Mexico-based carriers in pilot program have better out-of-service inspection rates th

Instead of doing DOT inspections of the pilot program trucks (aka: the absolute best they have to offer), why don't they check out the stuff that comes across the bridge in Laredo? Jeezus, if they were to do a quick L2 on 100% of the border trucks, we'd never see any freight come across!

 

I see someone found the propaganda photos. Let's see.

1. Photo number one is a Guatamalan or Bolivian truck from many years back.

2. Photo #2 is from circa 1986 more or less. Trucks like this are in the scrap yard now.

3. Nobody says accident don't happen in Mexico, but certainly not at the frequency they do here. And it appears to me the driver did a pretty good job of keeping the rubber side down on this one.

4. Photo number 4 is a stock photo of an accident occurring somewhere in the United States used by one of the shyster ambulance chasing lawyers that are a plague to our profession. This photo has nothing to do with Mexican trucks.

5. Looks like a Schneider trailer improperly loaded or a trailer with structural damage. Either way, the only this has to do with Mexican trucks is that one is pulling it. Coincidently, TUM is a very large carrier with an impeccable safety record in Mexico

6. Who can tell what that is other than a copyrighted AP photo hotlinked from a web site with real loony toons!

7. The Volvo is a US registered truck. This photo appeared in 2002 news story in the Pecos Texas Enterprise newspaper. Again, absolutely nothing to do with Mexican trucks nor the Cross Border Program.

Only a very transparent attempt to muddy the issue and further the efforts of the protectionists who oppose the program.

It is interesting you mention "Business Competition" and I would ask you what you do not understand about competition?

Why is it the Teamsters, OOIDA and others are so scared of competition?

You seem to think Mexican trucks can come here and undercut freight rates, wages, take job and have an unfair advantage, but logic would suggest differently.

Have Canadian carriers who have been allowed to operate here since 1982 had any impact on the American trucking industry? Not really! How many want to go to Canada? I used to run up there and I don't miss it. I also don't miss pre-NAFTA days taking a load to Sweetgrass Montana and waiting for a Canadian driver to deliver it in Calgary or Edmonton while I sat in sub zero weather waiting for them to return.

A Mexican carriers cost of operation, when operating in the US is not a nickels different than an American carrier nor a Canadian carrier.

Sure, they pay their drivers less. But then they have to buy US liability insurance the same as everyone else (but at a premium because they're of course Mexican), their trucks get about the same mpg as ours because they are identical to our trucks. In addition to that money (interest) is expensive in Mexico, averaging 13-15% for a truck loan. Then you have Mexican licensing fees, IVA tax of 10% (VAT) and other costs we don't have. They pay the 2290 the same as we do. They pay pump prices for fuel, unlike the majority of us that use Comdata and get an excellent discount from some of the chains.

It all averages out in the wash. And unlike the Canadians who operate much like we do, in other words, bringing freight down and then looking to brokers for a return load to Canada, and on occasion violating cabotage, the Mexicans are coming here providing service to their clients in Mexico who want direct shipments to their customers in the US.

Once here, the Mexican's generally have a return load back to Mexico for the same customer. Other times, I've seen these Cross Border participants carrying back crushed autos or truck parts to be recycled.

And everyone seems to forget about the 850 - 1300 Mexican carriers who had authority to operate without restriction in the US prior to the 1982 Foreign carrier moratorium, who were grandfathered in and allowed to continue operations. They continue today and you never hear of these trucks being involved in a catastrophic event that you do American and Canadian trucks.

No, sir, the statistics on SAFERSYS are correct whether you choose to believe them or not.

And you know what else is strange about those stats? Most were taken before the Cross Border Program came into being. They are the statistics of the cross border drayage trucks. You know? The old JB Hunt and Schneider cabovers that Hoffa and Todd Spencer would have you believe are representative of Mexican trucks?

Hoffa's "dangerous and unsafe" Mexican trucks actually have a lower OOS rate than ours!

 

An independent evaluation panel’s report on the U.S.-Mexico cross-border trucking demonstration project prepared at the request of Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters, definitively shows that Mexican domiciled trucks can operate safely and in compliance with all US laws and USDOT regulations.

The report was prepared by Mortimer L. Downey III, chairman of the board of PB Consult Inc., James T. Kolbe, senior advisor at McLarty Associates and a professor in the college of business at the University of Arizona, and Kenneth M. Mead, a special consultant at Baker Botts LLP and former inspector general of the Department of Transportation.

