U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

67–722 2011

DO NOT ENTER: HOW PROPOSED HOURS OF 

SERVICE TRUCKING RULES ARE A DEAD END 

FOR SMALL BUSINESSES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS, OVERSIGHT 

AND REGULATIONS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

UNITED STATES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD 

JUNE 14, 2011 

Small Business Committee Document Number 112–020 

Available via the GPO Website: http://www.fdsys.gov/house 
(II) 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri, Chairman 

ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

SCOTT TIPTON, Colorado 

JEFF LANDRY, Louisiana 

JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington 

ALLEN WEST, Florida 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

JOE WALSH, Illinois 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

RICHARD HANNA, New York 

NYDIA VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York, Ranking Member 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

MARK CRITZ, Pennsylvania 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

YVETTE CLARKE, New York 

JUDY CHU, California 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

BILL OWENS, New York 

BILL KEATING, Massachusetts 

LORI SALLEY, Staff Director 

PAUL SASS, Deputy Staff Director 

BARRY PINELES, Chief Counsel 

MICHAEL DAY, Minority Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Coffman, Hon. Mike ................................................................................................. 1 

Altmire, Hon. Jason ................................................................................................. 2 

WITNESSES 

Mr. Paul James, President, Rex Oil Company, Denver, CO ................................ 3 

Mr. James Burg, President, James Burg Trucking Company, Warren, MI ....... 5 

Mr. Rusty Rader, J.J. Kennedy, Inc., Fombell, PA ............................................... 8 

Mr. J.D. Morrissette, Senior Vice President, Interstate Van Line Operations, 

Springfield, VA ..................................................................................................... 9 

APPENDIX 

Prepared Statements: 

Mr. Paul James, President, Rex Oil Company, Denver, CO ............................ 18 

Mr. James Burg, President, James Burg Trucking Company, Warren, MI .... 22 

Mr. Rusty Rader, J.J. Kennedy, Inc., Fombell, PA ........................................... 35 

Mr. J.D. Morrissette, Senior Vice President, Interstate Van Line Operations, Springfield, VA ..................................................................................... 40 

Tipton, Hon. Scott ................................................................................................ 49 

Statements for the Record: 

Walden, Hon. Greg ............................................................................................... 50 

Mr. Todd Spencer, Executive Vice President, Owner-Operator Independent 

Drivers Association ........................................................................................... 53 

The Expedite Alliance of North America (TEANA), The National Association of Small Trucking Companies (NASTC) and the Air & Expedited 

Motor Carriers Association (AEMCA) ............................................................. 60 

(1) 

DO NOT ENTER: HOW PROPOSED HOURS OF 

SERVICE TRUCKING RULES ARE A DEAD 

END FOR SMALL BUSINESSES 

TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2011 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

INVESTIGATIONS, OVERSIGHT AND REGULATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room 

2360, Rayburn House Office Building. Hon. Mike Coffman (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Coffman, Tipton, Hanna, West, Altmire. 

Chairman COFFMAN. The hearing is now called to order. Good 

morning everyone, and thank you for joining us. The hearing will 

now come to order. 

Thank all of you for joining us today for this hearing on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s proposed rule on Hours 

of Service and whether it will harm the ability of small business 

to compete. 

I would like to extend special thanks to our witnesses for making 

the trip to the Capitol and taking time out of their schedules to discuss this issue with us here today, especially my constituent, Mr. 

Paul James, who traveled from Colorado to provide his views on 

the proposed Hours of Service rule. In addition to Mr. James, our 

Subcommittee will hear directly from other small business owners 

about how the proposed rule will harm their industries and the difficulties their firms may face to deliver goods and remain viable. 

As you know, Hours of Service trucking regulations are issued by 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration at the Department of Transportation and apply to tractor-trailers that engage in 

interstate commerce that exceed 10,000 pounds in weight. These 

regulations place limits on the amount of time a commercial truck 

driver can be on the road, which are meant to increase safety and 

reduce fatigue-related accidents. 

There has been a significant decline in large truck crashes since 

the 2003 Hours of Service rules were implemented. Since then, according to the Department of Transportation’s own data, there has 

been a reduction in fatal truck-related crashes by over 33 percent 

and a decline of crashes resulting in injury by 40 percent. During 

this period, the distance traveled by commercial vehicles increased 

by some seven billion miles. Despite these major improvements in 

driver safety, the FMCSA has now proposed complicated and cumbersome travel requirements for drivers meant to increase truck 
2 

safety by reducing the daily maximum driving limit, decreasing the 

maximum on-duty time limit, requiring mandatory breaks, and 

changing the current 34-hour restart provision. The decreased instances of crashes involving commercial trucks over recent years 

begs the question: is this new rule really necessary? 

I find it troubling that the Agency relied on outdated truck-related crash figures to justify the need for such provisions, relying 

on pre-2004 crash-related data to inflate the safety benefits of their 

proposal rather than using current accident figures. Even more disturbing is that it is estimated that there will be a cost of $2.5 billion annually on the industry if the proposed Hours of Service regulations are finalized. How are American small businesses expected 

to survive in this unstable and costly regulatory environment? 

The trucking industry provides all Americans with much needed 

consumer products, food, fuel, and other items on a daily basis that 

are important in maintaining our national economy. It is critical 

that changes to regulations pertaining to the transportation of 

these goods be well thought out and strike the proper balance between the need for safety and a fast and effective transportation 

system. The failure of the Agency to take into account the significant improvements in driver safety over the last seven years has 

the potential to not only cost small businesses billions of dollars, 

but also lead to an increase of new and inexperienced drivers on 

the road to fill the employment holes created by the proposed rule. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on the possible implications of the new Hours of Service proposal. I now recognize the 

ranking member, Congressman Altmire, for his opening statement. 

