NASTC |

Victims’ Advocates Distort Truck Crash Data – Yet Again

David Owen — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 14:22:19 +0000

An Overdrive report published in early October detailed commentary and statistics from the Truck Safety Coalition about a report the TSC calls “The Deadliest Truck Crash States.”

The report concludes that the “deadliest dozen” states for fatal truck-involved crashes in 2023 (per 100,000 population) are 12 states where, but for three of them (Oklahoma, Mississippi and Alabama), fewer than 100 total fatalities resulted from a crash involving a large truck over the course of that year. The remaining roll call of “deadliest” states is a who’s who of what some coastal elites might call “flyover country”: Wyoming, New Mexico, North Dakota, Idaho, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Montana and South Dakota.

The Truck Safety Coalition’s conclusion is a statistical fairy tale, using the ratio of fatalities per 100,000 population to say our most rural, small-population states are the most deadly. Is it a coincidence that all of these states are politically red? Is it a coincidence that almost all of these rural states have higher posted speed limits, thus lending credence to the suggestion that speed-governed trucks might make sense (mandated speed limiters is long a goal of the TSC, after all).

Since when did we not use miles driven for all ratios concerning fatalities?

Using just the number of total fatalities, if we want to rank states for this metric, here’s a run at a better “deadliest” states list for truck-involved fatalities, also highlighted in a TSC-released infographic but otherwise glossed over in its press materials:

Texas (730 fatalities)
California (392)
Florida (341)
North Carolina (192)
Illinois (190)
Georgia (188)
Pennsylvania (180)
Ohio (167)
Arizona (155)
Tennessee (154)

In some ways the sheer size of these states explains their high fatality numbers, but isn’t it interesting that the top three also happen to be the three states with the most sizable intrastate truckload carrier populations? They’re also three states shown to have issued glaringly large numbers of non-domiciled CDLs to foreign drivers in recent years (Illinois is in that category as well). What might an analysis of intrastate truckers’ crash rates show us about the fatality statistics in those states? What about a deep dive into the stats in states where 18-year-olds can get CDLs?

Incidentally, the last time I suggested to federal representatives that we use state numbers for miles driven, I was told such numbers couldn’t be relied on for the reason that many of the states exaggerated or inflated their numbers indiscriminately so they would receive more federal funding. I guess the crash victims advocates and large-carrier trucking interests aren’t the only entities that pervert statistics.

The Truck Safety Coalition is a partnership between Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways (CRASH) and Parents Against Tired Truckers (PATT), two groups that have seemed to enjoy political leverage with another non-governmental organization, the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, which is mostly funded by and exists at the beck and call of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

The above organizations, often enough though not always align with the aims of the American Trucking Associations (ATA) and the Trucking Alliance of large motor carriers, and have used such statistical gymnastics in attempts to illustrate “relative risk” to make their cases. Any conclusions drawn from their reports must be questioned and scrubbed for bias against our industry. The TSC’s recent “deadliest states” rankings beg for such scrutiny.

There’s one point my own organization, the National Association of Small Trucking Companies, can wholeheartedly agree on with these groups — the truck-involved crash fatality numbers in 2022 and 2023 per 100 million miles driven were some of the worst in more than 30 years!

Raw numbers are bad enough. There were 5,969 truck-involved fatalities in 2022 and 5,472 in 2023. The former year was the first time since we’ve been recording data that more than 1,000 CDL drivers themselves were killed in their trucks during a crash.

Truck-involved fatality numbers have been on a generally steady increase since 2010, the year CSA (Compliance, Safety, Accountability) pushed carriers’ inspection, violation and crash data into the public realm. In real-number terms, truck-involved crash fatalities had posted two years of all-time lows in 2009 and 2010, below 4,000. Some would argue that the low numbers were attained because of the trucking recession that lasted from 2007 to 2010. Yet the number per 100 million miles driven had also reached an all-time low.

(Coincidentally, 2010 delivered the lowest driver-turnover rate our mega carriers had ever seen. Is it possible that there may be a meaningful correlation there?)

That’s to say nothing of fault in these truck-involved accidents, which the TSC report doesn’t bother to address, either. (Fault studies we do have show the large majority of truck-involved crashes are the fault of the other vehicle involved, not the truck, at a rate that’s getting bigger over time despite the horrible recent-history truck-involved fatality numbers!)