The Independent Evaluation Panel was charged with a comprehensive evaluation of the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) United States-Mexico Cross-Border Trucking Demonstration Project, which began September 7, 2007. The panel had the responsibility of independently reviewing this project for 12 months, assessing the implementation of US motor carrier safety rules, and evaluating the compliance and safety record of Mexico-domiciled carriers and trucks operating in the United States under the project. The report was issued October 31.

Although the participation levels fell far short of what had been anticipated, largely in part to the misguided and protectionists efforts of opponents to derail the project through lawsuits and Congressional actions, the panel said that their work verified that FMCSA implemented policies and regulations regarding admitting Mexico-domiciled carriers into the demonstration project, establishing safety mechanisms at the border, ensuring enforcement of safety rules by state enforcement officials, and carrying out the DOT’s commitment to check every truck and every driver every time. Exactly as Congress has demanded in the past.

“This report provides a comprehensive, independent, analysis of the safety measures the agency put in place to ensure the success of the project,” FMCSA Administrator John Hill said. “As the report makes clear, those measures have effectively shown that U.S. and Mexican carriers can safely engage in cross-border trucking operations while providing U.S. drivers new opportunities to compete and succeed in a market where they previously were unable to operate.”

Among other findings:

Demonstration trucks had no reported crashes.

The DOT has honored its commitment to check every truck everytime.

FMCSA and state safety enforcement officials reported no crashes involving Mexico-domiciled trucks participating in the demonstration project. During the project, more than 7,000 safety inspections were conducted on the participant drivers and more than 1,400 safety inspections on the participant trucks, in addition to the every-truck-every-time checks done at the border-crossing facilities used by the OP-1 carriers.

Of the 7,000 driver safety inspections, 37, or less than 1 percent, resulted in out-of-service (OOS) violations.

The panel’s work “verified” that FMCSA implemented policies and regulations regarding admitting Mexico-domiciled carriers into the demonstration project, establishing safety mechanisms at the border, ensuring enforcement of safety rules by state enforcement officials, and carrying out the Department’s commitment to check every truck and every driver every time. More specifically, the report said the authors found that

(1) the Pre-Authority Safety Audits (PASAs) were comprehensive and the agency conducted all the audits on-site in Mexico,

(2) that FMCSA honored its commitment to check every truck every time at the border, and

(3) that FMCSA provided state safety enforcement officers with guidance on enforcing safety requirements for the demonstration project.

It’s ironic that this report was released today. Last evening, I was listening to Todd Spencer mouthing off on Landline Now radio program. In his smirking voice, he felt assured that the new administration which is believed to be pro union, would put a swift end to the Cross Border Program and shut the southern border to any and all Mexican trucks.

This report, which was undertaken under rules established by Congress, should pretty much deflate the sails of the oppositon, especially Jimmy Hoffa of the Teamsters, who continues to erroneously refer to these trucks as “dangerous and illegal”!

More Highlights from the INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL REPORT 2008

Crashes, Inspections, Violations, and Driver Convictions.

FMCSA and state safety enforcement officials reported no crashes involving Mexico-domiciled trucks participating in the demonstration project. During the project, more than 7,000 safety inspections were conducted on the participant drivers and more than 1,400 safety inspections on the participant trucks, in addition to the every-truck-every-time checks done at the border-crossing facilities used by the OP-1 carriers.

Of the 7,000 driver safety inspections, 37, or less than 1 percent, resulted in out-of-service (OOS) violations. The driver OOS rate for the demonstration project carriers was lower than the rates of the grandfathered carriers and U.S.-domiciled carriers but similar to the rate for the border commercial zone carriers

Of the 1,400 vehicle safety inspections, 130, or 8.7 percent, resulted in OOS violations. By comparison, the vehicle OOS rate for the project participants was less than half the rates for the grandfathered carriers (24 percent), commercial zone carriers (22 percent), all U.S.-domiciled carriers (23 percent), and new-entrant U.S. motor carriers (28 percent)

he panel found a total of 6 cases out of the more than 12,000 truck trips in which a demonstration project driver was convicted for a driving offense. FMCSA provided us with records of drivers’ convictions from its Mexican Conviction Database for 2000 to 2008. Our review of the records shows that from September 7, 2007, to September 6, 2008, there were three cases in which a demonstration project driver was convicted for a driving offense. All three drivers worked for the same Mexican carrier. One of the convictions was for speeding 6 to 10 miles beyond the speed limit, and two were for general equipment failure, such as inoperable brake lights or insufficient tire tread.

The panel also reviewed the conviction records for the demonstration project drivers in the Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS) and found three additional convictions during this same period. These three convictions were for improper lane change and defective lights. Relatively minor offenses.

FMCSA’s Conduct of Demonstration Project.

