On February 6, 2012, a meeting was held between the FMCSA Medical Review Board and the Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee to discuss, once again, sleep apnea, BMI and truck drivers. The upshot of that meeting, citing the possibility of fatigue related accidents, is that drivers with a BMI (body mass index) of 35 or more will have to have a mandatory sleep study done if the FMCSA takes the recommendations to regulation. This though studies and statistics show that fatigue is related to approximately 1.4% of all truck related crashes. What is really going on?

Health

It is a fact that Americans are growing larger in both height and weight. Three of the major factors in an increase of weight are availability of food, decrease of physical activity and a prevalence of car usage. However, there are other factors; (from wikidpedia.com) “(1) insufficient sleep, (2) endocrine disruptors (environmental pollutants that interfere with lipid metabolism), (3) decreased variability in ambient temperature, (4) decreased rates of smoking, because smoking suppresses appetite, (5) increased use of medications that can cause weight gain (e.g., atypical antipsychotics)…” Then there is stress.

Stress causes an increase in a hormone called cortisol that can cause obesity. People’s bodies, those who experience high levels of work related stress, release cortisol in response to the ‘flight or fight’ factors found in the brain. Cortisol causes excess belly fat. A study done on the difference between regular shift workers and irregular shift truck drivers shows a marked increase in cortisol production for irregular shift truck drivers.

Sleep apnea is the current disease du jour and much has been written on this condition. While obese people are perhaps more susceptible to developing sleep apnea, it is not only fat people who do get it; many are susceptible. “According to the American Sleep Apnea Association (quoted at yahoo voices), people who are at a “normal” weight (with a BMI of less than 25) are at a 16.4 percent risk of sleep apnea. People who are “overweight” (with a BMI of 25 to 30) are at a 38.1 percent risk of sleep apnea, while those who are “obese” (with a BMI of more than 30) are at a 45.5 percent risk of sleep apnea. Other factors that can cause sleep apnea are high blood pressure, being over the age of 65, being male, a large neck circumference, alcohol, tranquilizer and sedative use, smoking, sitting for long periods of time, stroke, brain tumor or heart disorders.”

Safety

In a webinar presented by Ralph Craft, Ph.D., Senior Transportation Specialist, FMCSA Office of Analysis, Research, and Technology (ART) with Kirse Kelly, Web Conference Host, FMCSA ART, Kelly spoke about misconceptions involved in large truck crash statistics. In the presentation, Kelly stated, “Being unable to perform the task of driving means you are asleep, you are in diabetic shock so you can’t drive, or you have had a heart attack, or passed out, or any other medical condition that hits you and now you are no longer able to perform the task of driving.” Notice that being obese was not mentioned.

Finland did a study on truck crash causation as did the FMCSA using statistics from the Michigan State Patrol, neither showed a predominance of fatigue as factors causing the accidents cited. Finland 2%, Michigan 2.4%. Overall, accidents involving commercial vehicles has gone down and stayed relatively flat over the last 3 years.

Money

Sleep apnea is a big business ticket. NPR reports, “Medicare payments for sleep testing increased from $62 million in 2001 to $235 million in 2009, according to the Office of the Inspector General.” In the same report, “Dr. Fred Holt, an expert on fraud and abuse and a medical director of Blue Cross Blue Shield in North Carolina, says some patients aren’t having basic exams done first and are therefore being prescribed expensive tests they don’t need. Not everyone who snores has a chronic disorder, he says. In other cases, Holt says, the labs prescribe CPAP machines right away without first suggesting other strategies that could reduce apnea, such as losing weight or sleeping on your side.”