Overdrive pointed out that FMCSA in August kicked off the process to launch a new study into fatal heavy-duty truck crashes, as required by the 2021 Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act. The process will start with an information collection request to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a study titled “Crash Causal Factors Program: Heavy Duty Study Data Collection.” Beware — and I quote, “this study focuses on fatal crashes involving class 7-8 trucks, collecting and analyzing data on driver, vehicle, motor carrier, and environmental factors from about 30 states that were identified as key sampling locations for a nationally representative sample.”

The study has a start date of this coming year. It will run for two years! Why don’t we just digest and analyze all the available data from 2023? A great start would be to throw out the 84% of accidents where the truck wasn’t at fault, throw out the crashes where deer or other animals are the primary causal factor, throw out the number of accidents involving non-resident or illegal CDL holders, throw out the accidents caused by acts of God, or natural disasters, and for goodness sake throw out the despicable “swerve and squat” or other intentional acts causing an accident in the commission of insurance fraud.

What would be left would be true accidents, not those caused by drunk driving or impaired CDL holders, not accidents where the hours of service rules were ignored or abused, and not accidents where the clear and undisputed fault was the other vehicle’s driver rather than the CDL holder’s!

We need honest statistical data.
We need drivers that understand and speak the English language.
We need less, not more technology in the truck.
We need a better-educated populace concerning safe driving around large trucks.
We need a drastic decrease in driver turnover.
We need support from the insurance community to not roll over and settle in questionable at-fault cases.
We need tort reform.
We need to enforce the current rules and roll back existing rules that make little sense, not more rules.

What we emphatically do not need are any of the suggested proposals put forth by the Truck Safety Coalition:

Require Automatic Emergency Braking (AEBs) for all new CMVs. No. This technology is not ready for prime time and will create an increase in accidents.
Have FMCSA require new motor carriers to pass a knowledge exam proving that they know and can implement procedures required to operate a regulated motor carrier business. How can this possibly happen when FMCSA already can’t properly rate carriers, timely perform currently required New Entrant audits, or perform successfully any function suggested by Congress or the DOT?
Incentivize carriers to comply with post-crash drug/alcohol testing statutes in place. This is already happening despite the reticence of state enforcement who are on the accident scene and who refuse to do such testing.

The post Victims’ Advocates Distort Truck Crash Data – Yet Again appeared first on NASTC.

Pros and Cons of Communication

David Owen — Tue, 20 Jan 2026 14:22:57 +0000

Dear Member:

In a podcast conversation with Kevin Rutherford recently, we discussed the pros and cons of communication through emails, blogs, and texts versus real conversation in person or via the telephone. In business today I feel there are many misinterpretations and misunderstandings directly resulting from one-way communication and unfortunately almost 100% of our current generation prefer using one-way communication as the only channel available.

We both agreed that the biggest negative about this is the lack of nuance. You just can’t identify that through emails.

Kevin dug back into his treasured trove of trivial wisdom and recalled a psychological example of how dangerous the lack of context and/or nuance can be in using our language. I thought I would share this with our membership below:

With this eight word sentence you can change its entire meaning eight times by emphasizing each of the eight words.

“I never said your sister stole my money.”

“I never said” (someone else did)

“I never said” (not ever, never did)

“I never said your sister…” (I actually printed it)

“I never said your sister…” (it was someone else’s sister)

“I never said your sister stole” (it was your brother)

“I never said your sister stole my…” (I gave it to her)

“I never said your sister stole my money” (it was someone else’s)

“I never said your sister stole my money” (it was actually just a piece of cake)

Is it any wonder that one of the first counter measures to mitigate fraudulent activity is to confirm with whom you’re dealing by making a phone call? In today’s strange world even that stop-gap has been made impotent and unreliable because AI can kidnap not only one’s identity but their voice as well. I guess we need to go back to the old standby – what’s your mother’s maiden name?

The post Pros and Cons of Communication appeared first on NASTC.

Court Blocks FMCSA Rule Targeting Non-Domiciled CDL Drivers

David Owen — Tue, 20 Jan 2026 13:50:04 +0000

Court Blocks FMCSA Rule Targeting Non-Domiciled CDL Drivers

Last week, a federal court blocked the FMCSA’s new rule that aimed to phase out non-domiciled CDL holders — many of whom operate with unverifiable driving
records. The rule was designed to improve safety and accountability across the industry.

NASTC is disappointed in the court’s decision. We disagree with the claim that the industry will be forced to rely on inexperienced drivers to fill the gap.

