this industry were equipped with real-world knowledge of all modes and how those modes interconnect with each other – and how that interconnection underpins the global economy.

“This global movement of freight is sharply focused on speed, safety, reliable scheduling, and economic efficiency,” he said in a speech this week at the 15th World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems in New York City. “It builds on the strengths of each mode – ship, rail, and truck – who have become partners in offering service.”

Carmichael stressed that each mode has a specific and vital role to play in the global intermodal freight network – though his view not all truckers may agree with. That’s one of the other interesting things about him – he’s not afraid to court controversy when looking into his crystal ball.

From his perspective, cCargo ships and airplanes span the oceans, while freight railroads are the high-speed, long distance, lowest cost, transportation artery on land. The truck provides local feeder service at origins and destinations, while cargo airplanes deliver high-value, specialized freight.

“Overall, the operational and economic efficiency of freight’s intermodal network dramatically conserves fuel, reduces other environmental impacts, and is significantly safer,” he said. “It represents the most economically, fuel efficient, and environmentally sustainable approach to transportation.”

The reason Carmichael believes trucks should become more regionalized, with railroads taking on more long haul freight, relates directly to the question of energy supply and cost – an issue that can no longer be ignored.

“Petroleum was established as transportation’s fuel of choice for two reasons,” he said. “Historically, it’s been available at relatively low cost. Equally important – or perhaps more so – petroleum provides a portable source of motive power. Today, we worry about both the cost and future availability of petroleum fuels. Somewhere out in this century we know that the supply will start to fall dramatically. [That’s why] building more highways is definitely not the solution.”

Carmichael also pointed out that the intermodal concept was designed at a time when oil prices were near 40 dollars a barrel. Prices dropped sharply in the mid-1980s, but rail intermodal expanded anyway. “The recent whipsawing of oil prices has people wondering about capital investment,” he said. “Intermodal freight movement makes sense irrespective of fuel prices. It is the energy-efficient service provider. If prices drop the container will still represent the lowest-cost option. If energy cost again double, intermodal simply will gain more market share. Intermodal systems have become a whole new transportation science.”

And technology has a serious role to play here, in terms of helping optimize utilization of facilities while tightening cargo security. “The intermodal system requires efficient terminals. There have been significant improvements, but inefficiencies and bottlenecks remain,” Carmichael stressed. “Remember, too: A safety problem in one mode affects the overall performances of all modes in the intermodal system.”

He also believes re-regulation of the freight world is a bad idea. “Some industry experts argue – and I agree with them – that intermodal has succeeded because it was a private-sector, customer-driven initiative,” Carmichael said. “I believe that we must be very cautious in defining the future role of governments as participants in this process. In particular, there is talk in the U.S. of re-imposing the type of governmental economic regulation that existed prior to 1980. Had that regulation remained in place I seriously doubt that the U.S. would now be part of the global intermodal revolution.”

Whether you agree with Gil Carmichael or not, I’ll tell you this – he sure puts a lot on the table to think about. And mark my words – many of these issues are going to crop up next year as debate begins on the reauthorization of the next highway bill. So it’s best to keep our minds open to different views on global freight transportation as we move forward.

“Our agency found no justification to change the rules.” –John Hill, administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Administration

Well, now it’s final; a done deal; in the books – for the hotly-contested revision to hours of service (HOS) rules issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) way back in 2004 are now the law of the land, remaining largely unchanged as well.

In a nutshell (though we’re probably all bored to tears reading this for the umpteenth time) here are the key parts of the now-finalized HOS regulations:

• 14 hours on-duty; 10 hours off-duty; 11 hours maximum driving time;

• 60-hours/7-days or 70-hours/8-days cumulative cap for total on-duty time;

• On-duty clock reset to zero after 34 hours of continuous off-duty time;

• No nighttime or weekend restrictions.

These are the same rules FMCSA put into effect back on Jan. 4, 2004 – except for the “split sleeper berth” provision that allowed a driver to split up the 10-hour off-duty time into two rest periods totaling 10 hours, one of which had to be at least 2 hours long. That part of the HOS revision got ditched after one of many court challenges and despite efforts by several industry groups, notably the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association back in 2005, never got restored.