Sleep apnea became an issue under the first head of the FMCSA’s Medical Review Board Barbara Phillips, M.D. who was also the Chair of the National Sleep Foundation (NSF). NSF receives funding from sources including foundations, corporations and federal agencies. Dr. Phillips has also been affiliated with Astra Zeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, ResMed, and Sanofi-Aventis; has participated as a consultant for Ogden, Newell & Welch, PLLC; has received speaking honoraria from Boehringer-Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Cephalon, JewishHeart Lung Institutes, Orphan Medical, Pfizer, ResMed, St. Joseph’s Hospital, Swedish Medical Center, and Sepracor.

Today’s head of the Medical Review Board is Benjamin H. Hoffman, M.D. M.P.H. (Texas) who is the Global Chief Medical Officer at GE Energy. GE Energy develops and markets sleep apnea aid parts.

A sleep study costs between $2,000-3,000.00. A C-PAP machine, the only corrective device suggested by the Medical Review Board, can cost over $5,000.00. Some insurance companies pay for the studies and machines, some do not.

Summary

It is true that obesity is on the rise overall in America. It is true that there are many factors that cause a truck driver and others to be obese. It is true that obesity can cause health issues such as sleep apnea. It is true that many who are not obese may suffer from sleep apnea. It is untrue that sleep apnea or fatigue causes a substantial amount of unsafe driving among truck drivers. It is very true that there is a huge amount of money to be made from the promotion of regulations requiring truck drivers to have to take mandatory sleep studies using BMI as an indicator. Therefore, it is true that it is about money.

This post was submitted by Sandy Long.

The process begins with an owner recording a registered trademark, copyright or patent. The recorded works are placed into an electronic database used for reference. In the event that a US Customs official suspects the importation of infringing goods – which federal regulations refer to as piratical – they have the authority to detain the import as piratical goods. While U.S. Customs seizures generally involve only infringing goods for which a trademark, copyright or patent has been recorded, the agency clearly detain any clearly piratical goods, recorded or not. 19 U.S.C. § 1595a (c)(2)(C); 17 U.S.C. §§ 602; 501.

Procedures for Seizures of Infringing Goods

U.S. Customs regulations provide a very specific procedure to be followed in the event that there is a suspicion of the importation of infringing goods. 19 C.F.R. §133.43. Unfortunately for some importers, the local officials may not understand or care to follow the regulations and instead detain the goods under US Customs general detention authority. We have seen this occur where the importer must protest the seizure to have the goods released.

U.S. Customs regulations provide for the detention of an import if there is a suspicion that an import infringes the copyright, trademark or patent. After seizure of the suspected infringing goods, the agency is required to notify the importer, who then has 30 days in which to file a statement denying that the goods are “piratical” and that “the detention of the article will result in a material depreciation of its value, or a loss or damage to him.” 19 C.F.R. §133.43(a). If the importer does not make such a denial with 30 days, the piratical goods are subject to seizure or forfeiture.

Bond Requirement in Customs Detention

If the importer denies that the allegedly infringing goods are piratical, then U.S. Customs must notify the copyright owner, deliver a sample of the goods, give notice that the goods will be released within 30 days unless the copyright holder files a demand for the exclusion and, significantly, a bond to cover any resulting losses the importer might suffer if the goods are not infringing.

If the copyright owner follows these procedures by filing a bond and a written demand for exclusion, both parties then have an additional 30 days for discovery and submission of legal briefs. The burden of proof is on the party claiming that importation contains piratical goods.

U.S. Customs Determination of Piratical Goods

Once the time to submit briefs has passed, the files are given to the office of the Commissioner of Customs to determine whether there was any infringement. The regulations do not specify a time limit for the commissioner’s determination. The copyright holder may also choose to go to district court in search of an order enjoining the importation of the article in lieu of the aforementioned procedure. 17 U.S.C. §501.

Protest of U.S. Customs Detention

There are two ways that the parties can dispute an adverse decision or the failure to follow the procedures outlined in the statute. As a general rule, U.S. Customs regulations provide for the protest of adverse decisions within the agency. A protest is an application for relief, often relatively informal in nature, that seeks to reverse a decision of the agency.