The truth is: there are plenty of highly qualified, U.S.-based drivers currently sidelined due to the freight recession. We don’t have a shortage of drivers— we have a shortage of freight and standards that need enforcing.

We continue to support FMCSA’s effort to uphold the integrity of the CDL system and protect the motoring public.

The post Court Blocks FMCSA Rule Targeting Non-Domiciled CDL Drivers appeared first on NASTC.

The Dehumanization of Transportation

David Owen — Wed, 08 Oct 2025 18:07:03 +0000

I’m the last person in the world to have any credibility in an argument about uber-technological advances, unbelievable artificial intelligent capabilities, cloning, robotics, or getting to Mars. I’m the last person in the world to not have a cell phone. I own the majority interest in a software development company but use my computer to park sticky-notes. I’ve never used an ATM machine, an alarm clock, or even a wristwatch but I’m never without cash, I always know what time it is, and I’m never late for an appointment. Prior to Covid, I’d never gone through the drive thru window at a bank. As an aside, because of that when I started my company I hand carried my deposits to the teller’s cage, uncovered my “Deposit-only” stamp from the cardboard tent next to the window, made my deposit, and actually communicated with the tellers. Over time, I got to know several of them and had the opportunity to watch them work. As my company grew and I needed young, smart, responsible folks to assist in my company’s growth, I let them know I was hiring. I ended up hiring five wonderful employees from that bank who collectively have been employed by me for 120 years. The bank manager called and complained saying, “you’ve got to quit hiring my best people”. My response was “you’ve got to start paying them better and allow them some vertical opportunity within your bank or you’ll never keep good people”.

The operative words in that opening paragraph are “actually communicated with”.

Today I have a controlling interest in five very successful companies. All five are positive growth companies without debt. We have no employee turnover to speak of and, over 36 years, we’ve never had a workers’ comp claim. We’ve never sued anyone, nor has anyone successfully sued us. We’ve never been successfully hacked nor compromised although in today’s world attempts are made almost daily. We handle over 1,000 inbound calls per workday and a real person answers every call. Hold time is not an issue in that our real person directs the inbound call to the appropriate person with the appropriate company or program. If immediate attention by them isn’t possible we take a call back number and that person is called back. I do not screen my calls at all. If someone calls for me by name or title, the next voice they get is mine if I’m available. If not, I get a call back number and call it as soon as possible, almost always within an hour. My people are trained not to screen in any way. They do not ask if the person is a member or even what the call is about – if they ask for me, they get me. When you don’t have a cell phone, you can’t hide behind it. When you don’t have a computer, you can’t hide behind that either. My secretary gets my emails, prints them off, and puts them in my inbox. I pretend they’re a FAX and if I want to respond, I hand write my response and give it back to her to send. I do not respond to all my emails.

What I’ve just described is unheard of in today’s business world, but I believe it gives our companies a tremendous competitive advantage. We spend millions of dollars advertising to get people to call us and then we don’t answer the phone??? – that makes zero sense. Once again, the operative word here is COMMUNICATION. That word implies a conversation between at least two people. An email or an automated or robotic response mechanism does not qualify as a communication in my book.

I wrote my “take” on artificial intelligence and published it in our newsletter. Below is a reiteration of that comment:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an oxymoron.

I’m certainly no computer science specialist, but I recall when the first computers were built, and the technology was referred to as binary. The computer cards were programmed with long streams of zeros and ones which to me suggests a series of “two choices”, i.e., yes/no, right/wrong, left/right, etc., along a portion of programming. As Yogi Berra is credited with, “when you come to a fork in the road, take it.”

To some extent the human mind is designed similarly with a few major exceptions. Our senses – seeing, hearing, touching, smelling and tasting are the primary human functions that filter data. Just with those five basic senses we homo sapiens deal with billions of data bytes every nanosecond and yes, even when we sleep. Added to that the abilities to learn, remember, and reason, and to enjoy emotions, intuition, passion, and morals, love, hate, sadness, happiness, and grief, we realize that human intelligence will never be rivalled by artificial intelligence, which is still not much more than X’s and O’s, zeroes and ones.

We need to all remember that when the human element is compromised, sometimes it’s difficult to put that genie back in the box.

Another example of the “old-school” mentality that I believe is worth retaining, you’re holding in your hands. We still spend the money to actually print and publish our quarterly newsletters. We still spend the money to send each of you at least one copy via snail mail. Although we do post this electronically to our website where you can pull it, we provide this as an additional option or redundancy not as your only avenue to hear our thoughts. Although we have regular contributors outside of NASTC we have not outsourced or sold our rights to anyone outside our vendor partners. By the way, we think that this form of printed COMMUNICATION makes our newsletter one of the most read in our industry.

