Posts Tagged ‘NHTSA’

Phase 2 of Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot Kicks Off

Friday, August 24th, 2012

Tuesday kicked off the second phase of the Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot, a year-long research initiative led by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) and said to be “the largest road test to date of connected vehicle crash avoidance technology.” 1

Vehicle-to-Vehicle

Vehicle-to-Vehicle

This technology utilizes a “Wi-Fi-like device” which is less prone to interference and would allow vehicles to “talk” toeach other and to infrastructure, including work zones and traffic signals, in an attempt to promote safety.  According to the NHTSA, vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) safety technology has the potential to “address approximately 80 percent of the crash scenarios involving non-impaired drivers” as well as “one day alert motorists of dangerous roadway conditions, impending collisions, or dangerous curves,” preventing and reducing the severity of accidents. 2

Vehicle-to-Insfrastructure

Vehicle-to-Insfrastructure

How does it work?  According to the NHTSA’s website, the system utilize Dedicated Short Range Communications thatwould alert vehicles of “imminent crash situations, such as merging trucks, cars in the driver’s blind side, or when a vehicle ahead of them brakes suddenly” as well as interact with infrastructure to be alerted of school and construction zones as well as if a traffic light is about to change. 2

The first phase of the program took place from August 2011 to January 2012, during which time, nearly 700 drivers from six clinics were evaluated as to whether or not they supported the belief that the device would lead towards safety and if they would like to acquire and utilize the device themselves.  90% of respondents stated yes.

Warning Alerts

Warning Alerts

After analyzing whether or not the system would be driver accepted, the second (and final) phase of the study was able to proceed.

Phase 2 launched on the University of Michigan campus (whose Transportation Research Institute is conducting the road test) last Tuesday with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stating, “Today is a big moment for automotive safety.  This cutting-edge technology offers real promise for improving both the safety and efficiency of our roads.” 1

Close to 3,000 vehicles including buses, cars, and 60 commercial trucks (many volunteered) in Ann Arbor, Michigan participated in the study, applying the V2V and V2I (vehicle-to-infrastructure) devices on their vehicles in order to test its “performance, usability, and collect data.” 1

If the test proves a success, the DOT may look to make Connected Vehicle Safety Technology a regulation for vehicles.

What do you think of Connected Vehicle Safety Devices?  Do you think that this technology will be effective on reducing accidents/promoting safety?  Would you install these on your trucks?  Share your comments with us.

Click the video below to learn how Connected Vehicle Technology works.

connected vehicle video

Road Scholar Transport is an advocate to increasing safety on the road, which is why our trucks are equipped with the Bendix Wingman ACB System.  Through the use of sensors, the ACB system allows the truck to maintain a set distance of 8/10ths of a mile marker behind a forward vehicle through alerts or automatically reducing the throttle, using the engine retarder, and applying the brakes.  Learn more at http://www.roadscholarawareness.org/road-scholar-puts-the-brakes-on-accidents-with-new-trucks/.

1http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=77809

2http://icsw.nhtsa.gov/safercar/ConnectedVehicles/pages/v2v.html

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Hearing Ignites Support/Concerns Over Stability Control Systems

Friday, July 27th, 2012

Last May, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would require electronic stability control (ESC) systems on heavy-duty trucks (GVW greater than 26,000 lbs) with a manufacturing year of 2016 (when the requirement would go into affect) and onward.

Although stability control systems are not a requirement as of yet, over the years more and more truck manufacturers and carriers, such as Road Scholar Transport, utilize the systems to prevent rollovers due to unpreventable icy and wet weather conditions and to increase safety on the road, and with stricter regulations, are being utilized to help improve a company’s CSA scores

At a hearing conducted by the NHTSA last Tuesday, attendees both expressed their support as well as concerns towards ESC systems.

Bendix, who has been commercially manufacturing ESC systems since 2005, supports the proposal.  “It is the one stability technology that, in our expert opinion, delivers the performance needed to help commercial vehicle drivers mitigate both rollover and loss-of-control situations,” Bendix’s Fred Andersky states.1

In fact, according to the NHTSA, stability control systems “would help prevent 40-56 percent of untripped rollovers and 14 percent of loss-of-control crashes.” 2

There are two types of available stability control systems: Roll Stability Control (RSC) and Electronic Stability Control (ESC).  Whereas the two systems contain sensors that will reduce the throttle and apply the brakes when necessary to prevent a rollover situation, RSC only detects roll instability while ESC detects both roll and yaw instability.