Mr. Altmire. 

[The information follows:] 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an example of 

where most members in a bipartisan way of this Committee have 

exactly the same concerns on this issue. We all recognize that 

America’s trucking industry has an enormous impact on our economy. 

According to the Bureau of Transportation’s statistics, trucks annually transport nine billion tons of freight valued at more than $8 

trillion. Small business operators are the overwhelming employers 

in this industry. Ninety-five percent of the 76,000 firms nationwide 

have 40 or fewer trucks. In late December 2010, the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration issued a proposed rule on Hours of 

Service for non-passenger carrying trucks. Proposed changes include reducing maximum driving time from 11 to 10 hours as we 

heard, limiting drivers to one 34-hour restart in a seven-day period 

requiring periodic 30 minute breaks, and holding drivers to a strict 

14-hour operating window regardless of the nature of their work. 

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has argued 

these changes will have minimal impact on the transportation industry, while increasing highway safety and reducing casualties. 

That is what they say. However, to keep up with current demand, 

reducing drive time limits to 10 hours will require significantly 

more trucks and drivers on the road. This will force small businesses with scarce capital resources to hire additional drivers and 

buy new trucks. It is possible in today’s economy that some small 

firms would be forced out of business as a result. Raising the num-
3 

ber of trucks would also cause traffic congestion, higher diesel 

emissions, and greater wear and tear on our nation’s highway infrastructure. 

New on-duty rules will also impact small businesses that rely on 

drivers to perform additional tasks, like loading and unloading 

cargo after reaching their final designation. Currently, drivers can 

perform non-driving work beyond the 14-hour driving window. The 

new proposed rule will require drivers to be released after 14 

hours, potentially disrupting delivery schedules and costing employees pay when non-driving schedules exceed 14 hours. 

In an effort to curb abuse of the 34-hour restart requirement, the 

proposal will limit drivers to one restart per week. This could impact many small firms that are beholden to weather and other unpredictable schedule changes. These businesses frequently use 

down periods for driver resets. The proposed rule would end this 

practice and hinder small businesses during periods when they 

need their drivers the most. 

Finally, mandating 30-minute breaks every seven hours could be 

unduly burdensome for small businesses. Current rules allow operators flexibility to drive up to 11 hours during the driving window. 

The proposed rule will force drivers to stop after seven hours, regardless of the schedules and customer demands, eliminating the 

flexibility that allows many small businesses to succeed. 

Today in this hearing we will examine how proposed Hours of 

Service rules will affect small businesses and hear from firms that 

will be impacted by these changes. While the goal of Hours of Service rules is to improve safety, it is imperative that the new policies 

take into account economic effects on small trucking businesses. 

In closing, I want to thank Mr. Rader, who is from my district 

in Western Pennsylvania, for coming to testify today. And all of the 

witnesses. I look forward to hearing his testimony and the testimonies of the entire panel who have traveled here to offer their insights on this important topic. 

Thank you all, and I look forward to the discussion. 

[The information follows:] 

STATEMENTS OF PAUL JAMES, PRESIDENT, REX OIL COMPANY; JAMES BURG, PRESIDENT, JAMES BURG TRUCKING 

COMPANY; RUSTY RADER, J.J. KENNEDY, INC.; J.D. 

MORRISSETTE, PRESIDENT, INTERSTATE VAN LINES 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Altmire. 

It is my pleasure to introduce our first witness and my constituent, Paul James, President of Rex Oil Company. Paul has over 

20 years of experience in the petroleum distribution businesses and 

sits on the Conoco Phillips Lubricant Advisory Council and the Colorado Wyoming Petroleum Marketers Association Board of Trustees. We appreciate your testimony and thank you again for coming 

here today. 

Mr. James. 

STATEMENT OF PAUL JAMES 

Mr. JAMES. Good morning, Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member 

Altmire, and members of the Committee. Thank you for the oppor-
4 

tunity to testify before you today on the FMCSA’s proposed 

changes to the Hours of Service regulations. 

My name is Paul James, and I am the President of Rex Oil Company located in Denver, Colorado. 

I am speaking on behalf of PMAA, the Petroleum Marketers Association of America. I am one of approximately 8,000 small business petroleum distributors who employ CDL drivers with 

HAZMAT endorsements. We transport gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, 

kerosene and heating oil to both wholesale and retail customers. 

Our drivers engage in short haul, local delivery service from petroleum terminals to intermediate storage banks, mainly gas stations 

and other end-users. Most stay within a 100-mile air radius or closer to home and they return home each and every day. 

I understand that the FMCSA is proposing these changes as a 

result of a lawsuit filed by the truck safety advocates who believe 

that the current regulations do not adequately address driver fatigue issues. However, petroleum marketers have concerns about 

the proposed changes and we appreciate the opportunity to speak 

to you today. 

1. PMAA opposes a reduction of the daily maximum driving 

hours from 11 to 10. 

Any reduction in the maximum daily driving hours would drive 

costs up for many small business petroleum transporters. With 

fewer hours to drive each day, many companies would be forced to 

hire additional, less experienced drivers, or delay deliveries to the 

following day. In the petroleum marketing industry, product prices 

change daily. Often it is advantageous from a price point perspective to purchase, pick up, and deliver petroleum products the very 

same day. It is not uncommon for drivers to experience unexpected 

delays at petroleum terminals, especially when there is a steep increase in prices for the following day. As a result, drivers often 

need every hour available under the current Hours of Service regulations to complete their daily runs. The daily reduction in driving 

hours would thus decrease overall safety by putting less experienced drivers on the road. If we are forced to hire new, additional 

people, buy more trucks to deliver the exact same amount of product. 

