August 2007

Executive Summary

We work in the most regulated industry in the most regulated state in the union. This report looks at the following changes in the ever-shifting regulatory scene:

• Caltrans addressing South Region permit issues
• LA County gives the go ahead for a pilot program
• Contra Costa County target date for Annual Permits – January 2008
• Lake County requires Caltrans Permit when submitting County Permit, 24 hr notice
• Napa County requires Pilot Cars at 10’ wide
• Sonoma County requiring CHP for loads exceeding 15’ wide
• City of Culver City review Annual and Site Permit requirements
• City of Fontana adopts new Annual Permit and Pilot Car regulations
• City of Gardenia reduces Insurance requirements
• City of Richmond reviewing Permit Fees and Annual Permits
• City of Livermore City Council considering Construction Traffic Impact Fee
• City of Palmdale reviewing current Truck Routes
• City of San Carlos increased permit fees
• Town of Tiburon increased permit fees and issuance of 3-5 day delays
• Local Business License for Trucking, not required

Caltrans – South Region Permit Issues
We recently met with Caltrans in the South region to discuss the problem the Industry is experiencing.  The meeting was attending by James Anderson, Chief of Truck Services Sacramento, South Region Permit Managers and members of the industry.  This is a step forward in building better relationships and lines of communications with Caltrans and industry on a local level. It was agreed to meet on a regular basis.  If you are interested in attending let us know.

Los Angeles County – Annual Permit Height - Pilot Program
We have been working with the county for years to modify their height limitations on their Annual Permits.  Currently whether you are obtaining a single trip or an annual permit, the industry is responsible for the routing their own loads.  If any incident occurs, the liability is the responsibility of the permittee.
The county has agreed to a pilot program and will allow a height increase to 15’ on Annual Permits for a period of 1 year.  The county is currently inspecting their structure prior to issuance and will review them again when the one-year period has expired.
This will be an exceptional savings for local haulers since 95% of their loads are 15’ and under.  This means no further delays waiting on permits and reduced permit fees; they will be able to load and go under their Annual Permit 24/7.

Contra Costa County – Annual Permit update
As we have reported in the past, the county has agreed to the concept of issuing Annual Permits.  They are under staffed and will implement this new program, as time will allow, for the drafting policy and regulations. We have submitted information to help with this process.
The county has recently responded:
“We did receive your previous email and did a cursory review of the information contained within but have not had a chance to study it in detail or begin drafting a county policy on annual permits. Thus far my work load from permit activity has taken all my time. Realistically, I probably won’t be able to spend a concentrated amount of time working on this until after the summer construction season ends and the wet weather starts. My goal is to have an annual transportation permit policy/process in place and operational for the beginning of next year (January 1st). I will keep you informed.”

Lake County – Permit Delays – 24 & 48 hour notice
A member forwarded a letter to all permittees from Lake County, regarding the new policy due to staff shortages and the need to properly review all permits.

• At the same time that you apply for your Caltrans transportation permit; you should fax your County of Lake transportation permit application to the Department of Public Works at the fax number of 707-263-7748
• When you receive your Caltrans permit you should fax it in to the Lake County Department of Public Works.  Your County of Lake transportation permit will then be issued to you within 24 hours of receipt of the Caltrans permit.
• If this office receives the approval Caltrans transportation permit at the same time as the County of lake transportation permit application, they will not be able to process your application for at least 48 hours after receipt of the application.  

We contacted the county and they said they are having a tremendous amount of Modular Homes being moved into the area and want to make sure that they are being reviewed properly.
We explained that the construction industry doesn’t always have a 24 or 48 notice from their customers and that this would create problems.  The county understood and explained stated in general doesn’t take 24 hrs to issue a permit, but for loads such as Modular Homes this gives them time to review their routes adequately.  
The county was very willing to work with the construction Industry and is willing to listen to any concerns.

Napa County –Annual Permits & Pilot Car Requirements
We were contacted by a member that had issue with their Annual Permit in Napa County.  We contacted the county to see what their current policy was regarding the issuance of annuals.  They do issue annuals and would rather issue them.  This past year 586 permits were issued and of 182 were annuals.  As you can see they are very receptive to annuals.
Pilot Cars are required for all loads exceeding 10’ wide. We agree this may be appropriate on certain routes for safety, but not the entire county.  We will continue to work with the county on this requirement.

Sonoma County – CHP Escorts
We recently contacted by a member that was having a situation in Sonoma County where CHP Escorts were being required.  They had recently been contacted by CHP that they were not complying with CHP Escort Tables that refers to State Highways.  In our previous article regarding the shortage of CHP Officers to handle the workload that Caltrans already utilizes, this is where the increased CHP being requested by localities is slowing down Interstate and Intrastate Oversized Commerce.  CHP has not added any additional manpower and they are currently using Officers through their overtime.

After explaining to Sonoma County the growing problem and that their needs to be other options available to Industry if they are going to require CHP, where they didn’t before.  We had suggested local enforcement or additional Pilot Cars in those areas that are appropriate.