Bendix directed their support towards the ESC system over the RSC due to “Extensive research and development – along with over seven years of solid customer experience.”1 In addition, ESC’s provide an additional two sensors over RSC’s (which lead to sooner detection), provides greater braking power, and, according to NHTSA, has a 6-7% greater effectiveness overall.1

But with all regulations comes concerns.

The Owner-Operators Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) explained that the cost of installing the devices could prevent companies from adding newer trucks, costing around $1160 per truck and the industry nearly $1 billion within 5 years.2

In addition, attendees at Tuesday’s hearing stressed concern over the certification process noting that the proposal would “put trucks through high-speed maneuvers that can only be done at one facility in the country” and can damage the truck.3

And although Bendix encourages ESC systems over RSC, the American Trucking Associations explains that although ESC has proven its effectiveness over RSC, there needs to be flexibility since “one size does not fit all.”3

The comment period will end on August 21.

For a better understanding of how ESC systems work, check out the video below.

Bendix

Should stability control systems be required on heavy-duty trucks?  If so, do you prefer the Roll Stability Control (RSC) or Electronic Stability Control (ESC)?  List your comments below.

1http://www.thetrucker.com/News/Stories/2012/7/24/BendixsupportsESCasbeststabilitycontrolsystem.aspx

2http://www.landlinemag.com/Story.aspx?StoryID=23928

3http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=77599

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Government Seeks Mandatory Electronic Stability Control Systems on Trucks by 2016

Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012

How many times have you sat in traffic on the interstate, anxious to get to where you were going only to find out that there has been an accident that is going to detain you and cause you to be late?  The accident, you later find out, was the outcome of a tractor trailer taking a turn too fast, resulting in a rollover that closed both lanes of traffic and involved several cars.

Unfortunately, situations like this occur every day, resulting in delays, injuries, and even fatalities.  But the federal government is hoping to crack down on rollovers through a proposal announced last week.

stability control system

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is seeking a regulation that would require electronic stability control (ESC) systems on heavy-duty trucks with a manufacturing year of 2016 and onward.

The agency plans to have the rule active within the next four years and will hold a comment period this summer.

Bendix, who “sold the first commercially available ESC for heavy vehicles in 2005,” along with their competitor, Meritor Wabco, support the agency’s crash prevention proposal. 1

Over the years, more and more stability control systems have been utilized by truck manufacturers and carriers such as Road Scholar Transport to prevent rollovers due to unpreventable icy and wet weather conditions and increase safety on the road, and with stricter regulations, are being utilized to help improve a company’s CSA scores.

There are two types of available stability control systems: Roll Stability Control (RSC) and Electronic Stability Control (ESC).  Whereas the two systems contain sensors that will reduce the throttle and apply the brakes when necessary to prevent a rollover situation, RSC only detects roll instability while ESC detects both roll and yaw instability.

ESC systems are also more expensive to install than RSC, costing an additional average of $1,160 per new truck. 2 However, due to greater safety benefits, the NHTSA chose to support the mandatory use of ESCs.

Is the higher cost worth it?  You decide.  Let’s look at an example.

On September 8, 2008, a fatal accident occurred on the Donner Pass.  According to reports, a trainee was driving as the trainer slept in the back.  The trainer was driving too fast, causing a horrific rollover that killed them both.

video

According to the NHTSA, this technology “would help prevent 40-56 percent of untripped rollovers (generally attributed to vehicle top-heaviness, roadway slope, curves, and other factors) and 14 percent of loss-of-control crashes caused by severe oversteer or understeer conditions.” 2 This breaks down to the prevention of “up to 2,329 crashes, elimination of an estimated 649 to 858 injuries, and avoidance of between 49 and 60 fatalities a year.” 3

For a better understanding of how ESC systems work, check out the video below.

video 2

Should electronic stability control systems be required on heavy-duty trucks?  Post your answers at http://gsfn.us/t/2vcnv.