2. PMAA opposes changes to the 34-hour restart period. 

The FMCSA proposal would place limits on the 34-hour restart 

period required at the end of the driver’s work week before a return to duty is allowed. Specifically, the 34-hour restart provision 

would introduce two nightly periods between the hours of 12 a.m. 

and 6 a.m. This change would be extremely detrimental to petroleum transporters. For instance, in my case we have a small window of operating hours to make certain deliveries in order to meet 

local government restrictions like in Boulder, Colorado. They grant 

us access within the city limits only during the proposed time. Rex 

Oil also schedules several of our drivers during the specific hours 

of 12 a.m. and 6 a.m. to meet the demand for deliveries, as well 

as minimizing the daily traffic congestion present in most of our 

cities. We believe this to be the safest drive time and try to utilize 

it the best we can. 

Lastly, this provision would affect those who supply residential 

heating oil found mainly here on the East Coast. Many times dur-
5 

ing the winter heating season, drivers are required to respond to 

emergency calls after their shift is over and often in the middle of 

the night in order to restart residential furnaces and deliver additional product. Therefore, we would request that no specific timeframe be used when calculating the 34-hour restart period found 

currently in the regulations. 

3. PMAA opposes the proposed 30-minute driver rest break. 

Requiring a 30-minute driver break within the first seven hours 

of driving time does not result in any noticeable reduction of fatigue among short-haul petroleum drivers. Our drivers are making 

short, local runs between gas stations, farms, and other commercial 

operations to deliver product in the communities where we live. 

Which brings me to my last and final point. 

4. PMAA requests that the FMCSA adopt a provision that would 

allow time spent by a driver in a parked commercial motor vehicle 

to count as off-duty time. 

PMAA makes this request because private short-haul drivers 

often spend significant periods of time parked in line at terminals 

as they wait to load product. When fuel is in high demand, a driver 

wait time may last up to three hours. During these extended times, 

the commercial motor vehicle is parked and the driver remains in 

the cab. The current rules require drivers to count no driving wait 

time as on-duty. We respectfully request that the FMCSA allow up 

to three hours waiting in a parked commercial motor vehicle to be 

counted as off-duty time when a driver stays within the 100-mile 

air radius. The three-hour allowance would be similar to that that 

the FMCSA already allows under the oil field exemption. PMAA 

believes that this change can be made without reducing fatigue. 

In closing, it is essential that the FMCSA take into consideration 

the differences between short-haul and long-haul drivers. Our drivers return home to home base every single night and fatigue is 

thus a less significant factor among short-haul drivers as opposed 

to the long-haul drivers. 

We appreciate the opportunity to submit these written comments, and I thank you for your time. 

[The statement of Mr. James follows on page 18.] 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. James. 

Our next witness is Mr. James Burg, owner of James Burg 

Trucking. Mr. Burg grew his business from a one-truck operation 

he began at the age of 19 to a fleet of over 75 trucks and operating 

primarily throughout the Midwest. We look forward to hearing 

your testimony, Mr. Burg. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES BURG 

Mr. BURG. Thank you, Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Altmire, members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for holding today’s 

hearing. 

My name is Jim Burg, and I am the president of James Burg 

Trucking Company, a small business located near Detroit. I started 

my company in 1984 with one truck at the age of 19. We now employ 75 trucks and employ over 85 people. I personally hold a commercial driver’s license and have driven over 1.3 million miles. 

I am testifying today on behalf of the American Trucking Associations. The proposed Hours of Service changes, if finalized, would 
6 

have a profoundly negative impact on small businesses, would restrict productivity, and would result in greater congestion and increased emissions. These impacts are significant since there are 

more than 500,000 trucking companies in the United States, and 

according to FMCSA, 99 percent of these companies are small businesses. 

The proposed changes come at a time when the pool of qualified 

drivers has shrunk. Last year, I increased driver compensation by 

six percent just to attract and retain qualified drivers. If the proposed rules are finalized, I will need to add more trucks and drivers and their corresponding expenses simply to counter the loss in 

productivity. By my calculations, the Hours of Service changes 

would trigger the need to increase our retained earnings by between 20 and 25 percent just to maintain our current level of financial stability. 

At some point, companies like mine will need to pass these costs 

onto consumers which, as we all know, fuels inflation and reduces 

global competitiveness. Ironically, increased costs and reduced productivity prohibit me from investing in promising onboard safetybased technologies. Regrettably, my current business strategy must 

be to hoard cash and delay expansion until the economic and regulatory uncertainties are diminished. 

With respect to the proposed hours of service regulations, my 

strong belief is that the Agency should abandon its proposal and 

retain the current HOS regulations. This belief is founded upon the 

following points: 

1. The safety record of the trucking industry has been improved 

dramatically while operating under the current rules. Since 2003 

when the basic framework for the current Hours of Service regulations was published, the numbers of truck-related injuries and fatalities have both dropped by more than 30 percent to their lowest 

levels in recorded history. 

2. The proposed changes would cause enormous productivity 

losses. FMCSA previously estimated that changes like the ones 

proposed would cost society over $2 billion annually. These losses 

would disproportionately impact small businesses. 

3. The proposed changes would have virtually no benefit in terms 

of reducing fatigue-related truck crashes. Only a small percentage 

of truck crashes are caused by driver fatigue and only a very small 

number of truck crashes occur in the latter hours of drivers’ shifts. 

