Carriers Hit FMCSA Limits for Oil, Gas-Field Drivers

This story appears in the July 23 print edition of Transport Topics.

Federal regulatory “guidance” issued last month that restricts the number of oil and gas drivers allowed to extend their workdays beyond the 14-hour limit could have significant adverse economic and safety implications for the trucking industry, several truckers said in comments filed earlier this month.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration said the new provision allows drivers who are waiting at oil or gas well sites to count that time as off-duty, but that the exemption applies only for trucks that are “specially constructed for use at oil and gas sites” and whose operators require “extensive” training for the use of the equipment.

But writers of nearly all of the more than 25 public comments, including American Trucking Associations, agreed that the guidance should be withdrawn and FMCSA should seek greater input from the industry.

“The operational changes required to comply with the new guidance will require more trucks, more drivers, and could very easily reach into the millions of dollars,” ATA wrote. “At the same time, ATA is not aware that FMCSA has initiated any research as to the safety effects of this change.”

ATA said that the guidance changes have the potential to “render some sites economically unfeasible for exploration, hobbling America’s efforts towards energy independence.”

“Ultimately, the unknowns are simply too great,” ATA said. “FMCSA needs to pursue further research in this matter before changing the playing field.”

ATA also asked the agency to extend its public comment period beyond Aug. 6.

FMCSA said that the guidance did not constitute a rule and was done only to clarify current regulations in response to questions raised by carriers.

“A significant increase in oil and gas drilling operations in many states has resulted in a major increase

in commercial motor vehicle] traffic to move the oil-field equipment, and to transport large quantities of supplies, such as water and sand, to the sites,” FMCSA’s June 5 guidance announcement stated.

In its written comments, Motor Carriers of Montana said that in the past, FMCSA has provided data and information to support its recommendations or proposals. But this time there were no listening sessions or analysis of how the guidance could affect the industry, the trade association said.

“While the underlying premise of the proposed guidance is safety, the net effect of it will be to generate a need for more drivers; less experienced drivers; and equipment which will increase overall accident exposure,” the Montana group said. “Rather than enhancing safety, the guidance could actually adversely affect it.”

The Colorado Motor Carriers Association said the new guidance document specifically excludes sand and water trucks from being eligible for the waiting time exemption because the vehicles are deemed not to be specialized equipment for the oil field.

“This is a subjective determination and does not recognize the fact that these vehicles in most cases are dedicated to serving well sites and that they are constructed and equipped in a manner to better serve those sites,” the association said.

Jodi Maack, an executive with Magna Energy Services, LaSalle, Colo., said that only those who work in the industry understand the importance of the oil-field exemption.

“This exemption is very much needed in our line of work. Sitting on-site waiting does not impair a driver’s ability to drive, in my opinion, nor does it prevent them from just being on duty working,” Maack said.

Ron Mann, of Britt Trucking Inc., Lamesa, Texas, said the guidance will “unfairly” affect the company’s operations. “Our company . . . is at the mercy of the oil and drilling companies while moving from one oil well site to another site,” Mann said. “We have a tremendous amount of down time while waiting for the drilling operations and moving the oil rig equipment.”

R.J. Hicks, executive director of the Western States Transportation Association, also asked that FMCSA withdraw the new proposal.

“The federal government did not engage the affected industries and companies nor seek their input prior to the issuance of this proposed regulatory guidance,” Hicks wrote.

In its comments, ATA criticized FMCSA because it “changed the rules mid-game” on the first day the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance began its 2012 Roadcheck event, which included a focus on oil-field exceptions to hours-of- service regulations.

“Changing the interpretation in such a way and at such a time

pulls the rug out from motor carriers attempting to comply with FMCSA’s regulations and points to an attitude more focused on ‘gotcha!’-style enforcement than the government-industry partnership model espoused by FMCSA,” ATA said. “Without some sort of prior notice, enforcement agencies certainly could not have distributed the guidance and properly educated their personnel on its interpretation either.”