1http://www.ttnews.com/articles/basetemplate.aspx?storyid=29391&page=1

2http://www.landlinemag.com/Story.aspx?StoryID=23652

3http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-05/D9UPVUA80.htm

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in LTL Freight Quotes, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

TCA Approves Speed Limiter Policy

Friday, March 9th, 2012

TCA

Did you know:  An 80,000 pound tractor trailer traveling at 30 mph has a stopping distance of 100 feet?  Doubling this speed, it would take the same truck traveling at 60 mph 426 feet to come to a complete stop.  With only a 5 mph increase (now traveling at 65 mph) the distance required to stop increases almost another 100 feet to 525.

As you can clearly see, the faster a tractor trailer travels, the greater the number of feet it takes for the truck to come to a stop.  Now consider a truck that is exceeding the speed limit by 5, 10, even 15 mph on the interstate when it suddenly has to come to a stop due to sudden traffic, a construction zone, or a recent accident.  With the additional stopping distance required on speeding trucks, do you think the driver will stop in time?

Earlier this week, the Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) approved a policy stemming from a 2006 petition that would support a limitation on the maximum speed of an 80,000 pound tractor trailer.

According to the policy, commercial trucks would acquire a speed limiter that would restrict them to a maximum speed of 65 mph.

As truckersnews.com states, the “National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) expects to issue an Aug. 12 notice for proposed rulemaking to mandate speed limiting devices for heavy trucks.” 1

The policy plays off of a petition filed in 2006 by Roads Safe America and nine carriers that would mandate all trucks modeled 1990 to present and having a gross vehicle weight of over 26,000 lbs. to limit their maximum speed to 68 mph. 1 The American Trucking Associations filed a similar petition thereafter.

The NHTSA requested comments regarding the petitions in 2007, receiving nearly 3,850 with the majority being in support of the speed limitation.

The TCA is stepping up to promote safety and to give the trucking industry a better image.  According to TCA President Chris Burruss, “I think this is the type of policy that presents the opportunity for our industry to increase our visibility in a positive way. It says that not only do we preach safety, but that we are going to walk the walk.” 2

In addition, Burruss is challenging “other groups that say they are committed to safety to step up as well, such as calling on AAA to support a similar mandate for personal vehicles.” 3

Speed limiters come with many benefits, one of them being cost-efficiency.  By limiting a driver’s speed, and therefore reducing the number of “cowboys” (those drivers constantly running fast) on the road, carriers can cut back on fuel and tire costs.

And of course, safety is a large reason why implementation is being sought for speed limiters.

Take, for example, a few months ago when a tractor trailer overturned in Springfield Pike, PA, skidding nearly 50 feet before causing some serious damage.

According to state police, the driver (identified as 44-year-old Rodney Crow of Kentucky) was speeding when he failed to make the curve, losing control and crashing into a telephone pole, three parked cars, two homes, and another telephone pole. 4

The accident came as no surprise as neighbors indicated trucks traveling at high speeds all the time down the hill, with one driver being killed in the same spot five years ago and both houses being struck in the past.

Fortunately, those families living in the houses that Crow hit were not injured.

But let’s look at a case where a driver’s speed did lead to some heavy consequences.

Last June, John Davis Trucking Company driver Lawrence Valli plowed through the railroad crossings in Nevada, striking two of ten Amtrak railcars headed for California, causing it to catch fire and resulting in six fatalities.  Under further investigation, it was discovered that Valli had an additional two speeding violations, one of which resulting in him hitting a stopped car on Interstate 80 five years back that which resulted in three injuries.

Speed limiters may reduce a driver’s “need for speed,” and in return, reduce the stopping distance, but Road Scholar Transport takes it a step further.

Imagine going 65 mph, which would be the maximum speed if mandated, when the vehicle in front of you decides to suddenly stop or drastically slow down.  You cringe at the shortened distance between you and the forward vehicle, and although you quickly react, brace yourself at the high risk of an accident.

But Road Scholar’s equipped with the Bendix Wingman ACB System on our trucks.

Simply put, ACB will cause our truck to maintain a set distance of 8/10ths of a mile marker behind a forward vehicle.

When cruise control is off, the ACB will deliver a beeping alert, which gets faster and louder when closing in on a vehicle, as well as a visual warning on the dashboard showing how far the vehicle is from our truck.

When cruise control is on, the ACB will automatically reduce the throttle, use the engine retarder, or apply the brakes (delivering 1/3 the vehicle’s power but the driver can apply the rest if needed) in order to maintain a set distance from the vehicle ahead, and thus, make sure that our vehicle remains a comfortable distance in case of sudden stops.