FMCSA’s own cost benefit analysis acknowledges that the safety 

benefits of the proposed rules would not outweigh the economic 

costs. Only by adding creative, questionable health-related benefits 

does the Agency’s proposal pass the cost benefit test. However, as 

explained in my written testimony, the Agency has misrepresented 

and misapplied the sleep duration and mortality risk studies it relied on in its analysis. Hence, there is simply no scientific support 

for the health benefits claimed by the Agency. 

4. Ironically, the proposed rules would trigger unintended safety 

consequences. Drivers feeling pressure to meet tighter restrictions 

would be more prone to rushing or poor decision-making. The reduction in productivity would drive a need to increase the number 

of trucks on the road, especially during peak hours of congestion. 
7 

And finally, the resulting productivity losses would raise demand 

for inexperienced, more crash-prone drivers. 

Certain elements of the FMCSA’s proposal are particularly troubling. The Agency has proposed that drivers utilizing the restart 

provision be required to ensure that each restart include two nighttime periods between midnight and 6 a.m. As a result, drivers 

using this provision would enter the traffic flow at approximately 

the same time, further exasperating rush hour congestion and the 

corresponding consequences. 

FMCSA’s proposal to eliminate the 11th hour of driving simply 

reflects a lack of understanding of how the 11th hour is used. Even 

though the 11th hour is not used extensively, eliminated it would 

not only impact the trips where it is used but those trips where it 

might be used. In short, eliminating the 11th hour would only 

serve to render certain routes impractical or repress drivers to 

make runs in tighter time constraints. 

In summary, FMCSA’s proposed changes to the Hours of Service 

rules are necessary, unjustified, and would have a profound negative impact on the economy, particularly on small businesses. 

I speak on behalf of the American Trucking Associations, companies just like mine, and the 99 percent of the trucking industries’ 

over 500,000 motor carriers which are classified as small businesses. In our review, the only rational and reasonable course of 

action for the FMCSA is to abandon this proposal, retain the current Hours of Service regulations, and spend its resources better 

enforcing the current rules. 

Before closing I want to thank Chairman Graves and Congressman Bill Shuster for their leadership on this critical issue. I want 

to thank all of you who joined them in writing Transportation Secretary LaHood to urge him to keep the current Hours of Service 

rules in place. 

Thank you again for your time. And I am pleased to answer your 

questions. I owe you 24 seconds. 

[The statement of Mr. Burg follows on page 22.] 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Burg. 

I will now yield to the Ranking Member Altmire, Congressman 

Altmire, who will introduce his constituent. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And it is my pleasure 

to introduce Rusty Rader, the CFO and part-owner of J.J. Kennedy, 

Inc., a family-owned ready mixed concrete business headquartered 

in Fombell, Pennsylvania. 

Rusty is a graduate of Penn State University and has a Master’s 

degree in civil engineering. Prior to joining the family business in 

1994, he was employed as a transportation engineer in Chicago. 

Since his return to J.J. Kennedy, Inc., Rusty has worked to expand 

the business from a two-plant local operation to six plants located 

throughout Western Pennsylvania. And most relevant to this hearing today, Rusty was integral in implementing technology that has 

allowed J.J. Kennedy to become a more productive ready mixed 

concrete supplier. The technology that he has applied has given 

J.J. Kennedy the ability to accurately track the amount of time an 

employee spends driving versus pouring a load of concrete. This 

has allowed the company to provide more accurate scheduling of 
8 

their mixer fleet, ultimately providing their customers with more 

consistent service. 

We look forward to hearing your testimony. Welcome, Mr. Rader. 

STATEMENT OF RUSTY RADER 

Mr. RADER. Thank you, Congressman Altmire, Chairman Coffman, and other members of the Committee. Thanks for this opportunity to share my views on the proposed Hours of Service regulations currently being promulgated by the FMCSA. 

My name is Rusty Rader and I am a co-owner of J.J. Kennedy, 

Inc., a family-owned ready mixed concrete company based out of 

Fombell, Pennsylvania. J.J. Kennedy was founded in 1905 and currently employs 65 people. We operate six ready mixed concrete 

plants with 32—— 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Rader, could you pull your mic a little bit closer to yourself? Sorry about that. 

Mr. BURG. In his defense, it does say ‘‘do not touch microphone.’’ 

Rule follower. 

Mr. RADER. We operate six ready mixed concrete plants with 32 

concrete mixers and deliver nearly 100,000 cubic yards of concrete 

annually. 

The current Hours of Service regulations are not perfect; however, they are manageable and much more flexible for operations, 

such as the ready mixed concrete industry, than the new Hours of 

Service rule being proposed by the FMCSA. 

J.J. Kennedy, Inc., as well as the ready mixed concrete industry, 

takes issue with a number of the proposed changes, specifically the 

following six points. 

1. Requiring off-duty time immediately following the end of the 

driving window. 

Never before has the FMCSA limited the on-duty time in which 

a driver is allowed to perform his or her work. It has only regulated the amount of time a driver can safely drive. By forcing companies to release drivers at the end of the driving window and not 

allowing them to continue on-duty work will hurt any company’s 

competitiveness. Plus, many ready mixed concrete companies use a 

driver to help with additional duties at the plant. By limiting their 

on-duty time, FMCSA has overstepped its boundaries and responsibilities. 

2. Possibly reducing driving time from 11 to 10 hours. 

Safety-related incidents for truck traffic has been declining since 

the rule to allow 11 hours of driving time per day was adopted. J.J. 

Kennedy and the NRMCA (National Ready Mixed Concrete Association) see no justifiable reason to reduce that number. A reduction in driving time would only cause more trucks to be on the road 

to deliver the same volume of concrete. 