A significant issue is the requirement in the regulations that a party seeking to prevent the importation of allegedly piratical goods is required to demand exclusion and to post bond. The bond requirement provides an important protection for importers, which may have goods detained for months and incur market losses and storage costs.

If Customs seizes allegedly piratical goods but relies on its general authority to detain imported goods for inspection, then a protest to compel compliance with the regulations – or, in some cases, a lawsuit in the International Court of Trade – may be required. If a protest is filed, a demand that it be decided in 30 days should be included to prevent additional storage costs.

Our experience has been that Customs officials, who detained the allegedly piratical goods, will simply accelerate the investigation and then seize the goods that it has detained, releasing any that are not piratical in the eyes of the inspectors, rather than complying with the administrative procedure specified in the code.The U.S. Customs seizure creates its own set of procedural rules and moves the case out of the administrative realm and into the federal courts. We’ll discuss those procedures in another post.

This post was submitted by Viviana Arturo.

Even though mail and parcel forwarding has been available in the United Kingdom for some years, most notably offered by Royal Mail, for business and domestic use in the form of “Mail Redirection”. With more and more businesses either moving premises or having operations in other countries, mail forwarding is now offered by other companies and to suit more specific requirements.

Mail forwarding is used for many different purposes but it is the onset of internet that has created the need for more mail forwarding options. Internet based businesses for example who wish to have a valid postal address but who do not have business premises and that do not wish to have a PO Box address. Purchasing goods online from abroad is another reason why both business and domestic consumers would require a mail forwarding address. A parcel forwarding company will set up an address, in the United States for example, where goods purchased will get sent to you and then they will organise the shipping of the goods back to the United Kingdom. By ordering goods in such a way, shipping costs can be greatly cut down.

The latest in mail forwarding in the UK is an international mail and parcel forwarding service offering consumers and businesses the advantage of a hassle free UK postal address from which they can ship anywhere in the world. A UK mail forwarding address also enables overseas businesses to have a presence in the United Kingdom.

A mail and parcel forwarding service streamlines businesses and enables even more efficiency when carrying out operations overseas and internationally.

Mail forwarding how it works

Sign Up to a mail forwarding service to get a UK address.
This typically involves following quick and simple steps to register. Choose the right account to suit your need parcel forwarding needs. Click here to compare our parcel forwarding membership options. Once you’ve decided on which service account is right for you, you’ll be given a unique and genuine UK street address.

Make sure your goods are legally importable to the country of delivery
Its your responsibility to make sure that your goods are legally importable to the country of delivery. The forwarding service company will have a list of excluded items to make sure your package isn’t among them.

Get a quote
Find out how much it will cost to get your parcel to the destination country.

Order you goods
Get shopping and place your order. Make sure you enter your mail forwarding UK address when prompted to fill in the shipping address.

The packing forwarding company will receive your parcel
The company will let you know as soon as we receive delivery of your parcel. When you sign in to the online mail forwarding account, you’ll be able to track the status of your parcel as it is prepared for shipment.

The parcel will be prepared for shipment
The mail forwarding company will sort out all the paperwork for you and make sure your parcel is securely packaged.

Your parcel arrives at your doorstep
You can typically expect to receive delivery of your parcel within 5 days of the date of dispatch from the warehouse.

This post was submitted by jen smith.

Being that 18-wheelers pose a safety concern to other vehicles, it is of the utmost importance that semi drivers are professionals and safe. Unfortunately there are unsafe semi drivers on the road. From speeding to being medically unqualified to drive for extended periods of time to being fatigued and exceeding hours of service (HOS) limitations, unsafe semi-truck drivers put everyone on the road at risk.

Red List?

Rumor has it that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) keeps a list of the drivers who are guilty of serious offenses. The so-called “red list” is used by the FMCSA to keep track of bad drivers and to “monitor” the trucking companies that those drivers work for, according to Annette Sandberg, a former FMCSA Administrator.

