North American Cargo Securement Standard www.ab.org/ccmta/ccmta.htm

1
North American Cargo Securement
Standardwww.ab.org/ccmta/ccmta.htm

• Report to the Vehicle Safety and Inspection
  Committee
• August 2001

2
Towards A Uniform North American Cargo
Securement Standard

• Goal
• a performance based cargo securement standard
  which can be uniformly implemented and applied
  throughout North America
• Process
• joint effort, open discussion and collaboration
  between governments and stakeholders from Canada
  and United States

3
So whats the problem?
4
Background

• Research program to address problems with cargo
  securement developed by Ontario MTO in early
  90s
• Research conducted under sponsorship and
  direction of joint Canada - U.S., public-private
  partnership
• Research testing completed in early 1997
• Findings delivered to joint Canada/United States
  committee to support development of new
  regulations

5
(No Transcript)
6
Standard Development - Organization
Canada Council of Deputy Ministers of
Transportation
United States Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
Mexico Secretaria de Comunicaciones Y Transportes
CCMTA
CVSA
North American Standard Harmonization Committee
Membership Open to all public private
stakeholders and other interested parties
7
Standards Harmonization Committee

• open membership
• nine meetings held from 1996 to spring 1999
• broad participation from both governments and
  industry
• federal, state and provincial governments
• trucking industry
• shippers
• equipment manufacturers

8
Meeting Results

• Performance Criteria the fundamental basis for
  cargo securement requirements
• Format of standard review of existing
  regulations and models used in other countries
• Evolutionary process variety of expectations
• simple standard clear, usable and enforceable
• practical guide advice based on research and
  testing results

9
Meeting Results

• Convergence to consensus
• agreement on scope and application of standard
• agreement on performance criteria
• agreement on framework for standard
• general requirements which apply to all cargo
• specific requirements for commodities which pose
  high risk or challenges to securement
• agreement on list of specific commodities

10
North American Standard

• development of a model regulation which can be
  implemented throughout North America
• ultimate vision of standard in two parts
• Model Regulation the regulatory aspects of
  the proposed standard
• The Guide elaboration on the regulations,
  whats required, whats good practice, basis for
  training programs

11
Standard Development - Milestones

• Standards Harmonization Committee formed
• Research program completed
• Agreement on format of standard first draft
  model regulation tabled
• Model Regulation Draft 3 completed Canadian
  stakeholder consultation
• Draft Model Regulation completed committee
  disbanded
• FMCSA issues Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Spring 1996 December 1997 May 1998 January
1999 May 1999 December 2000
12
Standard Development - Milestones

• CVSA/CCMTA convene meeting of US stakeholders
• Deadline for comments on Proposed Rulemaking
• Final rule expected to be issued by FMCSA with
  implementation 1 year later

February 2001 March 2001 Fall 2001
13
Cargo Securement Principles
14
Guiding Principle

• public safety requires that cargo being
  transported on the highway system must remain on
  or within the transporting vehicle under all
  conditions which could reasonably be expected to
  occur in normal driving and when a driver is
  responding to emergency situations, short of a
  crash.

15
Performance Criteria
Vertical (bumps, rough roads)
Rearward (accelerating, braking in reverse)
Forward (braking)
Sideways (cornering)
16
Performance Criteria - Implications

• - the cargo must be secured in a manner which
  prevents it from falling from, or shifting on,
  the vehicle when subjected to the forces which
  would occur with the performance criteria
• - vehicle structures and attachments must be
  strong enough to supply the necessary restraining
  forces
• bulkheads, walls, floors, anchor points etc
• - the securing equipment must be strong enough
  to supply the necessary restraining forces
• tiedowns, chains, ratchets, binders, etc

17
Securement Approaches
18
Contained Cargo
Cargo is contained and secured by the vehicle
structure, additional securing devices not
needed liquids in tankers, bulk solids in
tankers or dump boxes, general freight in van
trailers or containers
19
Blocked Cargo
Cargo is restrained against movement in at least
one direction by vehicle structures, such as
headboards or bulkheads, or other cargo.
20
Attached Cargo - Direct Tiedowns
Cargo is restrained by tie-downs which are
attached to both the vehicle and the cargo.
21
Attached Cargo - Direct Attachment
Cargo is attached to vehicle by locking devices,
twist locks other integral locking systems.
Friction between the load and the loading deck is
not relied upon for cargo restraint.
22
Model Regulation
23
Model Regulation - Outline

• Part 1 -Application and Objectives
• Part 2 - General Provisions and Requirements
• Part 3 - Specific Securement Requirements by
  Commodity Type
• Part 4 - Definitions
• Part 5 - Referenced Standards
• Part 6 - Default Working Load Limits

24
Part 1 - Application and Objectives

• Applies to any motor vehicle in excess of 4500 kg
  (10,000 lb)
• Cargo must be secured or contained so that it
• will not, leak, spill, blow, fall from, fall
  through or otherwise become dislodged from the
  vehicle or
• shift upon or shift within the vehicle to such an
  extent that the vehicle's stability is adversely
  affected.