One of our most valuable assets is our membership list. We protect your identity as a group as best we can. We do not publish our members list in any form even to our members, nor do we decal or identify your trucks and drivers as NASTC affiliates. However, this doesn’t prevent you from telling others in the industry about us or referring us to potential companies that might profit from NASTC membership.

One other example of our strong opinion about old fashioned COMMUNICATION centers around our advocacy presence in Washington. We have a real and very talented man in Washington, Dr. Jim Edwards. He will be participating in several breakout sessions and panel discussions at our Annual Conference. Also, he has written a book titled “To Invent is Divine” that will be included in your conference package. Join us at the conference, take the opportunity to COMMUNICATE with Jim, and he will sign your book! Jim has been with us for well over a decade, we talk almost daily, and we’re constantly communicating with folks inside the beltway with FMCSA, Congress, and a variety of agencies like, the EPA, the Small Business Administration, OSHA, and others. Our advocacy efforts have been forthcoming for over 25 years, and we have spent the money to represent full-truckload, small, rural based, family companies in Washington – whether they are NASTC members or not. Once again, your COMMUICATION is very valuable to us in these efforts. However, if you want a great example of poor communication try getting to anyone in Washington, the phone company, your cable provider, or now, even a freight broker.

With all these high browed systems using AI, robotics, and advanced technology, WHERE IS the “just in case” button and how can you get it fixed when it’s broken?

Be sure and listen to one of our next Podcasts entitled “More Tech, More Problems” for more on this topic.

The post The Dehumanization of Transportation appeared first on NASTC.

Carrier-Lease Purchases: Let’s Not Just Throw The Baby Out With The Bath Water

David Owen — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 21:36:21 +0000

A recent headline in Overdrive caught my attention:

“Carrier lease-purchase programs ‘meaningful’ for at least half of lessee operators”

In reading the article and the related comments from drivers about both good and bad outcomes from lease-purchase agreements, I decided to comment on this issue and FMCSA’s typical one-size-fits-all, throw the baby out with the bath water, knee jerk reaction that would disallow companies from leasing to their drivers at all.

Their proposal to do away with this established business practice not only does not accurately fall under their authority to do so but also is a bad idea and represents just another example of a governmental agency getting into the middle of a business contract because some carriers take advantage of lessees, and some drivers are naïve about the truthfulness of driver recruiters.

When our industry was de-regulated in 1980, The Interstate Commerce Commission was sunset in 1995, and FMCSA created in 1999, small carriers and owner-operators were invited into long-haul trucking and allowed to operate under CONTRACT authority and not COMMON authority. Many drivers decided to get their own authority and operate under that authority as one-truck owner-operators. Many chose to “lease-on” to larger entities and run under their authority, thus creating the leased-on business model. From these generally large company models, the driver and the company entered into a contract that spelled out their respective terms, conditions, and mutual expectations. From these contracts came many creative concepts that would mutually benefit both parties – the driver and the company. Over the years it seems that some companies have pushed the envelope to such an extreme as to be viewed as predatory lessors not only with equipment leases, but with other areas in the contract such as fuel programs or other ancillary offerings. Many began to treat their lessees as profit centers and in some cases, the company made more money off their drivers than they did hauling freight. Most of the F— The Driver, (FTD) companies gained a reputation as predatory and their driver retention and driver turnover rates reflected that. However, for every one company that is considered predatory, there are ten who sincerely put these well-thought-out contracts together to help the driver succeed, take ownership of his own truck, and drive long-term as a leased-on owner-operator.

Let’s begin to regulate and legislate from a positive perspective rather than a negative one that represents an attempt to reach perfection. Let’s let the marketplace repair itself and not mandate industry wide policy based on a few bad actors. Let’s let true de-regulation create the level competitive playing field that it is designed to accomplish.

As some drivers pointed out, there are some cases where the lease purchase agreement is the only option their particular circumstances will allow.

Think about it: How many people ever pay off their house?

The post Carrier-Lease Purchases: Let’s Not Just Throw The Baby Out With The Bath Water appeared first on NASTC.