The panels work verified that FMCSA implemented policies and regulations regarding admitting Mexico-domiciled carriers into the demonstration project, establishing safety mechanisms at the border, ensuring enforcement of safety rules by state enforcement officials, and carrying out the Department’s commitment to check every truck and every driver every time.

More specifically, the panel found that:

1. The Pre-Authority Safety Audits (PASAs) were comprehensive and the agency conducted all the audits on-site in Mexico,

2. FMCSA honored its commitment to check every truck every time at the border, and

3. FMCSA provided state safety enforcement officers with guidance on enforcing safety requirements for the demonstration project.

FMCSA stated in a June 8, 2007, Federal Register notice that the Panel would review whether the agency detected violations of 11 critical safety regulations in any greater proportion than found in conducting new-entrant safety audits of U.S.-domiciled carriers. The agency also stated that ?the FMCSA has determined that a violation of any of the following 11 critical regulations is so significant that it merits failure of the safety audit.
The panel observed that FMCSA did find fewer violations of the 11 safety regulations among the Mexican carriers that passed the PASA than among the U.S. carriers that passed the new-entrant audits.

Check Every Truck Every Time.

The Department honored its commitment to check every truck every time, and FMCSA implemented a key quality-control plan to guarantee that Mexican carriers were checked, as the Department had committed to do. Our evaluation verified that FMCSA jointly developed 25 site-specific plans with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to ensure that checks of Mexican trucks in the demonstration project would occur.

English-Language Proficiency.

FMCSA checked the English-language skills of Mexican drivers in the project. There are two components of FMCSA’s protocols for implementing the U.S. federal motor carrier regulations requiring all commercial motor vehicle drivers to have sufficient English-language skills. First,

They must be able to read and speak English sufficiently to converse with inspectors and the general public, respond to official inquiries, and make entries on reports and records.

Second, they must be able to demonstrate that they understand the meaning of highway traffic signs and signals that are in English.


For the demonstration project, FMCSA inspectors at the border tested Mexican drivers’ proficiency in English by asking a series of verbal questions and requiring the drivers to respond in English.

Inspectors separately tested comprehension of U.S. road signs by showing drivers a set of signs and having them respond in English or Spanish to indicate their understanding of the meaning of the signs.

The fact that drivers could respond with a Spanish word to indicate their understanding of the meaning of a sign (for example, ?stop? or ?detour?) in no way compromised their English proficiency, since their speaking and reading skills were tested separately in the verbal part of the test.

The panels review verified that FMCSA gave both tests to project participant drivers at the border-crossing facilities when they entered the United States. The agency also provided guidance to state inspectors on implementing these protocols.

Insurance

The panel independently reviewed the insurance information the demonstration project carriers submitted to FMCSA. They also contacted the five insurance companies that provided coverage for the 29 carriers that were granted OP-1 long-haul authority. We verified that all 29 Mexican carriers obtained the required minimum of $750,000 in bodily injury and property damage liability insurance before they received their long-haul operating authority. Of the 29 carriers, 24 had the minimum $750,000 of coverage, 4 had $1 million of coverage, and 1 had $5 million of coverage.

Observation of Border Inspections.

The Independent Review Panel conducted a comprehensive review of FMCSA’s monitoring and enforcement mechanisms at the U.S.–Mexico border from February 2008 to August 2008.

They directly observed FMCSA and state safety operations at 21 of the 25 commercial truck crossings at the southern border of the United States, including all the high-volume entry points, such as Laredo and Brownsville in Texas and Otay Mesa in California.

The panel determined that FMCSA had adequate site-specific plans for the commercial truck crossings and for conducting the truck checks and inspections in a manner consistent with the Department’s commitments.

Additionally, their review of the border-safety operations found that FMCSA had inspection equipment and the capacity to conduct meaningful truck inspections of the demonstration project trucks at the 21 border-crossing facilities our independent inspectors visited.

State Enforcement Officers’ Implementation of Demonstration Project Guidance.

FMCSA took steps to ensure project participant carriers’ compliance with its motor carrier safety rules. These actions included ensuring that state enforcement officials were prepared to monitor the participant carriers and understood how to implement the demonstration project’s policy guidance. The panel interviewed officials from 48 states and the District of Columbia. It verified state safety officials’ understanding of the enforcement of demonstration project guidance and found states had received training and guidance from FMCSA on English-language proficiency assessment and requirements for placing Mexican vehicles out of service. From our interviews, it was clear that FMCSA prepared guidance and provided materials through the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) coordinators for the states. Most of the states indicated that FMCSA guidance on the project had filtered to safety officers at the state motor carrier enforcement agencies. More than 30 states noted they had not encountered demonstration project trucks, and 8 states expressed concern about how to deal with nondemonstration project Mexican trucks that leave the commercial zone and operate illegally in their states.

