SCCA Magazine

More work in 2011? California construction, private and public combined, reached an estimated $41.5 billion in 2010, up 6.2 percent from 2009 but down 53.9 percent from 2006, when total construction volume was $90 billion. Total construction volume is forecast to increase again in 2011, up 16.1 percent to $48.2 billion. The increase is expected to be primarily in private building construction. There will be little change in the public sector.

Federal appeals court upholds “indirect source” rule
The San Joaquin Valley Air District has adopted an “indirect source” rule to control emissions that occur as a result of new development. They are targeting emissions generated by the vehicles of those who eventually buy the new homes in the project. If they don't do enough to preserve air quality, they must pay fees that have averaged $500 per house.

Contractors win one
California contractors may recover attorneys’ fees under new case law.

New state standards for cranes & derricks coming soon
CalOSHA has announced they will release a revised California safety standard for cranes and derricks (Group 13 of the General Industry Safety Orders) on February 17, 2011, in response to new federal rules that went into effect last November.

DEPARTMENTS

The pause that refreshes By William E. Davis
What happened in Sacramento in mid-December with CARB can best be described as a pause, rather than a game-ending victory. In the off-road diesel rule, everybody gets an extra four years before they start compliance. In the on-road rule, construction companies get a two-year pause, and maybe more, for at least parts of their fleets under an expanded low-use exemption.

A 21st Century answer to a Caltrans bottleneck By Greg Dineen
Before you can put that fixed load (cranes, concrete pumps, drill rigs or any towable loads that exceed legal dimension and weight) on the road, you have to get a permit—and the first requirement for the permit is the fabled Caltrans inspection.

FUEL ECONOMY REGULATION

By Steve Sturgess, consultant, speaker and writer to the heavy-duty trucking industry

In case you missed it, on the horizon is the heavy-duty fuel efficiency regulation that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced last October. This set of mpg requirements for medium and heavy trucks has been crafted in response to Bush’s 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act and the Obama administration’s call for greenhouse gas emissions reduction technologies for commercial vehicles.

Never mind that engine and truck manufacturers have commercial considerations providing a major incentive to deliver the best fuel economy at the most affordable price. It’s yet another instance of how regulators and lawmakers are out of touch with the real world. The danger, though, is that fuel economy mandates will bring unintended consequences – like additional costs for technology that do not pay back over the life of the truck.

The new fuel economy rules apply to engines and powered vehicles. Grudgingly, I will admit the agencies have acknowledged that there are different vocations and configurations so the corporate averaging fuel economy (CAFÉ) standards forced on the car makers years ago will not apply to medium and heavy trucks. And they have also acknowledged that ton-miles per gallon is a much better yardstick than just mpg. The new regulations begin in 2014, with a second round to go into effect in 2018 that will require truck fuel economy to be increased from 7 percent to 20 percent depending on the truck type, vocation and other factors.

At the fall American Trucking Associations (ATA) meeting and expo, two panels specifically addressed the upcoming economy mandates and the impact it will have on end users. The general consensus from the panels was that 2014 should not be hard to achieve. Indeed, a fleet that specifies EPA SmartWay-recommended fuel-saving components ‒ more aerodynamic cabs, low rolling resistance tires, etc. ‒ is about at the 2014 fuel savings level already.

But while over-the-road truckers can avail themselves of current technology, the opportunities to gain fuel economy on vocational trucks just aren’t there. While 2014 is doable with some pain but an available payback in lower fuel use, 2018, will demand new technologies like turbo-compounding, electricity generating surface treatments and so on that will make trucks more expensive ‒ way more expensive.

This is all on top of the incremental costs imposed by the successive emissions restrictions since October 2002 that have added more than $20,000 to the price of a heavy-duty truck chassis. The increase in costs of vocational trucks, which can’t now meet the 2014 requirements, will be even higher. Outgoing ATA president and panel moderator Tommy Hodges pressed hard on this point and shared the general disappointment that fuel economy is something fleets are going to have to pay for, not embrace as a savings.

Another consequence of the regulations will likely be a reduction in truck models choices. Speaking on one of the ATA panels, Kenworth’s Bill Kozak pointed out that this fuel efficiency mandate sounds the death knoll for the bluff-fronted traditional tractor typified by his company’s W900L and Peterbilt’s 389.

These fuel economy mandates are on the truck manufacturers, not on the end users. The manufacturers will have to deliver, no matter what it costs. Greening is enough to make your hair grey.