Letter To The Editor: Challenging A Misinformation Campaign

David Owen — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 21:27:38 +0000

https://www.ccjdigital.com/perspectives/article/15744018/challenging-a-misinformation-campaign

Apr 25, 2025 | Updated May 7, 2025

An article that appeared in the April 8 edition of CCJ in the Business, Workforce Development section entitled “Study Reveals Driver Fatigue and Mental Health Struggles” caught my attention and angered me almost to a stroke level.

CCJ needs to do a little fact checking before it regurgitates a vile, vicious, and vilifying portrayal of the trucking industry, its companies and its drivers in print.

The article took down several libelous factoids and misrepresentations that cannot in good conscience go unchallenged.

We can all agree on one central theme and that is the job of a professional CDL holder in full-truckload, long-haul trucking is a very difficult one. It is lonely, mentally and physically demanding, and requires special people to carry it out safely.

Our industry is quite proud of our drivers – our heroes of the road – who literally save hundreds of lives and avoid hundreds of accidents every week despite the irresponsible, careless and reckless behaviors of the driving public with whom they share the road.

When there is a car/truck crash the fault is not with the truck but with the auto in 84% of those accidents. Billboard ambulance chasers like Gruber Law ignored this inconvenient truth and provided to CCJ an internal study from 2019 to 2023 (during the COVID years) where they produced a series of big lies that are not supported by any statistical information. Let’s peel back the onion so to speak and look at some of these.

What is a big lie? It is really a psychological concept that basically says that an undocumented statement that is repeated over and over again by a reliable source is eventually perceived as being true, regardless of how absurd it might be at the outset. There are many examples of the big lie in history, but the most famous was the series of lies told by Hitler’s regime to the German people concerning their Jewish population.

CCJ echoes several big lies in the article in question:

The very beginning of the article where it is stated, “Truck drivers are struggling with extreme fatigue, isolation and high rates of depression leading many to self-medicate with alcohol and stimulants to keep working.”

The report, according to Gruber Law, utilized data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, American Addition Centers, RPM Moves, and peer-reviewed research along with 3,000 long-haul and regional drivers from 2019 to 2023 (during the height of COVID). Though these creditable sources are supposedly attached to the data, there are no direct quotes, footnotes, or any traceable evidence of what these studies showed.

The big lie that I’m quite familiar with is the one concerning lack of sleep. The report referenced in the article states that “nearly half of truck drivers sleep less than six hours a night.” She then extrapolates that to “sleeping fewer than five hours results in a tripling of the crash risk and that the report (by Gruber) avers that fatigue of this sleep level is equivalent to 0.08 blood alcohol concentration (BAC) impairment.”

The idea that crash risk triples with less than five hours of sleep is totally made up and probably comes from the FMCSA’s rationalization that driver fatigue went up exponentially as the shift time increased from hour one to hour 13. The agency used “relative risk” theory that was discredited and debunked as statistically absurd when it was pointed out that the relative risk increase was based on the theory that the likelihood of a crash went from six chances in hour five to 13 chances in hour 13, which they erroneously reported as doubling the likelihood of an accident. This is not only disingenuous, it is statistically unsupportable to state that six chances in 1,500,000 and 13 chances in 1,500,000 would result in over a more than 100% increase in the relative risk. Ergo, relative risk did not apply. Actually, that study discovered that the first hour in a shift was statistically the most dangerous hour although there is little or no fatigue at that time.

As far as the idea that sleeping five hours or less is criteria for a sleep deficit is also totally made up and unsupportable. Col. Belenky, who studied battle fatigue for over 20 years, told us in 1999 at a driver fatigue symposium that nothing he had uncovered in his 20 years of research indicated to him that a one-hour nap was not as restorative as a full night’s sleep. I suppose that this reinventing of the truth came as a result of the big lie told at that very symposium when Joan Claybrook stated that 65% of America’s truck drivers had obstructive sleep apnea and that was equal to or worse than driving drunk.

That irresponsible hyperbole has been repeated over and over inside the beltway and in the halls of Congress. Most of the unproductive, unnecessary and, in some cases, dangerous elements of hours of service and driver health has been erroneously built around that double lie. Sleep apnea, or hypopnea, is perfectly normal in all humans. As mammals, we all stop breathing while asleep. Unless there is chronic daily drowsiness associated that results in a severe sleep deficit or narcolepsy, there is no fatigue risk with apnea. And, if there were, why was STOP-BANG protocol not mandatory for all safety sensitive jobs that would include doctors serving their residencies, governmental agency employees, and Congress?