Discussing the FMCSA Comprehensive Safety Analysis (CSA) 2010 system, Sandberg noted that the red list is “woven into” the new system. By having the red list, the FMCSA is able to keep closer tabs on the drivers that are considered to be the worst drivers on the road and to ensure that those drivers are not continuing to commit serious violations that put other drivers at risk. The FMCSA denies the list exists.

According to the FMCSA, the CSA 2010 is an “initiative to improve large truck and bus safety” in an effort to reduce “crashes, injuries and fatalities.” The CSA 2010 system is used by the FMSCA and state authorities to identify possible safety issues, through an enforcement and compliance model, before accidents occur. The FMCSA notes that the CSA 2010 system “red flags” violations, but only to bring these violations to an investigator’s attention when conducting a review so that the investigator can look into these violations.

Employer Liability

If you have been injured in an accident with a semi-truck, the driver and the driver’s employer may be liable for your injuries — especially if the employer was aware of dangerous practices by the driver. An attorney experienced in handling trucking accidents can help you determine who can all be held liable for your injuries. Contact an experienced attorney to help you protect your rights and to seek compensation for your injuries.

Article provided by Johnston Law Offices, www.pgjlaw.com

Source = 24-7

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management. Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

- / N2N / – The Private Sector Resources Catalog 2.0, released November 15th, 2010, facilitates your organization’s access to the resources you need to participate in the homeland security enterprise and help keep our country secure. The first to be targeted specifically towards private sector partners and encompassing the entire Department, this document collects the training, publications, guidance, alerts, newsletters, programs, and services available to the private sector across the Department. Recognizing the breadth and diversity of the available resources as well as the Department’s continually evolving work, this catalog will be updated regularly to publicize new resources and increase private sector awareness.

In order to face the new threats and evolving hazards of today’s security environment, we must develop and maintain critical homeland security capabilities at all layers of our society. We all share the responsibility to build all-hazards preparedness and resiliency into our way of life. As outlined in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report, this enterprise approach is composed of multiple partners whose roles and responsibilities are distributed and shared among a broad-based community with a common interest in the public safety and well-being of America and American society.

private_sector_resource_catalog

Source = DHS

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management. Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

Map of U.S. seaports along the Atlantic Coast of the United States

The Atlantic coast seaports facilitate freight flow and international trade for both the long-established and populous Northeast, and the growing areas along the Southeast Atlantic coast.

This fact sheet highlights the major Atlantic container ports of New York/New Jersey, Virginia, Savannah, and Charleston. Containerships and containerized cargo comprise the bulk of vessel calls and most of the vessel value at these seaports along the eastern seaboard. Commodities transiting the canal to the Atlantic ports include auto parts, bananas, chemicals, canned and frozen fish, and pulpwood, among others.

Read The Report

Source = RITA

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management. Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

One of the most disturbing reasons to promote the use of EOBRs is that it removes ‘the human factor’ from HOS and a truck’s hourly operation. This was brought up during a satellite radio discussion about the EOBRs. The speaker said that the use of EOBRs would help the companies make the shippers and receivers pay detention time or load or unload the truck faster because the driver would be monitored every minute of his/her day and the EOBR would document his/her whereabouts such as arrival and departure times without the driver having to key in that information. Furthermore, it was stated that EOBRs would stop dispatchers and brokers from making a driver ‘cheat’ on their log books to make delivery/pick up appointments, again removing the ‘human factor‘.

The original HOS regulations were put in place to protect the driver from being pushed beyond safety limits by their companies. When the first satellite systems were talked about, it again was suggested that they would not only allow a company to track their freight and equipment, but would also stop falsification of log books and the dispatching of drivers beyond safety limits. The new HOS regulations went so far as to ‘remove the human factor’ to where a driver could not determine for themselves when it was safe to run, whether they were tired or not and once again, was supposed to stop them from being pushed beyond safety limits by their dispatchers and brokers. All of the above were supposed to make shippers and receivers stop detaining drivers at docks and warehouse staging areas and make it so the companies could more easily receive detention time payments.