25
Part 2 - General Provisions and Requirements

• Context
• Foundation of standard - requirements that apply
  to all cargo
• Establishes basic principles for compliance with
  standard
• use appropriate equipment to transport and secure
  cargo
• contain or immobilize cargo to prevent shifting
  or tipping

26
General Requirements

• Applies to all types of cargo, including those
  specifically identified in Part 3
• if additional requirements are specified in Part
  3, these take precedence
• Need to satisfy one of three conditions
• 1. fully contained by structures of adequate
  strength, or
• 2. immobilized by structures of adequate strength
  to prevent shifting or tipping, or
• 3. immobilized on or within a vehicle by
  appropriate means to prevent shifting or tipping

27
General Provisions

• vehicle structures, floors, anchor points,
  headboards, bulkheads, stakes, posts, pockets
  must be strong enough
• must use a securement method suited to the type,
  size and shape of cargo
• tiedowns must be capable of being tightened by
  driver
• tiedowns must be inside rub-rails
• edge protection needed if tiedown could be cut or
  abraded

28
Part 3 - Specific Commodities

• Specific additional securement requirements
  which take precedence over the general
  requirements
• Logs
• Dressed Lumber
• Metal Coils
• Paper Rolls
• Concrete Pipe
• Intermodal Containers
• Automobiles, Light Trucks Vans
• Heavy Vehicles, Equipment Machinery
• Crushed Vehicles
• Roll-on/Roll-off Containers
• Large Boulders

29
Securement System Strength Rating

• Default WLL Values
• Chain
• Synthetic Webbing
• Wire rope
• Manila Rope
• Synthetic Cordage
• Steel Strapping
• Friction Mats
• A friction mat shall be considered to provide
  resistance to horizontal movement equal to 50 of
  the weight of the cargo resting upon the mat.

30
FMCSA Proposed Rule

• Includes majority of principles and requirements
  of Model Regulation
• Docket Number 2289 at http//dms.dot.gov
• Key differences
• structure and format differs from Model
  Regulation rewritten and recast as amendments
  to existing US regulations rules for specific
  commodities proposed in question and answer
  format
• does not include minimum or maximum acceptable
  angles for tiedowns
• does not propose to require testing and marking
  of strength of anchor points, tiedowns or other
  securement or blocking devices

31
US Stakeholder Meeting - February 2001

• Consensus
• Significance of proposed uniform North American
  Standard and the unprecedented international
  government/industry cooperation
• Importance of maintaining ongoing cooperative
  mechanism for interpretation, maintenance and
  amendments to standard
• Need to ensure an orderly and adequate
  implementation strategy
• Need to eliminate the distinction between direct
  and indirect tiedowns and to provide clear
  guidance on determining aggregate working load
  limit of tiedown systems
• Need to recognize and accept conditions under
  which movement of cargo (shifting) does not
  compromise public safety
• Need to continue development of a orderly
  strategy to eliminate default working load limits
  for unmarked components of cargo securement
  systems

32
Comments to Docket - US Rulemaking

• Approximately 100 submissions received by March
  19 deadline
• Reaction mixed general support for uniformity
• Major concerns
• difficulty in distinguishing between direct and
  indirect tiedowns (fear of inconsistent
  interpretation)
• language in NPRM implying cargo cannot shift
  under any circumstances
• implementation date - propose 18 to 24 months
  delay to allow for implementation and training

33
Implications for Canada

• NPRM indicates that form and content of Model
  Regulation cannot be adopted by US
• FMCSA NPRM represents new proposed North American
  Standard if uniformity to be achieved, but
• Final form of proposal will not be known until
  FMCSA responds to comments with Final Rulemaking
• final rule is final cannot be changed without
  restarting rulemaking process
• Canadian jurisdictions and stakeholders will have
  to judge acceptability of US proposal when issued
  later this year
• Implementation date - most likely 2002

34
Next Steps

• Wait for final rule to be issued by Federal Motor
  Carrier Safety Administration
• Canadian Provinces will
• consider acceptability of US rule for adoption in
  Canada
• develop implementation strategy to coincide with
  US
• Consider options if final US rule not acceptable

35
Training Program - Background

• Fall 1999 - Training Committee formed funding
  assembled
• Spring 2000 - Terms of Reference for training
  program completed
• Summer 2000 - Request for proposals issued
  consultant selected
• Winter 2000/01 - Training program developed based
  on requirements of Model Regulation

36
Training Program Funding

• 23 agencies or organizations contributed funding
  for training (13 Canadian, 10 United States)
• Assembled to date 180,000 (Canadian)
• Expenditures to date 135,000

37
Training Program

• Structure
• Based on Model Regulation - May 1999
• Focus on development of a training course (2
  days) comprising
• instructors manual
• participants manual
• slides to accompany instructors manual
• video to accompany/supplement training materials
• driver handbook

38
Organization - Modular
Module 1 Fundamentals of Cargo Securement
North American Cargo Securement Training
Module 2 Standard Application, General
Provisions and Requirements
General Securement Requirement
Module 3 Logs
Module 4 Dressed Lumber
Module 5 Metal Coils
Module 6 Paper Rolls
Module 7 Concrete Pipe
Module 8 Intermodal Containers
Commodity Specific Requirement
Module 9 Automobiles, Trucks Vans
Module 10 Heavy Vehicles, Equipment and
Machinery
Module 11 Flattened or Crushed Vehicles
Module 12 Roll-on/Roll-off Containers
Module 13 Large Boulders
39
Status

• Drafts completed
• instructor manual
• accompanying slides
• participant manual
• driver handbook
• Initial draft script for accompanying video
• video shooting not yet initiated

40
Training Program

• Status
• work on hold pending final rulemaking by FMCSA
• revisions may be necessary to all draft
  materials, depending upon content of final rule
• review required by Steering Committee and
  industry experts

41
Next Steps

• Review training program materials to identify
  necessary changes
• complete training materials and video ( 3- 4
  months)

42
Conclusions

• Proposed standard represents significant
  departure from format of most current
  requirements
• broader scope
• greater precision
• less interpretation required
• Proposed requirements do not imply major changes
  for most commodities
• clarification of general requirements