Click for next page ( 20


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 19
Applicants must successfully perform all the shift (6 a.m. to 8 p.m.), 7 hours for the night shift required skills (listed in 49 CFR 383.113 (8 p.m. to 6 a.m.), and 7.5 hours for a mixed shift. through 49 CFR 383.123) to pass the skills test. During a continuous work day, drivers must rest for The skills test must use a vehicle representative at least 30 minutes. If the driver cannot leave the of the type of vehicle that the applicant operates workplace for rest or meal breaks, he/she must count or expects to operate. Depending on the type of the corresponding time as hours of service. Drivers passenger vehicle used in the skills test, the may accumulate daily overtime of up to 3 hours in following restrictions must be added to the three instances during a week (maximum 9 hours license: except Class A bus or except Class A per week total). The carrier must pay drivers double and Class B bus. their hourly rate for overtime. Drivers are required The driver/applicant must surrender his/her to report their work and break activities in a logbook driver's license issued by another state if he/ and maintain records for a minimum of 60 days. she has moved from another state. FMCSA requires all commercial drivers to meet POTENTIAL IMPACTS specific testing and licensing standards. Commercial ON U.S. BORDER STATES Driver's License (CDL) driver training, however, is Cross-Border Transportation not a mandate unless the driver will be transporting hazardous materials (3). The FMCSA and the state departments of trans- portation inspect all commercial vehicles entering Drug and Alcohol Testing the United States from Mexico. In most land ports of entry, FMCSA inspectors operate within the federal In order to detect the use of drugs or alcohol, a tox- compound; in other locations, FMCSA performs icological exam is required for all drivers in Mexico inspections at the state inspection facilities. under the following circumstances: Under the North American Free Trade Agree- Every 3 months for 1 year after the physical ment (NAFTA), the plan was to open the border for exam Mexican-domiciled trucks. The plan has not been Every 6 months thereafter implemented, and the majority of truck crossings As part of the psychophysical exam performed from Mexico into the United States are drayage or when a driver applies for a federal driver's transfer trucks. The original NAFTA provisions license, any psychophysical event has tran- were designed to improve transportation efficiency spired, an accident has occurred, or a carrier by enabling more seamless cross-border trucking or driver asks for reevaluation operations. However, Mexican truck operations are During the 24 hours following a vehicular restricted to a narrow commercial zone extending accident 3 to 25 miles into the United States (up to 75 miles If there is evidence of substance abuse in Arizona). During any period determined by the Staff Given that Mexican tractors are not allowed to Security Monitoring Program travel beyond the commercial zone, northbound truck When established by any international treaty shipments into the United States must use a drayage or convention or transfer tractor. These drayage tractors connect to a trailer on the Mexican side of the border and move For drivers who have successfully completed the the trailer into the U.S. commercial zone for coupling drug and alcohol rehabilitation safety program, a to a U.S. long-haul tractor to continue the trip to its toxicological exam is required every 3 months for 1 year after the physical exam and every 6 months destination. In 2007, the U.S. and Mexican governments thereafter. announced that they had reached a resolution on the cross-border trucking impasse. The agreement called Hours of Service for a 1-year pilot project involving up to 100 Mexican Commercial drivers must comply with the Fed- and 100 U.S. trucking firms that wished to engage in eral Labor Law. The Mexican labor law limits daily direct long-haul movements across the border and hours of service for drivers to 8 hours for the day beyond the commercial zone. To qualify, Mexican 19

OCR for page 19
carriers had to undergo safety audits by U.S. inspec- the 40-ft trailer, depending on the destination. South- tors in Mexico; meet all safety, environmental, insur- bound movements are usually unloaded or rearranged ance, homeland security, and other regulations on the U.S. side of the border into a 40-ft trailer if imposed on U.S. trucking firms; and pay all applica- the trip involves a T3-S2-R4 vehicle in Mexico for ble U.S., state, and federal taxes and registration fees. that shipment. The pilot project was discontinued in March of 2009 Given the extensive federal and state vehicle when Congress eliminated funding for the demon- safety inspection process for every truck that enters stration program that had allowed Mexican trucks the United States from Mexico and given that most of access to U.S. roads, citing safety concerns. the existing