Although some trucking companies already have speed limiters as well as other safety technology on their trucks, Burruss notes that not all groups will support the policy, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) being one of them.

OOIDA argued that “high speed crashes represents a small percentage of all truck accidents,” and therefore, speed limiters were unnecessary; however, the TCA acknowledged that “the mandate would result in a speed differential between trucks and cars that would result in more crashes.” 1

On top of that, groups are arguing over the cost of implementing tamper-resistant speed limiters.  According to truckersnews.com, it would cost around “$35 million to $50 million to develop tamper-resistant devices and a one-time cost of $150 million to $200 million to develop tamper-proof ones…excluding additional costs for maximum speed, tire size and drive axle and transmission gear ratio information.”

Do you feel that the cost to implement these devices is too high or is it worth it?

Here are some top anti-collision technology devices that carriers should implement on trucks to help enforce safety on the road:

-speed limiters

-anti-lock braking systems (Such as the Bendix Wingman ACB System mentioned above)

-electronic and roll stability control systems (Stability control systems, which became available in 2002, are becoming more and more by truck manufacturers and carriers to prevent rollovers and increase safety on the road.  Bendix and WABCO are two main contenders manufacturing this technology.  Stability control systems are expected to save over a hundred of the 700 fatalities per year).

-side view assist (Helps omit a driver’s blind spot)lane departure

-lane departure warning system (Alerts when a driver is beginning to swerve into the other lane)

Do you support mandatory speed limiters?  Why or why?  Have you or anyone you know been affected by a truck driver traveling at excessive speeds?  List your comments below.

click for quote

1http://www.truckersnews.com/feds-set-date-for-stability-control-proposed-rule/

2http://www.thetrucker.com/News/Stories/2012/3/6/TCAboardapproves65mphspeedlimiterspartoftakingoffensiveBurrusssays.aspx

3http://www.truckinginfo.com/news/news-detail.asp?news_id=76295

4http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/s_771926.html

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Amends Stopping Distance Requirement

Thursday, July 28th, 2011

(The following information is based on the NHTSA’s ruling located in the Federal Register and available at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2009-0175-0006)

NHTSA

Earlier this week, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published a new requirement for the stopping distance of truck tractors, in response to an earlier ruling.

In July of 2009, the agency issued a ruling requiring an improved stopping distance for heavy trucks, reducing the distance of trucks traveling at 60 mph from 355 feet to 250 feet, allowing a minority of very heavy tractors a stopping distance of 310 feet.

The ruling, however, sparked the response of eight petitions based on four main issues.  One of them, having to do with the stopping distance requirements, was challenged by the TMA, HDBMC, and Bendix, who believed that “speeds lower than 60 mph have not been validated through actual vehicle test data” and that “the brake timing may be too fast for some vehicle configurations.”

Therefore, the NHTSA was asked to remove the new requirements until tests could be conducted and results obtained.  The NHTSA accepted and “required compliance with the improved stopping distance requirements for tractors with four or more axles and a GVWR of 59,600 pounds or less by August 1, 2013.”

NHTSA conducted tests analyzing the stopping distance of a tractor trailer traveling at 60 mph, 55 mph, 50 mph, and so on down to 20 mph, repeating the test with a lightly loaded vehicle weight (excluding the trailer).

The results showed that when the tractor was loaded to GVWR and traveling at 20 mph, it obtained a stopping distance of 31.2 feet…1.2 feet more than the required amount.

After gathering all of the results, the NHTSA decided that the requirements may not be practicable and increased the stopping distance for a loaded truck traveling at 20 mph from 30 to 32 feet and for an empty tractor traveling at the same speed from 28 to 30 feet.

The NHTSA’s new ruling will become effective on Monday, August 1st with petitions being accepted up until September 12th.

truck

How is Road Scholar Transport improving their stopping distance?  We have equipped all of our new tractors with disc brakes for safety as well as purchased trucks with the Bendix Wingman ACB System which works to maintain a set distance of 8/10ths of a mile marker behind a forward vehicle, preventing accidents by automatically reducing the throttle, using the engine retarder, or applying the brakes.

Wouldn’t you rather your freight onboard trucks equipped with anti-crash technology?  If so, then visit www.roadscholar.com to schedule your LTL or truckload freight.