3. Mandating a break of 30 minutes every seven hours. 

Ready mixed concrete drivers spend less than 50 percent of their 

on-duty time actually driving. The other 50 percent is spent at the 

plant waiting to be dispatched, at the jobsite waiting to unload, unloading the concrete, and performing other duties. Companies need 

to have the flexibility to give breaks as the schedules dictate 

throughout the day. For example, a concrete delivery often takes 

more than two and a half hours to complete. Concrete is a perish-
9 

able product, and once a delivery is started it must be completed 

or the concrete may harden in the truck causing thousands of dollars worth of damage and potentially violating a delivery contract. 

Every day is different in the construction field, thus companies 

need the flexibility to deliver concrete when the customer needs it. 

Often customers order concrete on an as soon as possible basis. 

4. Limiting restarts of the 60/70 hour clock to once in seven days. 

Most ready mixed concrete truck drivers use the ‘‘Construction 

Materials Exemption’’ of 24 hours to restart their weekly clocks. A 

rainy day will often stop deliveries for an entire day more than 

once a week. Many ready mixed concrete drivers use this 24-hour 

off-duty period to reset their weekly clock more than once in a 

seven or eight day period allowing construction schedules to continue when the weather improves. The proposed changes would 

eliminate this much needed and used practice. Drivers should have 

the flexibility to restart their weekly clock as they see fit instead 

of once per week. Construction schedules fluctuate and companies 

need the ability to stay complaint with the regulations and still 

service their customers. 

5. Including at least two periods between midnight and 6 a.m. 

Many ready mixed concrete products work exclusively at night 

during the hot summer months. The reduced nighttime traffic congestion and cooler temperatures are more conducive to concrete 

placement. By mandating a driver’s off-duty time to include at 

least two consecutive periods of midnight to 6 a.m. reduces the 

number of hours available to meet construction and delivery schedules to an unacceptable level. Not every work day takes place during daylight hours, making this proposed change overly restrictive. 

6. Limiting on-duty time to 13 hours in a driving window. 

NRMCA sees no justification to limit on-duty time. FMCSA 

should restrict its regulations to ‘‘driving time’’ as I previously 

mentioned. During the 16-hour-window-days, this would require a 

mandatory minimum of three hours of nonproductive, nonpaid 

time. This provision makes no sense for the short-haul driving industry like ready mixed concrete. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on how FMCSA’s proposed Hours of Service regulations will affect J.J. Kennedy and the 

ready mixed concrete industry. 

[The statement of Mr. Rader follows on page 35.] 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Rader, for your testimony. 

I would like to introduce our final witness for the hearing, Mr. 

J.D. Morrissette, president of Interstate Van Lines. 

Mr. Morrissette has more than 25 years of experience in the 

transportation industry, working his way up the ranks at Interstate, including Vice President of Domestic Services, Vice President 

of Van Lines, and Manager of Van Lines Operations. The Subcommittee appreciates you taking the time to speak with us today. 

Mr. Morrissette. 

STATEMENT OF J.D. MORRISSETTE 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. Good morning, Chairman Coffman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee. I am John Morrissette, 

president of Interstate Van Lines, a third-generation family business located in Springfield, Virginia. Thank you for the oppor-
10 

tunity, on behalf of the 3,000 members of the American Moving 

and Storage Association, to share our views on the proposed Hours 

of Service rules. 

Our industry is comprised primarily of small businesses that 

have been hard hit by the depressed economy and housing market 

collapse. Household goods movers are unique and the proposed 

Hours of Services changes will have a devastating impact on our 

ability to service our customers. 

The household goods industry differs from the general trucking 

industry, not only in the type of cargo we carry but also in the type 

of service we provide. We spend more time on residential streets 

than at loading docks on established freight lanes. We are an industry that prides itself on customer service, particularly our ability to take care of the customers’ often changing needs. 

Our drivers typically spend a large part of their available onduty time packing, loading, unloading, rather than driving. In addition to on-duty driving hours, our drivers enter private residences; 

sort, wrap, and pack shipments of personal items; load and unload 

their vehicles, which is a skill set that is unique to our industry; 

reassemble and sometimes even arrange the customer’s furniture; 

move personal possessions and memories with the utmost care in 

the customer’s presence; inventory each customer’s items while at 

residence; and complete the contract (bill of lading) directly with 

our customer. 

Our drivers must satisfy the frequent changing schedules of our 

customers. The proposed Hours of Service changes are complicated 

for drivers and difficult for customers to appreciate how they can 

affect the timing of their move. Customers’ plans change. They add 

items, they decide to move into a unit on a higher floor, their mortgage closing gets postponed, the landlord delays the move-in date, 

their flight was canceled, and so on. All of these issues can force 

last minute pick-up and delivery changes. Also, our vehicles often 

transport several households in one trip, and any schedule change 

for one shipment affects all the others. 

The proposed hours of service changes will severely limit our 

flexibility to meet customers’ scheduling needs. Moves that are delayed and run over the duty-time day will require additional trucks 

and drivers to finish the move, at substantial additional cost. 

Fewer hours to service individual shipments will mean fewer loads 

and reduce revenue for drivers. 

The Hours of Service rules will require multiple days to be added 

to complete moves at additional cost. Every business will need to 

increase its staffing and fleet size to compensate for the loss of 

hours in order to maintain service levels and customers’ expectations. The capital required to add drivers and trucks would be difficult for many businesses and likely prohibitive for small businesses. Small businesses that cannot afford necessary trucks and 

drivers may be driven out of the industry. 

The health and well-being of our industry’s drivers are of the utmost importance to us. Our industry fully supports the efforts of 

FMCSA to promote safety and protect driver health. However, we 

submit, in recognition of the unique aspects of the customer-service 

model of our industry, the proposed Hours of Services changes 
11 

should not be applied to the interstate household goods industry 

and the current rules should continue to apply. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to answering any questions that you may have. 