commercial crossings have already built In July 2011, the FMCSA announced a new state inspection facilities, the U.S. border states have cross-border long-haul trucking pilot program to test no concerns regarding Mexican trucks entering their and demonstrate the ability of Mexico-based motor territory with overweight or non-complying vehicles. carriers to operate safely in the United States beyond However, safety and security inspections that take commercial zones. This pilot program would allow place at the border have a negative impact on border Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate through- communities. These inspections create congestion at out the United States for up to 3 years. Participating border crossings, and trucks waiting in long lines Mexican carriers and drivers would be required to for inspection contribute excessively to greenhouse comply with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations, gases, unproductive driver time, and noise. including those concerned with motor carrier safety, Some state agencies have developed strategies customs, immigration, vehicle registration and taxa- to reduce the impact of cross-border trucking. The tion, and fuel taxation. following section describes two strategies that states As with the previous pilot program, it is expected are beginning to implement at the U.S./Mexico bor- that very few Mexican carriers will participate. Point- der to reduce congestion at the border. to-point transportation (cabotage) is prohibited, and other commercial aspects and fees will prevent a large Alternatives for U.S. Border States number of Mexican carriers from participating in the new program; therefore, drayage will continue Some of the states that border with Mexico are to dominate cross-border trucking along the U.S./ implementing or are in the process of analyzing vari- Mexico border. ous strategies to allow overweight or oversize vehicles Another common scenario for northbound trucks to operate near the U.S./Mexico border. This section is to load a long-haul U.S. tractor-semitrailer combi- presents two projects that have been implemented and nation at plants called maquiladoras, located near the one that is being analyzed. border in Mexico. In this case, the U.S. tractor trans- ports the trailer from the origin to its U.S. destination Port of Brownsville Overweight Corridor Program without being decoupled. As noted earlier, truck weight limits in Mexico are The overweight corridor program allows trucks to higher than truck weight limits in the United States; transport overweight freight between the Port of therefore, northbound loads are usually adjusted to Brownsville, Texas, and Monterrey, Mexico. This meet U.S. regulations before crossing into the United route between the port and the Veteran's International States. The drayage process is also used to consolidate Bridge, SH 4 (International Boulevard), and SH 48 loads so that they meet each country's truck size and (Padre Island Highway) constitutes Brownsville's weight regulations. overweight truck corridor. The corridor allows trucks A considerable proportion of the freight that carrying primarily break bulk steel but also other comes to the port of entry at Laredo, Texas, arrives cargoes to be loaded to Mexican truck weights. The by LCV, using the T3-S2-R4 configuration with two gross weight of cargo and equipment is not allowed 40-ft trailers. This configuration is legal at the Mex- to exceed the allowable axle load, the Mexican legal ico border city of Nuevo Laredo via the toll-road weight limit, or 125,000 lb, whichever is less, and the system. Once the shipment reaches the border, the dimensions of the load and vehicle shall not exceed driver disassembles the LCV into two separate tractor- 12 ft wide, 15 ft 6 in. high, or 110 ft long. semitrailer combinations. Drayage tractors cross each Overweight trucks must remain on the over- trailer separately in the United States, and the load is weight corridor and pay a fee collected at the port to cross-docked into a 48- or 53-ft trailer or remains in help cover damages caused by these loads. In 2009, 20

OCR for page 19
due to its success over a period of several years, Texas most of these roadway types serve the U.S./Mexico made this program permanent. border. The current scenario for those combination vehicles is to travel to the border and utilize staging Arizona Overweight Permit Pilot Program areas on the Mexican side of the border where the tandem configuration is uncoupled. From that point, The Arizona Department of Transportation a drayage truck tows the load in two trips, usually a (ADOT) has implemented a Single Trip Overweight 40-ft trailer on each trip. Permit, which allows a motor carrier transporting To reduce the number of crossings at the U.S./ fresh produce within the Mexico/Arizona com- Mexico border, two states--Texas and Arizona-- mercial zone to lawfully operate a vehicle with an are proposing initiatives to allow tandem trucks to overall GVW of up to 90,800 lb on a five-axle