Of the 900 comments FMCSA received as part of the interim final rulemaking process, John Hill, the agency’s administrator, said a good chunk of them were about the split-sleeper provision. “It’s still very much an issue,” Hill said in a conference call with reporters yesterday.

“Our concern was that, under the old rules, drivers could keep extending their 15 hour work day by using sleeper berth rest periods,” he explained. “We were concerned that might reoccur if we retained a sleeper berth provision. So we stayed with the firm 14 hour work day – you can’t extend it. You must stop.”

I must say, though, it’s quite something to be sitting here, writing about an HOS final rule. I mean, this whole process began over EIGHT years ago, when then-administrator Julie Cirillo introduced the then newly formed FMCSA’s first attempt at HOS reform – rules that had remained unchanged since 1933. THAT first go around was a disaster, to say the least – proposing FIVE different HOS packages in an attempt to make the rules more flexible for different kinds of trucking applications. Needless to say, everyone hated the idea – truckers and the anti-trucking lobby alike – and the effort quickly died.

Under the tenure of Joseph Clapp, who replaced Cirillo following the election of President Bush, the HOS rules that are new finalized came into being. Those went into effect on Jan. 4, 2004, and quickly got bogged down in a series of court battles launched by Public Citizen and other so-called advocacy groups – battles that began to focus more and more on minutiae and the procedural processes FMCSA used to develop the rules in an effort to overturn them.

But the rules survived those challenges and are now finalized – that is unless President Obama’s administration decides to re-address them. It would take a lot of time and resources to do so, both of which are in short supply due to the economic crisis we’re in, but you never know.

Still, despite all of the back and forth over the years, these are rules the industry can live with – indeed, since 2004, truckers are not only making them work, safety isn’t being compromised one whit by them, as many so-called advocates claimed would happen.

“Our science is meticulous and our analysis exhaustive so that we can deliver definitive results: more alert and efficient drivers, safer roads, and even fewer fatalities,” said Hill – and the numbers back him up.

For example, the truck-car crash fatality rate declined 12%, from 2.57 per 100 million miles in 2000 down to 2.25 million miles in 2006. Truck-car crash fatalities are also way down, from 5,240 deaths in 2005 down to 4,808 last year. Fatigue as a factor in truck-car collisions remains stable, Hill noted. In 2000, fatigue was a factor in 2.2%, dropping to a low of 1.5% in 2001 and 2006. Last year it was 1.9% – well within the highs and lows established since 2000.

The big issue, of course, is how many crashes occur in that 11th hour of driving. Many safety groups claimed we’d see a big increase since the new rules upped allowable driving time from 10 hours a day to 11. Guess what? There’ve been just two in the last three years of available data – none in 2004, one in 2005, and none in 2006. That’s pretty compelling evidence, if you ask me.

“The biggest advantage of these rules is that they follow the optimal 24-hour circadian rhythm wake/sleep cycle,” Hill told reporters. Under the old rules, truckers were on duty for 15 hours, could drive for 10, and were off duty for eight hours. That added up to 23 hours, skewing their time clock as their week progressed. The new rules not only puts them on a 24 hour clock, it shortened their work day by an hour and boosted off-duty time by two hours.

“These rules are crafted to match what we know about drivers’ circadian rhythms and the real world work environment truckers face every day,” he said.

Now, one thing bugged me in all of this – did the recent economic downturn skew the numbers in any way? I mean, with less freight being hauled and carriers going out of business (some 1,900 this year alone according to the American Trucking Association) all adding up to fewer trucks on the road, could compromise the data. Hill told me he doesn’t think so.

“Much of our analysis was done before the downturn,” he explained to me. “A lot of the data we used to look at the safety impact of the rules is from 2006 and 2007. Also, we’ve factored in economic fluctuations into our calculations over the last 10 to 12 years to eliminate how that impacts our data.”

Hill also thinks this final rule is going remain standing once he leaves and a new administrator takes over in January. “There was strong objection back in 2006 but we don’t see that now – there doesn’t seem to be interest in fighting this,” he said. “We’ll just have to watch this play out and see what happens.”

Indeed. It’s been a long trip with these rules up till now. We’ll have to see if the journey continues under a new administration next year.