[The statement of Mr. Morrissette follows on page 40.] 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Morrissette. 

My first question, and I am going to ask the whole panel, and 

let us start with Mr. James and then work our way down. What 

provision or provisions in the proposed rule do you believe would 

be most difficult for your business to comply with? Why don’t we 

just say which is the toughest one out of all the provisions that you 

think would affect your business in terms of compliance? 

Mr. JAMES. Thank you. I would say that the production in hours 

from 11 to 10 would probably impact us the greatest. Obviously, in 

my statement I mention that every hour is critical in the commodities that we trade. Depending on what the market is doing, we are 

left with, you know, what market conditions dictate as far as deliveries go. And by reducing that by even one hour would be critical 

to our scheduling. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Mr. Burg. 

Mr. BURG. Mr. Chairman, they are all critically important. I 

would lean more towards my operation and the 34-hour restart provisions of requiring the two rest breaks between midnight and 6 

a.m. It could dramatically impact how we are getting to our customers in timely deliveries. Let us say we load over the weekend 

and we need to be onsite at, say, noon. But if we could not leave 

our place until 6 a.m., we might not get there until after the receiver’s hours that day or possibly even the next day. Our restraints 

are just as equally compounded by our shippers’ and receivers’ 

schedules as they are ours. Receivers and small businesses all over 

the country that receive the products that we haul, they have set 

hours of their operations and they cannot adjust their businesses 

to receive our goods without impacting their costs. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Mr. Rader. 

Mr. RADER. I agree there are a few of them that would be difficult to work with, but I think for our industry the 30-minute 

break every seven hours would be very cumbersome in order to try 

to juggle drivers’ schedules and delivery schedules and that sort of 

thing. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Mr. Morrissette. 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. We are also of the opinion the 34-hour reset 

rule would not give us the ability to service our customers without 

increasing fleet size, and that the two consecutive midnight to 6 

a.m. off duty will reduce our ability to properly service the customers. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. James, specific to you, in what ways do you believe the 

FMCSA would take into account the differences between short-haul 

truckers and their long-haul counterparts? 

Mr. JAMES. Thank you, Chairman. 

Specific to our industry, our drivers are in and out of the truck 

continuously throughout the day. We are not driving long, monotonous stretches of highway where fatigue really does become an 

issue. They may drive for an hour, get out of the truck for an hour, 
12 

45 minutes, as they are dropping products. There is plenty of wait 

time when they are sitting at a terminal, and so consequently the 

physical drive time might be half of their actual on-duty time. So 

I really believe that that would impact us. 

Chairman COFFMAN. And Mr. Burg, given the limited pool of 

qualified drivers how will your company be able to meet transportation demands safely should the proposed rule go into effect? 

Mr. BURG. Ideally, we would have to change the driver lifestyle 

significantly and that would increase the amount of home time. 

The issue that I have with my company is not getting qualified 

drivers to perform the task; it is qualified drivers that will sign up 

for the lifestyle of trucking. So that would need to change so I could 

go outside of the typical trucking ideal candidate and move to more 

acceptable home-every-night operations. So that would dramatically increase our costs to do so because we would have to shape 

runs. We would have to have increased possibly trailer pools. We 

would have regional locations and trailers would be dropped and 

interchanged, possibly with other carriers. You know, anything can 

be done with the right financial incentives, but I think that is the 

challenge that we have with this regulation. It does not take into 

account the full value of the proposed rules and it does not increase 

the safety element like the rules are supposed to. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Burg. 

Mr. Rader, you stated that the current HOS regulations are not 

perfect, the proposed rule notwithstanding. How do you believe the 

current regulations could be improved? 

Mr. RADER. Well, the ability to—lumping us in with a long-haul 

trucking fleet as we have all discussed, the short-haul truckers, it 

is a different animal. It is a different type of vehicle. The drivers 

are home every day. Fatigue is really not an issue. I would say that 

the—I am sorry. I lost my train of thought there. Could you ask 

the question again one more time? 

Chairman COFFMAN. Sure. We talked about current regulations, 

current HOS regulations. If you were going to come up with a proposal to better reform current regulations without the new regulations, what would that reform be? 

Mr. RADER. I would say leave things as they are. To make the 

changes, they are not necessary at this point. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Rader. 

Mr. Morrissette, since your industry does not generally deliver to 

and from the same addresses, would the proposed rules make it 

more difficult for movers to operate? 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. Significantly. You know, our drivers do not 

spend as much on-duty driving time as other drivers because they 

are in the house supervising an entire crew that is in there. So the 

household industry is uniquely different in that respect. And so in 

some ways we do not feel that the Hours of Service as proposed 

really should apply to the household goods industry. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Morrissette. 

Mr. Altmire, ranking member. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Rader, you spoke in your testimony about the 

shift from the current rules and the proposal that would then prohibit drivers from performing non-driving work beyond the 14-hour 

driving window. And I wonder if you could expand a little bit on 
13 

how this would affect a business like yours that usually requires 

drivers to perform extra duties, such as loading and unloading 

after reaching their final destination. 

Mr. RADER. Yes, the drivers tend to do different, a lot of other 

things around the plant. There are things that need to be cleaned 

up. We have some drivers that wear different hats. They will 

haul—we have a fuel business in addition to our ready mix, so we 

might have a guy go pump some fuel, filling our trucks, block truck 

drivers who pick up some extra deliveries, something. We try to 

keep the drivers productive and keep the business moving. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. I wanted to ask the full panel a question. We will start with Mr. James and then work to your right. 