tractor- cross into the United States. The proposed operation semitrailer. The program began on May 17, 2010, and would allow trucks to cross into the United States will allow ADOT to evaluate the effectiveness of from Mexico, go through Customs and Border Pro- allowing overweight trucks from Mexico and thereby tection and state safety inspections as a combination determine whether to continue or expand the service vehicle with two trailers, and then travel to a staging to other Mexico/Arizona commercial zones. yard where trailers are decoupled. From there, two In order to qualify for this program, carriers power units would pull the two single trailers to their must meet the following requirements: destinations on U.S. roadways. The cargo must arrive in a sealed container The main benefit of this proposal is the reduction originating from Mexico. in the number of drayage trips that are required to The vehicle configuration must have at least move the same number of trailers at international bor- five axles. der crossings where current operations are congested. The axle group weight configuration cannot This scheme would allow for reducing the number of exceed the maximum weight allowed in the tractors crossing, thereby reducing emissions and con- Arizona Administrative Code. gestion. This proposal would require a large plot of Trucks can only follow specific routes desig- land next to the state inspection facility, and this close nated on the permit by ADOT. proximity would prevent tandem trucks (T3-S2-R4) from traveling on U.S. roadways. ADOT already issues overweight permits for ship- ments crossing the state from other states. The pilot program brings shipments crossing an international North American Truck Size border into this permitting process and recognizes the and Weight Limit Comparison importance of maintaining the security of shipments The following comparison concentrates on LCVs coming from Mexico, which allows for a higher GVW due to the emphasis on these vehicles in recent Mexi- than the United States. can size and weight legislation. (Despite this empha- Currently, produce shipments from the Mexican sis on LCVs, it is important to note that most of the states of Sinaloa and Sonora destined for the United U.S./Mexico trade uses 53-ft semitrailers due to States utilize staging areas across the border in the ability to cross the border with these trailers.) Nogales Sonora to remove the portion of a shipment Vehicle lengths are similar in both Mexico and the that is allowable in Mexico but that would be over- United States, but legal weights are quite different. weight in the United States. The overweight portions The maximum GVW allowed in Mexico for the most from several trucks are consolidated in a new truck, common configuration (T3-S2) is 46.5 metric tons creating an additional shipment that must cross the (102,515 lb); the maximum allowed in the United border. Under the new program, growers will be able States is 80,000 lb (e.g., on Interstate highways). to ship produce at the allowed Arizona permitted Trucks traveling to the United States from Mexico weight of 90,800 lb without the need to break the cold avoid going over the 80,000-lb limit established in chain and cross-dock produce to another truck. the United States to avoid fines. Table 13 presents some current U.S. state size Oversize Trucks Crossing into the United States and weight limits for common LCVs. FMCSA defines As noted previously, the T3-S2-R4 combination LCVs in the United States as a combination of a is popular in Mexico along the ET corridors, and tractor and two or more trailers that operates on the 21

OCR for page 19
Table 13 General weight and dimension limits on U.S. LCVs. Truck Tractor and Truck Tractor and Two Trailing Three Trailing Units Allowed Units Allowed Length Max. Gross Length Max. Gross State (ft)a Wt. (lb) (ft) Wt. (lb) Other Alaska 95 NAf 110 NA 83 ft Arizona 95 129,000 95 129,000 b Colorado 111 110,000 115.5 110,000 78 ft Florida 106c NA NA NA NA Hawaii 65c NA NA NA NA Idaho 95 105,500 95 105,500 b Indiana 106 127,400 104.5 127,400 58 ft Iowa 100 129,000 100 129,000 78 ft Kansas 109 120,000 109 120,000 NA Massachusetts 104 127,400 NA NA NA Michigan 58 164,000 NA NA NA Missouri 110 120,000e 109 120,000 NA Montana 93 137,800 100 131,060c b c Nebraska 95 95,000 95 68 ft Nevada 95 129,000 95 129,000 98 ft New Mexico NA 86,400d NA NA NA New York 102 143,000 NA NA NA North Dakota 103 105,500 100 105,500 103 ft Ohio 102 127,400 95 115,000 NA Oklahoma 110 90,000 95 90,000 NA Oregon 68 105,500 96 105,500 70.5 ft South Dakota 100 129,000 100 129,000 b b Utah 95 129,000 95 129,000 Washington 68 105,500 NA NA 68 ft b Wyoming 81 117,000 NA NA a Cargo-carrying length is measured from the front of the first cargo unit to the rear of the last cargo unit. b State submission includes multiple vehicles in this category. c No maximum weight is established because this vehicle combination is not considered an LCV per the ISTEA definition. dNo maximum cargo-carrying length is established for this