“The intelligent vehicle and infrastructure technologies on display this week will save drivers precious time and hard-earned money by making travel safer and more convenient.” –Scott Belcher, president and CEO, Intelligent Transportation Society of America

There’s a ton of technology available today that could – and I stress the word “could” here – help not only alleviate a lot of the traffic congestion on our highways today, but also save fuel, money (in terms of vehicle maintenance costs) and that most precious of all commodities today, time. The best thing is most of the technologies I’m talking about – electronic tolls, “smart” traffic lights, and real-time routing using global positioning satellite (GPS) data — all exist today and are well-tested. What we need now is a national strategy to deploy them in an orderly fashion and get people to use them.

Right now in Manhattan this week, the 15th World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems is showing off the potential of these technologies to transportation officials and industry leaders from the U.S. and more than 45 countries. “These technologies allow cars and roads to communicate with each other,” noted Scott Belcher, President and CEO of the Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America). “They can prevent accidents before they happen, minimize traffic delays by reducing congestion and suggesting alternative routes based on real-time data, and even find you an available parking space.”

The point here is that technology today can play a multi-faceted role in helping alleviate a lot of transportation problems – both from the cars and commercial truck perspective. It’s not a silver bullet – nothing is these days – but deployed and used properly, technology can take a lot of pressure off freight and travel roadways in our country.

Consider these numbers: currently, a traffic accident occurs every five seconds on our roads killing over 42,000 Americans each year – equivalent to a full 737 flight crashing each day. Commuters waste more than seven million gallons of fuel daily, and the average rush hour commuter wastes almost a full work week each year stuck in traffic. The resulting financial cost to our economy exceeds $300 billion per year, said Randell Iwasaki, chairman of ITS America and chief deputy director of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

“These unacceptable safety, environmental and congestions problems have solutions, and the answers often involve more effective use of technology,” he pointed out. “Technologies are readily available, and even more advanced solutions are on the way that will help commuters, transit operators, and commercial vehicles get where they need to go more safely, efficiently, and cost-effectively than has ever been dreamed of in the past.”

I talked with Charlotte Seigler, a spokeswoman for ITS America, about how difficulties involved in getting all these disparate technologies on the ground and working together seamlessly. “First of all, this technology is here and is already in use in pockets across the country – E-Z Pass for tollways on the east coast, GPS tracking for cars and trucks alike. So the excuse the technology doesn’t work is off the table,” she told me.

“The bottom line, though, is we need a national strategy to get the benefits out of it – not deploy these technologies piecemeal in different parts of the country,” Seigler explained. “It’s a matter of installing these systems in synch with the highway infrastructure.”

It might seem a little outlandish to rank sensor systems up there alongside concrete and asphalt in terms of infrastructure needs, but the benefits could be pretty significant, such as:

• Detecting traffic bottlenecks and then responding in real time by displaying travel advisories, changing speed limits, and altering traffic signal timing.

• Respond to crashes more quickly to save lives and prevent gridlock.

• Deploy maintenance crews in response to changing weather conditions – down to the exact street.

• Manage the regional transportation network to ensure optimum performance, efficiency and safety.

It’s not all solely about the roadways, either. Take new vehicle technology such as General Motor’s oil life monitoring (OLM) system, installed now on most of its cars. By tracking vehicle use habits and analyzing the resulting data within the vehicle’s onboard computers, engine oil life can be safely extended – saving money for the vehicle owner by reducing the need for oil changes, thus reducing petroleum consumption as well.

[Here’s a short video showing how GM’s OLM technology works. As they say, pictures – in this case moving pictures – are worth more than a thousand words.]

These are just some of the ways we can use technology to help us improve transportation as a whole in the U.S. What we need now is a national strategy to get everyone on the same page so we can fully maximize the benefits such technology offers.

“The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell.” –Confucius

A while back, I got the chance to sit down with one of my favorite contacts on the truck manufacturing side of things; a guy that’s been in the business of designing, building, and selling trucks for almost four decades. We were just talking shop when he related an interesting tale from his days as a heavy truck salesman some years ago – one I think anyone in trucking can relate to.