What do you think of the NHTSA’s stopping distance requirements?

click to become our friend on facebook


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in LTL freight, Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Truck Rollover Proposal Expected Within Upcoming Months, Making Stability Control Systems Mandatory on New Trucks

Friday, July 15th, 2011

A truck driver’s fatality risk is increased by 30 times during a rollover, making it the number one cause of truck accident fatalities with nearly 700 truck driver’s losing their lives each year, an article in Bloomberg.com notes.

But the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is determined to change that.

Bendix Stability Control System

Bendix Stability Control System

By mandating the installation of crash-prevention technology, among these stability control systems, on all new tractor trailers, the agency predicts that “5,510 rollover crashes and 4,803 loss-of-control crashes” would be prevented (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-13/bendix-meritor-look-for-boost-from-nhtsa-s-truck-rollover-rule.html).

According to the article, between 20-25% of new trucks are available for purchase with stability control systems, such as the ones recently purchased by Road Scholar Transport, with Bendix and WABCO being the two main contenders manufacturing this technology.

The problem with this is that even though 20-25% are sold with this technology, trucking companies still have the option of whether or not they want to purchase it and many do not want the additional expense.  But NHTSA is seeking to change that by making nearly 100% of all new trucks sold with these stability systems.

As Tim Kraus, President of Heavy Duty Manufacturers Association explains, although there is a higher cost associated with purchasing these trucks, trucking companies will save money in the end.  As he notes, a single accident involving a fatality results in millions of dollars but these stability control systems are expected to save over a hundred of the 700 fatalities per year.

Kraus continued to explain that it often takes regulation to put technology in motion.  For Road Scholar Transport, this is not the case.

new trucks

Road Scholar has been continuously building on newer, more advanced technology to increase the safety of its fleet, drivers, your cargo, and everyone on the road.  That’s why Road Scholar not only has ESP (Electronic Stability Program) on its trucks but the Bendix Wingman ACB (Active Cruise with Braking) system as well.

The ACB system causes Road Scholar’s trucks to maintain a set distance of 8/10ths of a mile marker behind a forward vehicle by automatically reducing the throttle, using the engine retarder, or applying the brakes (delivering 1/3 the vehicle’s power but the driver can apply the rest if needed) in order to maintain a set distance from the vehicle ahead, that is when cruise control is on.

When cruise control is off, the ACB delivers a beeping alert, which gets faster and louder when closing in on a vehicle, as well as a visual warning on the dashboard showing our drivers how far a vehicle is from their truck, thus preventing an accident from occurring.

The NHTSA estimates a finished proposal within the next few months.

Do you feel that all trucks, regardless of cost, should be equipped with stability control systems?

want a safe carrier

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Trucking Groups Seek Research on Crashworthiness Standards from NHTSA

Thursday, June 9th, 2011

(information provided by http://www.truckline.com/AdvIssues/Engineering/Documents/ATA%20OOIDA%20ltr%20to%20NHTSA%20June%208%202011.pdf)

In a letter addressed to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NHTSA(NHTSA)’s David Strickland, David Osiecki (Senior Vice President of the American Trucking Associations-ATA) and Todd Spencer (Executive Vice President of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association-OOIDA) addressed the need to conduct research on crashworthiness standards for heavy trucks.

Representing the ATA and OOIDA, Strickland and Spencer asked the NHTSA to research and analyze “how crashworthiness standards for the tractor/truck cabs of commercial motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 26,001 pounds or more could have safety benefits for professional truck drivers,” with a primary focus on safety systems used to prevent “roll over, ejection, fire and frontal impacts.”

The groups are concentrating on trucks with GVWR’s of 26,001 pounds and heavier since the NHTSA has already established ongoing crashworthiness standards for lighter vehicles.

The letter stems from continuous concern over the safety of drivers, with nearly 700 truck driver fatalities each year from 1998 to 2008, Strickland and Spencer note.

The groups believe that driver fatality, however, can be reduced by nearly 23% “if cab structural integrity can be improved sufficiently to prevent crushing in rollover,” which is the leading cause of 63% of injuries in accidents.