Due to the reduction in allowed driving time under the proposed 

rule, companies are going to have to put more trucks on the road 

to meet demand as we have discussed. And we, in this Committee, 

and certainly you understand, that access to capital is still difficult 

for small firms to obtain across the country. So I was wondering 

if you have a concern that your company might not have the ability 

to purchase more trucks or hire more drivers to remain competitive 

under these rules. 

Mr. JAMES. Yes. Obviously, credit is extremely difficult to obtain 

in today’s marketplace. I am not sure that the issue of actually 

buying more trucks is what we are talking about here or mainly 

having to hire additional drivers to fill the trucks. I guess that may 

be what you are referring to. We do a pretty good job of trying to 

maximize the rolling assets that we currently have. By bringing on 

additional trucks to move the exact same amount of product does 

not seem very efficient in my world. Just because we add another 

truck does not mean we are necessarily going to have more business. So I think I would defer more to trying to maximize and be 

as efficient with the staff and the equipment that we do have in 

order to run our business as best we can. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Burg. 

Mr. BURG. Prior to the recession, and I want to speak to the local 

owner-operator, 85 percent of the carriers that operate five trucks 

or less. They could walk into a dealership, get 95 percent financing, 

get a seven-year term at six percent interest to finance that capital. 

That five percent down is now 30 percent down. That seven-year 

term is now 48 months. The six percent interest is now eight or 

nine percent interest. And that is the same qualified individual. 

And those are real life scenarios that are going on now. 

Currently, I find myself in a situation where we are a financially 

viable company and we are still having challenges. Now, granted, 

that is overlapping how we got into the recession, financial issues, 

and the like. But for the next three to five years I would expect 

that that is going to continue, that there will be larger amounts of 

capital requirements because banks will have to hold that back and 

therefore, it will feed downstream to the small operators. So I see 

that being a big challenge for us. And I think available capital is 

going to be equal to finding the drivers that are willing to do the 

jobs that we need done. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. Mr. Rader. 

Mr. RADER. I would agree that credit is very tight right now. It 

is difficult as far as, to Mr. James’s point about buying more 
14 

trucks. In our industry with the downturn, we have had to park 

some vehicles and there are probably some trucks out there that 

could be put back on the road at minimal cost but the issue does 

come with putting qualified drivers into the seats to make that 

happen. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Morrissette. 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. The household industry is somewhat unique 

and utilizes subcontractors. So we are small businesses that employ small businesses. The economic situation has probably hurt 

them worse than the companies themselves and their ability to get 

financing. And then having the downpayment on the trucks has 

been very difficult. So they are into an aging fleet. So we definitely 

see the challenges from an economic standpoint, for both companies 

and our individual subcontractors, to get equipment. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Altmire. 

Mr. West. 

Mr. WEST. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Happy Flag Day and 

Happy Army Birthday to each and every one of you. 

First question is I think starting at the beginning. Obviously, it 

seems that the FMCSA did not do any type of consultation with 

any of you that are out there in industry. So what do you think 

drove this unilateral decision that they made? And that is a question for all the panel. 

Mr. JAMES. Representative West, that is a good question. Sometimes it seems that people look at rules and regulations and see 

how they can tweak them in order to attempt to make things safer 

without having all the facts. Sometimes numbers can be put in a 

position to justify their own agenda and I think the facts that have 

been presented do not necessarily tell the entire truth. 

Mr. BURG. Representative West, with all due respect to the 

FMCSA who I hold in the highest esteem, Anne Ferro is a great 

person, I cannot see a common rationale that would fit into what 

FMCSA’s historic message has been to, and that is to improve safety. Excuse me. With all due respect to the panel, outside the beltway we call this politics because that is what it seems to be. There 

seems to be other motives for why these rules would be restrictive 

to the small businesses and trucking companies that would be affected by these rules. That would be my personal conclusion. 

Mr. WEST. What then would you think? To you what would the 

motive be then? 

Mr. BURG. Who would benefit from having a more restrictive 

workforce? You could say that there would be more trucks on the 

road, therefore, there could be more manufacturing needed to have 

them. You could have an increase in people, so therefore driver or 

employment base would have to increase to accomplish that. You 

could look through, and I have done that personally, to try to understand what the reasons are. 

You know, trucking is the most overregulated, yet under enforced 

industry that I am aware of. Their current rules suggest that companies that operate within those rules have less crash statistics. So 

I suggest that the administration focus more on improving the current rules or enforcement of the rules than to modify out from 

those. 
15 

Mr. WEST. So political gamesmanship. 

Mr. BURG. Yes, sir. 

Mr. RADER. I would agree with their points. The issues of safety 

is what this all—I think is what it is based on. The statistics are 

showing the number of incidents are declining, not increasing. So, 

you know, I do not understand why they need to make the change 

either. 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. We agree with Mr. Burg that there are plenty 

of regulations that are currently not being enforced, and there is 

lack of adequate enforcement of other regulations that goes on out 

there. I think in general the trucking industry has made great 

strides in safety as the data will support, and especially in the 

household goods industry. I think that we have a phenomenal safety rating. You know, we concentrate on that, we focus on that, and 

we focus on customer service. So we do not understand the reasons 

for the additional regulatory. 

Mr. WEST. And follow up. Mr. Morrissette, you know, having 

spent 22 years in the Army, your industry was very integral in my 

moving back and forth all over the country. So I would like to ask, 

you know, when you look at this new rule, how would that affect, 

you know, such a thing as military PCS moving? 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. It is interesting because June is our peak season. 