To my knowledge obstructive sleep apnea has never been cited as the primary cause of a car/truck accident. Fatigue, however, is a contributory factor in all accidents, whether on the highway, in the home or in the office, and each of us is responsible for managing our own fatigue, not FMCSA, Gruber Law, or a trucking company owner.

The most egregious misrepresentation of fact comes with Gruber Law’s assertion that, “alcohol and amphetamine use is also high at 91% and 82.5%, respectively. Drivers are abusing substances to self-medicate untreated mental health issues.”

Where does this come from?

Without going into how large this misrepresentation truly is, I will point out prior to bringing on mandated alcohol testing for truck drivers, the government did a two-year study in four states and performed 66,000 random roadside tests for alcohol. They had eight positives at the 0.08 BAC level proving, at least for me, that long-haul professions do not drive impaired.

The insignificant results did not deter FMCSA from including random alcohol testing and that remains a rule that forces the smallest of companies to perform these tests. NASTC administers the drug and alcohol program for 5,000 trucking companies. We have over 8,000 drivers in our consortium, and over the last 30 years you can count the number of positives for alcohol on one hand.

This supposed study by Gruber Law has since publication been taken down and CCJ has agreed to publish my rebuttal based on more responsible facts. However, this serves as an ugly reminder of how badly we need to oppose these types of self-serving attacks to our industry by entities like Gruber Law and loudly begs for someone to do something about tort reform and the proliferation of so-called nuclear verdicts in our industry.

The post Letter To The Editor: Challenging A Misinformation Campaign appeared first on NASTC.

Advanced Clean Fleets

David Owen — Mon, 24 Mar 2025 15:59:10 +0000

“As of 2023, only 0.3% of all registered heavy-duty vehicles in the U.S. were zero emissions models according to the International Council of Clean Transportation.”

The Advanced Clean Fleets rule put forth by CARB (California Air Resource Board) would have mandated California’s truck fleet to move to zero-emission models starting in 2024 and reaching zero emissions between 2035 and 2042. Also, all new heavy-duty vehicles sold in the state were to be zero-emissions by 2036.

Just prior to President Trump’s inauguration, California regulators withdrew its proposed mandate for only zero-emission trucks over the next twenty years. Unfortunately, the state of Oregon has already implemented such legislation as of January 2025.

CARB’s chairperson, Liane Randolph was quoted by CCJ saying that “While we are disappointed that U.S. EPA was unable to act on all the requests in time, the withdrawal is an important step given the uncertainty presented by the incoming administration that previously attacked California’s programs to protect public health and the climate and has said will continue to oppose those programs.”

This particular attitude toward policies that return us to common sense and realistic answers to protect public health and the climate vis-à-vis laws, rules, and regulations that impact our industry, is typical of the myopic and almost fanatical attack foisted against the use of fossil fuel held by CARB, EPA, and most of the left-leaning regulators in Washington, D.C. What’s worse, is that until now, whenever anyone questioned the “Green New Deal” concerning any of its hypotheses, premises, projected models, or timetables warning of Armageddon, we were considered as undesirable, deplorables, ignorant, uninformed trash that was in favor of polluting the air, the water, and the atmosphere. That is and never was the industry’s position at all and the last 75 years of steady and reasonable controlled evolution prove it.

The re-awakening of the oil and gas industry will be the cornerstone of a re-invigorated economy in the USA. Developing the Keystone Pipeline, allowing new refinery capacity to be profitable, and freeing up the ability for finding and developing more buried resources will lead to global fuel independence, the creation of millions of high-quality jobs, a resurgence of research and development of new uses for products using petroleum, a much stronger military, and lower energy costs.

Our industry is overwhelmingly in favor of exploring all sources of energy and the innovative and creative ways to develop all these sources into a variety of uses. Electrical power, hydroelectrical power, nuclear power, solar power, and to some extent, even wind are some of these. The use of hydrogen and other elements are being investigated as well as battery technology. I feel that ultimately the answer to the evolving concept of long-haul trucking will be a hybrid that will use many forms of energy. It will be a “SMART” truck but not an autonomous one. It will still have a human driver and not a robot although the useful “driving life” of the CDL professional might well be extended into the eighties and nineties, age wise. It will have an increased weight capacity, not a lower one. It will get the equivalent of 15 to 20 miles per unit of energy. And, it will not be allowed to enter, exit, pick-up, or deliver, much less idle, on the West Coast.

The post Advanced Clean Fleets appeared first on NASTC.