The story goes that a guy comes in looking to buy a Class 8 tractor with big power, a big square hood, West Coast bumpers … the works. My friend works the numbers, reviews this fellow’s business plan, income, family needs (home mortgage, etc.) and figures that payment on the truck of his dreams is about twice what this guy can afford. So he tells the customer, in effect, you’ve got to look at something less expensive – less power, less weight, more aerodynamic … basically the complete opposite of what his customer wants.

The guy shakes my contact off – “No, this is the truck I want,” he explains. My source again points to the numbers – if this guy buys this truck, the payments will suffocate him, most likely resulting in repossession. But the customer doesn’t budge.

“Look,” my friend recalls this guy telling him. “This is the truck I want. Now, you either sell it to me … or I’ll walk down the hall to the next guy and he’ll sell it to me, costing you a sale. You choose.”

In the end, my contact sold him the truck. And three months later, the bank repossessed it – just like my friend feared.

I’ve thought a lot about this story in recent weeks as the economic news keeps getting worse and more and more companies clamor for help from the federal government. Just like the trucker who wanted what he wanted — damn what the numbers may say — many corporate supplicants seem to laboring under the very same delusions.

The easiest example is, of course, the cabal of executives running reinsurance giant American International Group (better known as AIG) – idiots that went on a $440,000-plus executive retreat, complete with spa treatments and $500 bottles of wine, after begging for – and receiving – an emergency $85 billion loan in September (a loan that’s been expanded to $150 billion now). They followed that with an $85,000 partridge hunt in merry old England – getting grilled later about such foolishness on Capitol Hill.

Sure, half a million is a trivial amount amid the billions being bandied about here … but still! Anybody with half a brain would’ve canceled any such gatherings after the loan went though … or better yet asked one of its multi-millionaire executives to cover the tab.

Next, take a look at Lehman Brothers – or more precisely, their 3,500-piece art collection that went on the auction block back in September. ART? What, may I dare ask, is an INVESTMENT BANKING company spending money on an ART collection for? We’re talking top-dollar stuff by Jasper Johns and Andreas Gurky here – with million-dollar (and then some) price tags. I don’t care how well a company does – if the CEO wants a Picasso in his office, HE or SHE goes and buys it – not the company. That’s just basic stuff … isn’t it?

And let me tell you, a LOT of Wall Streeters could afford to pick up the tab for their own art, for they racked up $33 billion in BONUSES last year – just BONUSES mind you, irrespective of salaries, stock options and the like. That’s more than what the former “Big Three” automakers TOGETHER are asking for in government bailout funds. (Maybe they should pass the hat among the investment bankers.)

“Shareholders and board directors have less and less tolerance for major art expenditures,” noted Orley Ashenfelter, a Princeton University economist in a great story by Daniel Grant in the Wall Street Journal. “Firms, especially when the economy starts to sour, recognize their need to stick to the core business.”

[Oh REALLY? It takes a downturn to figure this out? What DO they teach in business school these days?]

Yet even companies that do the right things got burned in recent years. Take Icelandair for example. After the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, with the airline industry in free-fall, then-CEO Sigurdur Helgason figured it would be a good idea to build up a “rainy day” fund of sorts – building up a cash reserve worth 25% of revenues in three short years.

Ah, but such a pot of gold proved irresistible to the likes of Hannes Smarason, a brash young investor. Leading a buyout of Icelandair in 2004, he drained that cash pile to create a holding company – FL Group – that invested in other airlines. It didn’t work, according to a story in the Wall Street Journal, and though another group of investors bought Icelandair back, the airline is struggling to both rebuild those now-lost cash reserves and stay afloat at the same time – largely by cutting back on service, laying off staff, etc.; moves that wouldn’t be needed if those reserves had remained untouched.

What to do, what to do, what to do. I tell you what – if corporations and individual owners alike focused on just the basics of business, rather than the extraneous stuff (be it fancy art or needless horsepower) we wouldn’t be suffering as many problems as we are now.

“At a time when the commercial truck industry is severely down in North America, we are growing beyond the cyclicality of our traditional markets.” –Daniel C. Ustian, chairman, president and CEO of Navistar.