combination. eThese dimensions do not apply to the same combinations. The 110-ft length is limited to vehicles entering from Oklahoma and is also limited to a 90,000-lb gross weight. The 120,000-lb gross weight is limited to vehicles entering from Kansas and also limited to a cargo-carrying length of 109 ft. fNA: Not applicable. SOURCE: Longer Combination Vehicle (LCV) Regulations Training (4). Interstate Highway System at a gross weight greater The three common types of LCV on U.S. road- than 80,000 lb. The FMCSA definition excludes the ways are turnpike doubles (TPDs), Rocky Mountain so-called "western double" from this group since its doubles (RMDs), and triples. Descriptions of these legal weight is capped at 80,000 lb. ISTEA prohibits types of LCV are the following: any further expansion of LCV routes or increases in LCV sizes and weights where LCVs were allowed TPDs typically consist of a three-axle power in 1991 when the law was passed. unit pulling a tandem-axle semitrailer followed 22

OCR for page 19
by a second semitrailer converted to a trailer Triples consist of one 8.5-m (28.5-ft) van semi- by an A-dolly. Each trailing unit is typically trailer followed by two 8.5-m (28.5-ft) van trail- 13.7 to 14.6 m (45 to 48 ft) in length, and the ers converted from semitrailers to trailers by total number of axles is nine. It is legal on at A- or C-dollies and operating at a maximum least some roads in 13 states (4). GVW of 53.5 metric tons (117,700 lb). RMDs typically consist of a three-axle power unit, a tandem-axle semitrailer (typically 13.7 Table 14 compares LCVs allowed in Mexico to 14.6 m [45 to 48 ft] in length), followed by with LCVs allowed in the United States and Canada an 8.5-m (28.5-ft) semitrailer converted to a and the corresponding weight and dimension limits trailer using a single-axle A-dolly, bringing in each country by vehicle type. This list includes the total number of axles to seven. RMDs are the "western double" even though it is not consid- legal in 16 states. ered an LCV in the United States according to the Triples typically consist of a two-axle tractor FMCSA's definition (GVW cap at 80,000 lb). pulling three 8.5-m (28.5-ft) semitrailers, with Allowable GVWs for similar vehicles in Mexico the trailer and two semitrailers converted to and Canada are 114,000 lb and 92,200 lb, respec- trailers by using A-dollies. Triples can oper- tively. The other three comparable vehicles in the ate in 14 states, but in some cases only on des- table are RMDs, TPDs, and B-trains. Differences ignated turnpikes. among U.S. states and jurisdictions and between In Canada, LCVs usually operate on a special per- provincial limits in Canada create challenges for mit basis using vehicle configurations consisting of a such comparisons, so this comparison simply uses tractor and two or three van trailers or containers. some typical values in the United States and the These vehicles exceed basic vehicle length limita- maximums allowed by the Canadian memorandum tions but operate within basic weight limits. Canadian of understanding (MOU). provinces have the authority to regulate size and Two of the vehicle types that do not have as weight, so the limits under which commercial vehicles much in common in the three countries are triples operate vary significantly among provinces. Canadian and B-trains. The United States and Canada allow LCVs are not directly comparable with U.S. or Mex- triples, but they are not included in the table since ican LCVs due to differences in regulatory regimes their numbers are small. Carriers in the United and the operating environment. For example, the States do not use B-trains extensively, but they prairie region of Canada (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, are particularly well suited for high-density com- and Alberta) requires trucks longer than 25 m (82 ft) modity movements. The GVW comparison for the to operate under a special permit. The three routinely remaining vehicles indicates that the U.S. GVW permitted LCVs in this region are TPDs, RMDs, limits are typically lower than those of Mexico or and triples. Even though the configurations have the Canada. same names as those allowed in the United States, Both the United States and Mexico use bridge for- they operate under different size and weight limits. mulas to set GVW limits for the protection of bridges. Their configurations and size and weight limits are The bridge formula used in the United States is more as follows: restrictive than the bridge formula shown below for Mexico. TPDs consist of a tractor with one 16.2-m The Mexico Bridge Formula is the following: (53-ft) van trailer and one 16.2-m (53-ft) van trailer converted from a semitrailer to a trailer by using an A- or C-dolly operating at max- L N imum GVWs between 60.5 and 63.5 metric GVWMX = 870 + 3.66 N + 11 tons (133,000 and 140,000 lb). N -1 RMDs consist of a tractor with one 16.2-m (53-ft) van trailer and one 8.5-m (28-ft) van where trailer converted from a semitrailer to a trailer by using an A- or C-dolly operating at maxi- GVWMX = maximum gross vehicle weight (kg), mum GVWs between 53.5 and 63.5 metric L = distance between extreme axles (m), and tons (117,700 and 140,000 lb). N = number of axles. 23