Regulatory Over-Reach

David Owen — Mon, 24 Mar 2025 15:51:54 +0000

Regulatory over-reach has once again shown that “one-size-fits-all” approaches from our federal central planning quagmire (i.e., Washington, D.C.) results in unenforceable, unrealistic, uneconomical, and sometime comical plans and programs that Draconically shackle the marketplace (particularly, small businesses). Below are samplings from the Small Business Administration’s comment concerning OSHA’s latest thoughts on how to improve working conditions for all businesses in regards to mitigating heat-related exposures. These suggested restrictions would apply to all employees in general industry, construction, maritime, and agriculture where OSHA has jurisdiction and whose employees are exposed to heat hazards above OSHA’s proposed 80ﹾ and 90ﹾ (high heat) triggers. “The rule would require covered employees to develop heat injury and illness prevention plans, conduct training, designate safety coordinators, seek non-managerial employee input and involvement, provide for periodic and episodic review and evaluation, and other requirements.”

The Small Business Advocacy Review Panel in its eight-page rebuttal to these inappropriate requirements stated in part:

(A) “OSHA’s proposed rule is intended to be a programmatic and flexible standard that would require employers to create heat injury and illness prevention plans to evaluate and control heat hazards in their workplaces. It would establish requirements for identifying heat hazards, implementing engineering and work practice control measures at or above two heat trigger levels (i.e., the initial and high heat triggers), developing and implementing heat illness and emergency response plans, providing training to employees and supervisors, requiring periodic reevaluation, and retaining records. The proposed rule would apply to all employers conducting outdoor and indoor work above the heat triggers in all general industry, construction, maritime, and agriculture sectors, with certain exceptions.”

(B) “The clear consensus among those who participated in these meetings is that while the safety and health of their employees is their paramount concern, the proposed rule is a one-size-fits-all approach that fails to account for their broad diversity of workplaces, employees, and regional differences.”

(C) “Indeed, many have stated that they already have heat IIP plans and controls in place and conduct training for their employees. Most have stated that they have experienced very few, if any, heat-related injuries or illnesses at their workplaces.”

(D) “However, OSHA has rejected the more flexible approaches recommended by the small entities and proposed a single, uniform standard for every situation regardless of industry, sector, geographic region, and acclimatization and susceptibility of employee.”

(E) “The universal heat triggers do not account for regional weather conditions, variability, and humidity and fundamentally affect the costs and impact of the rule. OSHA has not provided an adequate response to these concerns raised by small businesses. Further, the one-size-fits-all heat triggers, rest breaks, acclimatization, and the structure of a heat injury and illness prevention plans are too rigid to apply to firms and employers across all sectors, particularly firms with mobile or individual project workers.”

(F) “OSHA has not provided exceptions to the mandatory (high heat trigger) rest break provisions (i.e., 15 minutes every two hours) where materials like asphalt and concrete are time sensitive and must be applied upon delivery.”

(G) “Requiring artificial shade and temporary structures may be infeasible in operations such as road construction, where vehicular traffic and the rapidly changing work environment can introduce greater hazards.”

(H) “Small business representatives have also suggested that OSHA provide separate standards for outdoor and indoor work environments, or for operationally distinct sectors such as construction and agriculture. OSHA should also provide clarification on hybrid work environments, such as foundries, warehousing, and transportation, where work is performed in both outdoor and indoor environments.”

(I) “Small business representatives have stated that the proposed heat triggers are too low and should be increased. Many have suggested that 90- and 100-degree triggers might be more appropriate, but nearly all believe the proposed triggers are too low.”

(J) “Small business representatives have also raised concerns about the complex training provisions discussed in the preamble, which appear to require employers to conduct training on complex medical concepts.”

(K) “Small business representatives have also questioned the need for annual program reevaluations if workplace conditions have not changed.”

(L) “Small business representatives also raised concern about adopting universal rules for buildings and workplaces of unlimited variation and design, failing to adequately consider associated mechanical shops, supply and storage locations, and loading facilities, and not recognizing diverse workplace characteristics such as commodity variations in agricultural settings.”

This is a brief glimpse behind the regulatory curtain where all 141 regulatory agencies are hard at work scheming to undermine small business entrepreneurism, and our capitalistic system in general. It appears that their end game is to criminalize all business, unionize the larger ones, and nationalize the rest. It’s typical of a variety of central planning control campaigns with an ill-conceived plan looking for an almost imaginary problem to solve.