According to their letter, the groups suggest the following:

~A larger survival space in the cab

~Greater restraints, including seat belts and airbags

~Stronger doors and windows to prevent ejection along with padded surfaces within the cab

In closing, the groups “believe that improvements in truck occupant safety can be achieved” and so does Road Scholar Transport

Road Scholar Transport

That’s why Road Scholar Transport is installing adaptive cruise control on its tractor trailers which will maintain a pre-defined distance from upcoming vehicles, reducing the truck’s speed when closing in, and thus, preventing a rear-end collision.  Now that’s safety.  Check out more of Road Scholar’s technology and services at www.roadscholar.com.

What do you think of Road Scholar’s decision to invest in adaptive cruise control?

want a safe carrier

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Services, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

NHTSA Encouraged to Require Stronger Underride Guard Standards

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was petitioned on Monday by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety for the requirement of stronger underride guards.

According to Transport Topics, underride guards are known to fail, regardless of how fast or slow a truck is going, which can result in cars slipping underneath the truck, leading to greater injury, or worse, death.

As the site notes, over 3,000 people died in 2009 from accidents involving large trucks, many of them due to the failure/weakness of underride guards.

Now, since the 1998 implementation of rear underride guards on several types of trailers, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is looking for updated standards that would require the guards to withstand more weight/greater speeds as well as “mandate guards for more large trucks and trailers than currently stipulated” in order to help reduce the number of injuries/fatalities involved in tractor trailer accidents (http://www.etrucker.com/apps/news/article.asp?id=86311).

Comments on the issue will be received by the NHTSA until Tuesday, March 8th.

In the meantime, check out the underride guards on these Road Scholar trucks and get your freight onboard a safe carrier today by visiting www.roadscholar.com.

Underride Guard on Road Scholar's Truck

Underride Guard on Road Scholar's Truck

Underride Guard on Road Scholar's Prostate Cancer Awareness Truck

Underride Guard on Road Scholar's Prostate Cancer Awareness Truck

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Trucking Industry Must Wait Another Year On Speed Limiter Rule

Monday, January 3rd, 2011

The Federal Register today published a notice pertaining to the 2006 filings by the American Trucking Associations spedometer(ATA) and Road Safe America (including nine trucking companies) on obtaining a speed limiter rule for heavy-duty trucks, allowing for the petitions and announcing a rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration next year, truckersnews.com notes.

According to the site, both petitions are urging for mandatory devices to be installed on trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 26,000 pounds, which would limit a truck’s maximum speed to 68 miles per hour (http://www.truckersnews.com/agency-to-consider-speed-limiter-rule-in-2012/).  The ATA wants these devices installed on all new trucks while Road Safe America is taking it a step further, pushing for the requirement to be on all models from the year 1990 on.

Not everyone is for the speed limiter rule however, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association being one.

According to the Association, whether or not a truck is restricted to 68 miles per hour or not will not have a great impact on the number of fatalities or accidents.

The Association claims that only four percent of trucks are currently limited to a maximum speed and half of those trucks are responsible for fatalities involving trucks (http://www.truckersnews.com/agency-to-consider-speed-limiter-rule-in-2012/).

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration awaits its decision on whether they will issue a ruling on the petitions.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Trucking Industry News | Comments Off

Obama Proposes Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Standards for Trucks

Tuesday, October 26th, 2010

On Monday, Obama announced a proposal for greenhouse gas and fuel efficiency standards for those in the trucking industry, which includes propositions from both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as well as National Highway Traffic Safety Admininstration (NHTSA).

In an attempt to “go green,” and eventually put more hybrid trucks on the road, the proposal seeks to cut usage of fuel and emissions by 20 percent for tractor trailers, with smaller trucks having a slightly smaller cut, according to an article in The Hill.

With carbon emission reductions being favored over increasing fuel prices in order to lower the use of diesel fuel consumption, the EPA notes that the proposal will not require trucks to use a certain type of fuel but instead, can work on improving the truck’s engines, tires, and aerodynamics, the article states.

Road Scholar Transport has already brought new tractors into the fleet that account for 42 trucks in the amount of diesel particulate given off (a 1:42 ratio).

The following is projected to occur as a result of the proposal (information provided by http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/125727-trucking-industry-gives-initial-praise-to-proposed-carbon-efficiency-controls)

-Provide $41 billion in net benefits over the lifetime of model-year 2014 to 2018

vehicles.

-Nearly $74,000 in fuel savings over the life of a semi truck.

-Save 500 million barrels of oil and cut carbon dioxide emissions by 250 metric tons.

Road Scholar Transport

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Company News, Trucking Industry News | Comments Off