OCR for page 19
Table 14 Comparison of dimensional and weight limits for similar vehicles in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. U.S. Canadian Vehicle Limit NOM-012-SCT-2-2008a Comparable Vehicle Comparable Vehicleb T2-S1-R2 Weight T (lb) 52.0 (114,000) 36.4 (80,000) 41.9 (92,200) Length m (ft) 31.0 (102) 18.7 (61.5) 25.0 (82.0) T2-S1-R3 Weight 60.0 (132,000) NAe NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T2-S2-R2 Weight 60.0 (132,000) NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T3-S1-R2 Weight 60.5 (133,100) NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T3-S1-R3 Weight 67.5 (148,500) NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T3-S2-R2 Weight 67.5 (148,500) 48.0 (105,500) [RMD] 53.5 (117,700) [RMD] Length 31.0 (102) 29.0 (95) 31.0 (101.7) T3-S2-R3 Weight 75.5 (166,100)c NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T3-S2-R4 Weight 80.0 (176,000)c 58.6 (129,000) [TPD] 53.5 (117,700) [TPD] Length 31.0 (102) 32.3 (106) 41.0 (134.5) T3-S2-S2 Weight 65.5 (144,100) NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T2-S2-S2 Weight 58.5 (128,700) NA NA Length 31.0 (102) NA NA T3-S3-S2 Weight 68.0 (149,600) 56.8 (125,000) [B-train]d 62.5 (137,500) [B-train] Length 25.0 (82) 33.5 (110) 25.0 (82.0) aThese Mexican GVW figures correspond to ET and A highway classification limits. The extra weight applies to trucks with pneumatic suspension. bLimits according to MOE among provinces. Actual provincial limits vary. cThese two types of combinations are allowed an extra 4.5 tons gross weight until 2013. dUsually operates under permit. eNA: not applicable. U.S. Federal Bridge Formula B is the following: the design live loads used in Mexico are larger than the U.S. live loads. The Normativa para la Infraestructura L N del Transporte (Transportation Infrastructure Regula- GVWUS = 500 + 12 N + 36 N -1 tion) published by the SCT regulates bridge design loads in Mexico. Section N-PRY-CAR-6-01-003/01 where of this regulation establishes two live load configu- rations. The first one is applied to ET, A, B, and C GVWUS = maximum overall gross weight of the highways, while the second one is applied to D high- group (lb), ways. Figure 9 shows the corresponding live load L = distance between extreme axles of the configuration for bridges designed for ET, A, B, and group (ft), and C highway networks with a span length of less than N = number of axles in the group. 98 ft. Figure 8 shows that the bridge formula used in Canada, Mexico, and the United States also have the United States is more restrictive than the bridge different allowable axle weights. The six-axle tractor- formula used in Mexico to establish maximum semitrailer is a good choice of vehicle to illustrate the GVW limits. differences in axle weights and corresponding GVW One of the reasons why the Mexican Bridge For- because it contains both tandem and tridem axle mula is less restrictive than the U.S. formula is that groups. Table 15 shows that U.S. axle weights are 24

OCR for page 19
120,000 100,000 80,000 Gross Weight (lb) U.S. 4 axles 60,000 MX 4 axles U.S. 5 axles 40,000 MX 5 axles 20,000 0 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 Outer Bridge Measurement (ft) Figure 8 Comparison of U.S. Federal Bridge Formula B and the Mexico Bridge Formula. P1 P2/2 P2/2 P3/3 P3/3 P3/3 14.4 ft 23.6 ft 3.9 ft 3.9 ft 3.9 ft P1 = 11,023 lb P2 = 52,911 lb P3 = 82,673 lb Total = 146,607lb Figure 9 Mexican live load configuration. consistently lower than those of Canada and Mex- that of Canada and 33 percent lower than that of ico, resulting in a GVW that is 16 percent lower than Mexico. Clearly the allowable tandem and tridem that of Canada and 21 percent lower than that of axle weights in the United States are substantially Mexico, assuming removal of the 80,000-lb cap. less than those in Canada and Mexico. Basing the comparison on the current 80,000-lb cap A recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation indicates that the U.S. GVW is 28 percent lower than and Development (OECD) study on safety, productiv- ity, infrastructure wear, fuel use, and emissions assess- ment of the international truck fleet found that U.S. Table 15 Comparison of allowable axle weights axle weights were the lowest of all countries examined by country. including Australia, Canada, the European Union, Mexico, and the United Kingdom (5). Coefficients Axle Weights and GVWs (lb) within U.S. Federal Bridge Formula B are tied to cur- Country Steer Drive Tridem GVW rent axle weights, so increasing these weights would require revising the bridge formula accordingly. Canada 12,100 37,400 52,800 102,300 Bridge formula revisions could create an environment Mexico 14,300 42,900 49,500 106,700 of opportunity for vehicle designers to create more U.S. 12,000 34,000 42,000 88,000 productive configurations. 25