Let’s hope that with a much more business friendly administration taking over January 20, 2025, that we’ll once again put Constitutionalism and all its specific and implied concepts, like due process, the rule of law, responsible immigration control, and political ethics and accountability, back in place to put America, its citizens, and it businesses back in control of the federal government, and reestablish the true meaning of “WE, THE PEOPLE”!

The post Regulatory Over-Reach appeared first on NASTC.

Transport Topics Tesla Semi Crash

David Owen — Sat, 15 Mar 2025 15:54:03 +0000

According to Transport Topics issue of January 6th, 2025, there was a single truck” crash” and fire on August 19 of 2024 involving a 2024 Tesla Semi that “burned to the ground after it veered off Interstate 80 and slammed into a tree in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.” The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating this incident and their representative indicated that such investigations could take up to two years to complete and that this is their first such investigation involving an electric tractor trailer. It’s not specifically stated in the article whether or not the truck was being driven by a driver or whether the truck was being driven autonomously. The way it’s worded however suggests that the truck-tractor that departed the roadway to the right while navigating a right-hand curve was possibly driving itself. The “crash” occurred at 3:13 AM and the Tesla driver sustained no reported injuries.

On impact with the tree the truck’s lithium-ion electric battery system ignited in a “post-crash” fire.

Tesla sent a technical advisor to the scene.

Telsa did not respond to a request for comments.

The California Highway Patrol, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), and The California Department of Transportation were also sent immediately to the “CRASH” site.

Emergency responders dumped 50,000 gallons of water to extinguish the fire and COOL THE TRUCK BATTERIES.

CAL FIRE deployed an airplane and doused fire retardant to mitigate the fire spreading.

A thermal scanner was deployed to monitor the temperatures of the burning batteries.

Both directions of I-80 were closed for approximately 15 hours while fire fighters waited for the batteries to be considered safe to begin recovery procedures.

The Tesla Semi was moved to an open-air facility and monitored for 24 hours and no reignition of the batteries was detected.

And, finally, get this: “An FMCSA spokesperson had no information to provide since NTSB is the primary investigative federal government organization looking into the incident.”

I’m not going to try to list or enumerate the number of aspects of the above scenario that underline the absurdity that fuels the fire for autonomous trucks and for all EV vehicles, much less large trucks. However, just extrapolate the above off-the-shoulder ACCIDENT that by our old standards would not even qualify as a reportable accident, by thousands of such accidents per day. And what was the real cost of closing down I-80 both ways for 15 hours? Or flying in fire retardant? Or a two-year long investigation by NTSB?

I’m sure however that the 50,000 gallons of water could have been used by folks in Southern California even if a few smelt didn’t survive.

To view the full Transport Topics article, visit: https://www.ttnews.com/articles/tesla-semi-crash-ntsb

The post Transport Topics Tesla Semi Crash appeared first on NASTC.

In Loving Memory of Charlie Owen – NASTC’s First Field Rep)

David Owen — Mon, 23 Dec 2024 20:40:06 +0000

Owen Charles Owen, Jr. (Charlie), passed away peacefully in his sleep on November 9th at the age of 82. Charlie is preceded in death by his parents, Owen Charles Owen, Sr. and Bonnie Johnson Owen, both of Fayetteville, North Carolina.

Charlie is survived by two brothers, David Owen (Bonnie) of Hendersonville, Tennessee and Neal Francis Owen of Asheville, North Carolina, by his companion and roommate of 40 years, Justine Luecke, his two daughters Missy Mann (Jeff) of St. Cloud, Florida and Shelly Wright (Rob) of Deltona, Florida, and three grandchildren, Kelsey Wright, Alex Mann, and Dani Mann.

Charlie, in his early days, was a Boy Scouts of America executive for 25 years in charge of the greater Orlando metropolitan area division in Orlando, Florida. Following that, he did another twenty-five years with the National Association of Small Trucking Companies (NASTC, Inc.) in Hendersonville, Tennessee as its first field representative. His territory with NASTC, Inc. was Florida, Alabama, Mississippi and Georgia. He was honored several years as their Salesperson of the Year.

Though afflicted with Polio at the age of 12, his handicap never slowed him down in achieving great things for his family, The Boy Scouts and the National Association of Small Trucking Companies. In many ways, he often did with one arm what many could not do with two.

Charlie will be cremated, and a celebration of life will be held in Palatka, Florida at a date to be determined.

The post In Loving Memory of Charlie Owen – NASTC’s First Field Rep) appeared first on NASTC.