Mr. WEST. Absolutely. 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. Movement of personal property follows school 

calendars, and so there is an excessive demand for a limited supply 

especially during the summer months. Additional rules that limit 

our ability to service the customers, and we are challenged currently to handle the volume load of the DOD. We are primarily a 

DOD transportation provider and very proud to do that. So that 

only presents additional challenges for us that we have. 

Mr. WEST. Thank you, gentlemen. I yield back. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Tipton. 

Mr. TIPTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you panel for 

joining us here today. 

I would like to go back a little bit, Mr. Morrissette, and I think 

Mr. James, as well. You talked about if these rules go into effect, 

the possibility of increasing your fleet size. This is going to be a 

cost that is going to have to be passed on to the consumer, is it 

not? 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. Yes, absolutely. I just purchased a truck this 

past year and it was $140,000 for a 2011 Kenworth. Obviously, I 

have to pay for that and just by buying another truck does not necessarily mean that I am going to have additional business. I obviously try to have the safest trucks on the road and so we continually upgrade our fleet as time and equipment are needed. 

Mr. TIPTON. And Mr. James, you know, this just seems to me to 

reek of taxation by regulation. 

Mr. JAMES. I would agree with that. 

Mr. TIPTON. You know, we are consistently seeing new regulations come into play. The consumer ultimately now is carrying the 

burden of this, and these are at times when we have people that 

are just struggling to be able to pay the mortgage, let alone just 
16 

respond to bureaucratic mandates that are coming down. Tell me 

a little bit about the truck safety that we are seeing. Have we seen 

an increase in accidents? 

Mr. JAMES. No, sir. We have not since the last regulations were 

put into place in 2003. I think through several of the other testimonies it was mentioned that driver fatalities and accidents have 

actually decreased over time. 

Mr. TIPTON. So we have got a safe industry and we are trying 

to regulate it more? 

Mr. JAMES. That sounds pretty accurate to me. 

Mr. TIPTON. That sounds pretty accurate. Tell me, does—Mr. 

James, in your testimony you stated that it is not uncommon for 

drivers to experience unexpected delays at petroleum terminal facilities. Does that count towards their time—driving time? 

Mr. JAMES. Absolutely it does. Time sitting—— 

Mr. TIPTON. Does that make sense to you? 

Mr. JAMES. As far as sitting in the cab? 

Mr. TIPTON. Yeah, in terms of we are going to go ahead and give 

a break when they are already sitting there waiting at the terminal. 

Mr. JAMES. That is correct. And that is actually in my fourth 

point. 

Mr. TIPTON. Right. 

Mr. JAMES. I suggested that for petroleum transporters we be allowed to count up to three hours additional waiting time as offduty time that would allow our drivers to count the time that they 

are sitting and basically just resting, if you will, to count as offduty so that we can maximize those deliveries so that we do not 

have to put on unneeded equipment and/or people unnecessarily. 

Mr. TIPTON. Absolutely. 

Gentlemen, this might be for the whole panel. You know, we 

have heard a lot of regulations coming through, particularly in this 

Congress, and we are trying to do some good oversight. Public opinion comments are always taken before regulations are coming out. 

Do you hear your voice being heard? Are the regulators really listening? 

Mr. JAMES. I would say in my case you have given us ample opportunity to express our concerns and we certainly appreciate that. 

So we thank you. 

Mr. TIPTON. Gentlemen? 

Mr. BURG. Likewise. Having the opportunity is the first step. 

How we act or, I am sorry, how this body acts on our requests. I 

guess if you have an ailment you could ask your surgeon or your 

health care provider for the best resolve, and I appreciate the offer 

of being here today to give us the opportunity to say what is really 

happening, what our true life experiences are because this is over 

and unnecessary regulation that we feel is upon us. 

Mr. TIPTON. Thank you. Mr. Rader. 

Mr. RADER. I would agree. With the opportunity here today and 

we have made requests to our congressman and he has been obliging, and I think we are being heard. I think it is starting to 

change. 

Mr. TIPTON. Great. 
17 

Mr. MORRISSETTE. We definitely appreciate the opportunity to 

speak before the Subcommittee. In addition, FMCSA has given us 

good access to provide information to them. I think the end result 

of what we see, as far as regulation, will determine whether they 

heard us or not. 

Mr. TIPTON. Well, gentlemen, I appreciate you taking the time to 

be here. You know, it just seems to me that you are facing a lot 

of challenges. Credit is a challenge for you to get out and do it. The 

services that you provide, that quality is at a premium and you are 

doing your very best to be able to deliver a quality service at the 

lowest available price. I applaud your efforts and your willingness 

to be able to come in because this is part of the role. When we are 

talking about creating jobs in America and keeping people employed in America right now, this is absolutely fundamental, and 

I appreciate your insights. Thank you. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Mr. Hanna. 

Mr. HANNA. No, sir. Thank you. 

Chairman COFFMAN. Very well. I would like to thank all of our 

witnesses once again for testifying before our Subcommittee. You 

have given our members a better perspective on how the proposed 

rule on Hours of Service for trucks has the potential to damage a 

significant number of American small businesses. It is disturbing 

to me that under the guise of public safety, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has used outdated data to support their 

Hours of Service proposal, discounting the fact that we are currently experiencing the safest record on truck-related fatalities and 

injuries in recorded history. Regulating for the sake of regulating 

will create unintended economic consequences, especially in the 

case of Hours of Service. I encourage FMCSA to take into consideration the implications of their proposed rule before solidifying their 

position in the coming months. 

I ask unanimous consent that members have five legislative days 

to submit statements and support materials for the record. Without 

objection, so ordered. 

This hearing is now adjourned. Thank you again for coming and 

testifying. 

[Whereupon, at 11:02 a.m., the Subcommittee hearing was adjourned.] 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110