A lot of folks frankly didn’t like Dan Ustian’s plans for Navistar when he became the top dog at the truck and engine maker back in 2004. This is a guy who liked to think globally, looking for all kinds of opportunities – buying a Brazilian engine maker, partnering with Germany’s MAN Nutzfahrzeuge Group to build Navistar’s very first 11 and 13 liter engines, expanding the company’s military and school bus operations.

[Dan Ustian, Navistar’s chairman, president, and CEO.]

More than a few Wall Street analysts wanted Navistar to just focus on building trucks – worried that its “build-a-little-of-everything” approach would spread the manufacturer too thin.

Yet more and more, it’s looking like Navistar’s move is the right one – especially in terms of becoming a more global enterprise, like its rivals in the business. Sweden’s Volvo AB, Germany’s Daimler AG, along with Paccar in the U.S. are all global titans, building trucks and engines across the world. And those wider horizons seem vital for survival, especially in light of the severe downturn going on in North America.

Take the new “midibus” Navistar recently unveiled at the Expo Transporte show in Guadalajara, Mexico – a mid-sized commercial bus designed initially for Mexico and Latin American markets, but also with an eye for export elsewhere, to places such as India.

“The midibus represents an important milestone for our global business,” Ustian said in a recent press release. “It is the first Navistar vehicle specifically designed and developed for global markets.”

Unlike other vehicles Navistar currently sells in global markets that are derivatives of existing products the company sells in North America, Ustian pointed out that the midibus is going to be targeted from the start for Latin America and other global markets. It’s also the result of a global design effort, too, jointly developed by the company’s Truck Development and Technology Center in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and Mahindra Engineering Services in Pune, India, with the midibus engine was designed and built by the company’s MWM International Motores unit in Brazil.

This is of course is only one illustration of the bigger global steps Navistar is taking – a reflection of how truck makers are increasingly looking beyond just the domestic horizons of their home markets for new opportunities.

Volvo did this by buying U.S. stalwart Mack Trucks, with Daimler’s Freightliner division picking up Canada’s famous Western Star brand at the start of this decade. Paccar followed the trend by buying European concern DAF Trucks, then plotted out a long-term strategy to bring DAF’s engine-building skill to the U.S. market – an effort that becomes reality early next year with the opening of a $400 million engine plant in Missouri.

Now it’s Navistar’s turn – expanding its global product lineup and dealer network, adding to its portfolio of military contracts, and thus improving its cost competitiveness as volumes grow. The company is building what it calls a “sustainable business” of at least $2 billion a year selling military vehicles to the U.S. and its allies, bolstered by a growing dealership network overseas. It’s added two new dealerships in Qatar and Oman, boosting its network to 15 full-service dealerships in 33 locations in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

[Interestingly, Navistar also has three dealerships in Iraq, which help provide after sales support to the U.S. military vehicles supplied by its Navistar Defense subsidiary. Think about that: getting combat damage fixed at your local Navistar dealer. It’s more than a little strange.]

“Expansion into global markets represents significant near-term growth opportunities for us,” said David Johanneson, Navistar’s group vice president, global sales, marketing and distribution. “Our distribution strategy in the Middle East is an example of how we’re executing our global growth strategy.”

In a way, none of Navistar’s moves really surprises me – largely because I talked about some of these issues with Ustian himself about 10 years ago, back when he was the group vice president and general manager of Navistar’s engine group. A native of Harvey, IL (a suburb of Chicago), Ustian knows how to look for and seize opportunities – like when he snagged a full-time job as a supervisor at the Bliss & Laughlin steel plant, even though he was only working part time while attending college. He finished his degree in 1972 by going to night school at Chicago’s De Paul University, and quickly joined Navistar (still called International Harvester back then) in 1973.

[The U.S. customer isn’t forgotten, though — as Navistar’s development of the unique LoneStar Class 8 model demonstrates.]

When I met Ustian at a new light-duty diesel engine roll out at a company manufacturing plant outside Indianapolis, he spoke of the need to stop thinking in domestic terms – just about the U.S. market – and start viewing things from a global perspective. I don’t have my notes anymore from our chat all those years ago, but let me tell you, Ustian made an impression on me. Here’s a domestic diesel engine guy looking to compete OUTSIDE the U.S. for business – against some of the best diesel-engine makers in the world, on THEIR turf. That got my attention.