Three Concurrent FMCSA Operating Authorities for Mexican Carriers Operating in the United States.

I have been determinedly trying to hammer this point home for more than a year. And here is verification.

The panel determined that there are far more Mexican carriers operating legally beyond the border commercial zone than there were in the demonstration project—861 versus 27. These other Mexican motor carriers have been operating legally beyond the commercial zone under authority granted between 1982 and 1994. Members of the panel observed that FMCSA currently has three operating authorities for Mexican carriers to operate within the United States:

1. Authority to operate under this demonstration project;

2. Authority to operate within specific states or anywhere in the United States under pre–North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provisions; and

3. Authority to operate within the border commercial zone.

FMCSA’s safety requirements for Mexican trucks to operate in the United States vary under these three operating authorities. For example, only demonstration project carriers are subject to the stringent and comprehensive Pre-Authority Safety Audit (PASA). The panel found that the percentage of vehicles placed out of service during the roadside safety inspections was 9 percent for the project trucks, 24 percent for the grandfathered carriers, and 22 percent for the commercial zone carriers. The National average for US carriers is 23%. (these numbers are rounded to the next highest whole number)

Drug- and Alcohol-Policy Compliance

The independent panel determined that the PASAs conducted on Mexican carriers that applied for the demonstration project addressed U.S. drug- and alcohol-testing requirements, including a key requirement to use drug-testing laboratories certified by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. We observed that in most material respects, Mexico has a drug-testing program with protocols that are at least equivalent to U.S. protocols, although some aspects of the specimen-collection procedures are not identical to those specified in U.S. regulation 49 CFR 40. ( In other words some faggoty character watching you pee in the cup as proposed under new drug testing rules in the US, which were recently put on hold by a DC District Court injunction)

Safety Databases in Mexico for Drivers’ Licenses, Truck Inspections, and Crashes

Further debunking one of Todd Spencers pet peeves (No Databases! No Databases) which we have know to be a lie for some time, the Independent panel verified that Mexico has databases with information on the safety records of drivers engaged in commercial motor vehicle operations, on vehicle and driver violations, and on truck crashes.

Officials with Mexico’s Department of Transportation, the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes (SCT), indicated that the database of drivers’ licenses is well established and that coverage of licensed drivers and system reliability have improved over the past five years.

Additionally, SCT has databases for commercial motor carrier inspections and crash data that are fairly recent and are undergoing improvements in terms of numbers of inspections and reportable accidents that are entered into the system. These databases cover inspections and incidents on Mexican federal roads and have three years of carrier- and driver-specific data on commercial motor vehicle operations.

This report should squelch all of the ridiculous assertions of the opposition as it pretty much answers all the objections real or imagined.

I doubt that it will though. Protectionist interests seem determined to undermine the credibility of this country by refusing to allow us to fulfill out promises and committments made under NAFTA.

They have wrongly used the illegal immigration debate as a vehicle to push their anti mexican agenda upon and unsuspecting American public.

Hopefully, the new administration will see through this subterfuge and resist efforts by the Teamsters, OOIDA and other self interest groups to force us to ignore our obligations.


What this proves people, is you've been lied to and led to believe the end of the world is near, your jobs are in jeopardy and the lives of your loved ones are at risk by interests that don't have your best interests at heart. Only their protectionist or nativist agendas.

And some of you fell for it hook line and sinker! Others are able to look at the evidence and see the gigantic fraud that has been perpetrated on you. Still others, refuse to accept the truth since it conflicts with their fears and prejudices.

But this report validates and vindicates all the opinions and articles I have written over the past year on this subject.

And I didn't do it because I have a dog in the fight. I don't! I could care less whether there are Mexican trucks on America's highways or not!

They don't affect my life, my family, my career or anything else. My "agenda" as some call it, has been to expose the ones who would lie, use false statistics, projections of pending catastrophes and other underhanded methods, to force their agenda down your throats.

You know people! We have many many more important issues that will effect our livlihood, our ability to earn a living or even our right to work than the Mexican truck issue. We need to concentrate on those issues. This one is dead!

But don't take my word for it! READ the report. All 119 pages.

You can download it here

Independent Panel Report on Mexican Cross Border Demonstration Project 2008

 

I think it's a helium balloon for a fast get away...........lol

 

You might have something there Cybergal, but not helium.

The by product of frijoles for breakfast, dinner and supper!