Removing the human factor from the driver in the seat of the truck might be good in theory, but is it a workable proposition; who in reality benefits? Let’s look at some pros and cons.

The Pros:
The carrier’s insurance rates will go down because the insurance world thinks that truck drivers are unsafe and promote any sort of controls put on the driver.

Carriers will be able to track their drivers, loads and equipment.

Carriers will be able to cut down on office staff due to logs being recorded by computers from satellite feeds.

Carriers may be able to receive detention time payments from shippers/receivers.

Carriers will be more likely to weed out unsafe drivers.

Carriers will be able to monitor a driver’s available hours and ensure that the driver ‘maximizes’ those hours to increase productivity.

Drivers will not have to falsify log books to make pick ups and deliveries thereby avoiding prison time for that crime.

Cons: Many small carriers will not be able to afford the EOBR equipment which runs on average of $3,000.00 a unit and will have to go out of business.

Drivers will lose running time during their shifts due to unavoidable delay such as construction, accident back ups and traffic, thereby cutting their pay.

Drivers will lose any flexibility as to when to shut down due to weather or to avoid rush hour traffic, or if they are ill or tired.

Parking will become even more of a problem than it is because drivers will be forced to ‘maximize’ their hours and will not be able to stop where they can find parking; they will have to stop when the machine says to stop.

Just in time freight will not be able to be run unless relayed or hauled by team trucks, again possibly putting smaller carriers out of competition for this type of freight.

Drivers will be scrutinized for every pit stop that they make, even for stopping just long enough to use the facilities.

In my opinion, EOBRs appear to mainly benefit the larger carriers who can afford to buy them in the first place and provide enough drivers and equipment to move the freight; the driver and small companies will be the most harmed.

Removing the human factor in anything relating to trucks or the driving of them is a huge oxymoron in the trucking world. Trucks are driven by humans, dispatched by humans and repaired by humans. Removing the flexibility required to do any of those things is not the answer to any of the problems supposed to face the industry at this time. Of course, if technology gets to the point that trucks can be driven by robots, then EOBRs might be a good thing, but then you wouldn’t need truck drivers, just technicians to keep the computers running. Wait, that would still be a ’human factor’ wouldn’t it.

Sandy Long is a long time truck driver who is also very active within the trucking industry. She was a long time writer for layover.com, is a life member of OOIDA, member of the WIT and owner of two websites: Trailer Truckin’ Tech, a yahoo group dedicated to the education of new and prospective truck drivers and www.satinandsteelsisterhood.com for women truck drivers and women in non-traditional jobs. Sandy’s first book Street Smarts: A Guide for a Truck Driver’s Personal Safety is available at https://www.createspace.com/3449566

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Security, Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management.  Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.net.

This post was submitted by Sandy Long.

Projects supported by these funds will not only make the country safer and more secure, but they also will create new jobs, and in some cases, save the jobs of men and women who do the work of staying ahead of those who would seek to do us harm.

St. Elizabeths/DHS Headquarters Consolidation:

* $650 million ($200 million to DHS; $450 million to GSA)

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP):

* $720 million for construction at land ports of entry ($300 million GSA; $420 million CBP)
* $100 million for Non-Intrusive Inspection (NII) technology
* $100 million for border technology on the southwest border
* $60 million for tactical communications equipment and radios

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE):

* $20 million for ICE automation modernization and tactical communications

Transportation Security Administration:

* $1 billion for explosives detection systems and checkpoint screening equipment

U.S. Coast Guard:

* $142 million for Alteration of Bridges program
* $98 million for construction, which may include the following:
o Shore facilities and aids to navigation facilities
o Vessel repair/acquisition (includes High Endurance Cutter, National Security Cutter)

Federal Emergency Management Agency:

* $100 million for Emergency Food and Shelter Program
* $150 million for transit and rail security grants
* $150 million for port security grants, no non-federal match required
* $210 million for Assistance to Firefighter (AFG) grants for firehouse construction; maximum grant is $15.0M
* $5 million expansion in authority for FEMA Community Disaster Loans
* Requires the establishment of an arbitration panel to resolve Katrina/Rita public assistance disputes
* Requires FEMA to accept additional applications for Katrina/Rita public assistance
* All non-federal matching requirements for SAFER grants waived for FY 2009-2010

DHS Office of Inspector General:

* $5 million to conduct related oversight and audits

Source = DOH

Nation2Nation publishes articles of interest to professionals involved in Supply Chain Management, Logistics, Import Export, International Trade, Border Security, Transportation, Transportation Safety, Trucking, Railroad, Air Freight, Maritime and Cargo Management. Contact Jeff Platts at contact@nation2nation.com.

He will offer the following products to serve your needs:

You may contact JB at:

LA Freightliner
2429 S. Peck Road, Whittier CA 90601
Office: (562) 447-1200 Cell: (714) 357-0024
Email: jblakely@lafreightliner.com

www.LAFreightliner.com

Opportunities
industry experts, have suggested that this is a good time for companies to gain competitive advantage by tightening up the management of their supply chains.

Supply chain managers are achieving cost savings in a variety of different ways including:

• Cutting excessive inventory

Cutting excessive inventory is one very effective way of improving cash flow, a significant  amount of money is tied up, for example,  by having warehouses full of unsold goods. If you can cut inventory by 12 or 20 days it’s a huge improvement of cash flow.

Inter departmental and inter organisational communication is key to cutting excessive inventory.  Whilst the sales department will be keenly aware that sales are dropping, when will this information be communicated to Operations and procurement? If the information flow is slow , they will still be running to forecast. Effective communication across organisations and organisational boundaries, and decisions made on the basis of this shared information requires a level of trust between companies.

• Taking full advantage of lower costs

During the recession the cost of some commodities including oil dropped, sometimes quite dramatically. These price reductions provide opportunities for cost savings, cheaper shipping costs for example.

• Making budget cuts

Budget cuts in discretionary spend such as travel and training.
Postponing non essential projects.
Freeze in hiring.

• Increasing payment terms for indirect materials, eg from 47 to 60 days.
• Enabling faster turnaround of products ie quicker delivery.

The bad news

Bankruptcy of key suppliers – minimizing risk
Many organisations are concerned about the prospect of key suppliers failing and the more farsighted amongst them are taking measures to ensure their continued health. They are doing this in a number of different ways including:

• Offing earlier payment to suppliers in return for discounts.
• Monitoring  suppliers’ businesses more closely.
• Working with accounts payable to keep tabs on any suppliers that request early payment – one of the warning signs that they may be in trouble.
• Minimising  their exposure to suppliers they think could be headed for trouble, switching business to more stable suppliers.
• Reducing the number of single-source arrangements and dual-sourcing on key risk areas.
• Providing direct financial assistance to keep a supplier in business ie buying raw materials for suppliers.
• Helping smaller suppliers by advising them how to access government assistance money.
• Acquiring a failing supplier.
• Engage with suppliers in joint cost-reduction initiatives.

So, we suggest that you use this time to take a step back from your daily activities and look at how you can improve the management of your supply chain to best effect. If you do this now you will have real advantage when things pick back up.

Qube Vocational Development Ltd http://www.qubevocationaldevelopment.com are the UK’s Premier Specialist provider of Supply Chain Management NVQs and related Management NVQs. We have an enviable track record in the successful delivery of the qualification to both individuals and organisations alike. Whether you’re an individual wishing to achieve MCIPS or MCMI status, or a Purchasing Manager wishing to implement a vocational corporate training and development programme for your staff, Qube have the experience and resources to meet your expectations.

This post was submitted by James Brack.