Yet it made sense, for places like Europe sported some of the biggest demand for light-duty diesel engines, as almost all their cars and trucks operated on diesel. He felt more than confident, too, that the U.S. workers building that U.S. engine iron could compete successfully against any world players – and it’s clear he’s kept that viewpoint as he ascended Navistar’s ranks, first to president and COO in 2002, then president and CEO in 2003 and finally adding the chairman’s title in 2004.

“With the significant growth of our defense business and the abundance of other growth opportunities around the world, we are integrating and aligning our operations for maximum impact in the marketplace,” Ustian said, after the company announced it would reorganize its operations to create a more global footprint. “Our realignment will enable us to make the most of our opportunities while gaining efficiencies throughout the company.”

It’s an ambitious effort to say the least and the jury is still out on whether it’ll ultimately be successful, but one thing is for certain – Navistar’s wide view of the global horizon is here to stay.

“All continents, including Europe, face the challenge of how to stop the all too many road deaths and injuries.” –Brigitte Chaudhry, president of the European Federation of Road Traffic Victims (FEVR)

It’s an epidemic, killing 3,500 people around the globe every day. Yet we should be able to control – if not stop – this epidemic for it’s totally man-made. I’m talking, of course, about highway crashes – a problem not just for the U.S. but for the world as a whole. That’s why the United Nations just declared November 16 – the third Sunday in November – as the “World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims.”

Sure, it sounds hokey – and sure, it won’t do a damn bit to stop highway crashes from occurring. Yet I think we really can’t set out to find ways to reduce highway crashes unless we admit to ourselves that this is a serious problem worthy of our attention and resources.

Highway crashes kill 1.3 million worldwide every year – that’s more than the annual deaths caused by malaria. In the U.S. last year, 41,059 people died in highway wrecks last year, according to the Department of Transportation (DOT) – that’s about 115 people a DAY – with an additional 2.49 million being injured. And despite advances in vehicle safety systems and higher rates of seat belt use (83% this year by U.S. car drivers), highway fatalities are poised to increase according to the European Federation of Road Traffic Victims (FEVR).

“Between 2005 and 2030, road deaths are predicted to rise by over 60% worldwide but with low income countries suffering much worse, with a 120% increase,” said Brigitte Chaudhry, FEVR’s president. “The World Day of Remembrance offers an ideal opportunity for drawing attention to the urgency of the task and finding solutions, which must include a better post crash response.”

This “road victim remembrance” isn’t new – a victim’s organization called RoadPeace held the first such observance back in 1993. Now the day is getting much wider observance in many countries including: Belgium, Croatia, France, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxemburg, Mexico, The Netherlands, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Uganda, the United Kingdom and the U.S.

An though I’ve used the word “epidemic” to describe what’s occurring on our roads, I think it’s an appropriate term. Don’t think this is a widespread, ongoing global problem that touches every level of scoiety? Consider this: President-elect Barack Obama’s father died in a car accident in Kenya, with former President Bill Clinton losing his dad – William Jefferson Blythe III – after Blythe’s front tire blew out propelling the vehicle into a ditch, where he drowned. Joe Biden, the incoming Vice President, lost his first wife and a daughter in a highway crash back when he first got elected to the U.S. Senate in 1972.

John McCain’s first wife, Carol, was horribly disabled in a crash that occurred while he was a prisoner of war in North Vietnam. She spent three years in a wheelchair after skidding on ice on Christmas Eve and projected through the windshield – that included a six-month hospital stay and 26 operations left her five inches shorter.

“The World Day of Remembrance should lead to a greater recognition of the needs of road crash victims,” said Cynthia Barlow, the chairwoman of RoadPeace, who lost her owndaughter in a crash while bicycling. “A road crash bereavement will be a life sentence for those suffering such a loss. So we will use the World Day of Remembrance to campaign for a better post-crash response to bereaved families and people suffering serious injury, and ensure that appropriate lessons are learned so that future crashes can be prevented.”

The first step to solving a problem is admitting you’ve got one. Well, we’ve got one where highway deaths and injuries are concerned. Now we’ve got to start tackling ways to bring those numbers down.