Our member met with County Staff and according to the County they stated our member was” moving 34 loads down a route that would typically require CHP escort a condition that would add $30000.00+ and several weeks to the cost and time of the project.  In this case, we found a way to accommodate the loads by having the member apply for a special event permit to close down the road that was causing the CHP requirement.”   This is not just a savings to our member but to others in the Industry that are in need of CHP that would otherwise be delayed.
This is another example of communicating with a locality, so they can understand the needs and concerns of Industry. 
We will continue to work with staff on a resolution for future issues.

City of Culver City – Site and Annual Permits
We are working with Culver City staff reviewing their current transportation regulations.

• Site Permit requirements:  We recently had a member who thought he was traveling under a site permit that was issued to the contractor, to only find out that it didn’t cover him.  He was issued a $20,000 citation.  Culver City wants every load coming to and from the project to be listed, including legal loads.  That even makes it more confusing.  Once a route has been designated for travel, it should be considered what Caltrans calls a Repetitive Permit.  A Repetitive Permit allows no limit to the number of loads, but must be within an envelope vehicle for dimensions and weight, for a one-year period or the duration of the project and is route specific.
• Annual Permit:  Annual Permits are currently not issued in the city, but they are in just about all jurisdictions surrounding the city.

The city has agreed to meet and discuss these issues.

City of Fontana – New Annual Permit Requirements
After several years of continued meetings, we have agreed on an exceptional permit package that meets everyone’s needs.  City staff, engineering and traffic departments have been very instrumental in working through the issues.
Annual Permit Dimensions (maximum)

• Height – 16’
• Width -  15’
• Length – 135’
• Nights and weekends
• Issued to the company - $90

NEW Annual Route Specific Permit – This permit will cover those loads that exceed dimensions of the Annual Permit which can take up to a three-day delay for approval. This will benefit those that have a facility in Fontana, to allow them to get to and from the freeway and eliminate the three-day permit delay.  This would also be beneficial for use on the High Load Route through Fontana.

• Height – 16’ to 18’
• Width – 15’ to 18’
• Length – 135’
• Nights and weekends
• Issued to a company - $90

Pilot Car requirements (Industry’s Pilot Car Recommendations)
1)          ONE PILOT CAR REQUIRED:

• Length:
• Any vehicle with a single kingpin combination between 75’ to 100’.
• Any vehicle combination of truck, tractor, jeep, and semi trailers coupled together (multi-kingpin) exceeding 110’.
• Any vehicle combination of truck, tractor, jeep and semi-trailers coupled together (multi-kingpin), with articulating rear steering on the rear semi-trailer exceeding 125’.
• Width:  Loads greater than 12’ to a maximum of 15’ wide.
• Height: Front Pilot Car with vertical measuring device on loads exceeding 17’.
• Overhang: 
• Rear: When the rear load projection exceeds 25’ when measured from the rear extremity of the hauling equipment.
• Front:  When the front overhang exceeds 25’

2)         TWO PILOT CARS REQUIRED:

• Length:
• Any vehicle with a single kingpin combination exceeding 100’.
• Any vehicle combination of truck, tractor, jeep, and semi-trailers coupled together (multi-kingpin), with articulatingrear steering on the rear semi-trailer exceeding 135’.
• Width:  Loads exceeding 15’.
• Combination:  A combination of the following:

                          1C (Height) and 1A (length) or,
                          1C (Height) and 1B (width).

City of Gardenia – Increased Insurance Requirements
We were contacted by an owner-operator member who was trying to obtain a single trip permit, but due to the city’s increased insurance requirements--$1 million in General Liability, $1 million in Auto Liability and being named additional insured--was unable to do so.  This caused a delay and the member was unable to obtain the permit.
On any insurance policy, General Liability excludes any vehicle liability that is going to affect the traveling public. The cost to the smaller companies for this unnecessary coverage is $50 to $100 per certificate issuance, plus the cost of delay, for what may be a one-time only delivery or pick up.
CVC 35782

• “A local authority may not require proof of financial responsibility in an amount greater than that required for compliance with Section 16500.5 as a condition of the permit, and shall accept evidence of financial responsibility that complies with Section 16020.” 

If the owner-operator was going to be doing work in the city, then they could require additional insurance under the building, grading, demolition permit etc.  The locality may not require any additional insurance more than $750,000 in Auto Liability for the act of traveling through the city. 
The City has agreed to lower their insurance requirements to be in compliance with CVC 35782; they are now only requiring $750,000 in Auto Liability.

City of Livermore – Construction Vehicle Impact Fees
We were contacted by a member that advised us of additional fees that were being directed at the construction industry.  The City Council approved a study that was done to demonstrate the impact of construction vehicles and refuse vehicles to local roads.
The key assumptions related to construction vehicles were:

• An average of 500 vehicles travel on a typical residential street each day, with 1 % of those vehicles being trucks, and 50 % of those trucks being construction vehicles.
•  An average of 6,400 vehicles travel on a typical collector street each day, with 5.5 % of those vehicles being trucks, and 51.2 % of those trucks being construction vehicles.
• An average of 25,200 vehicles travel on a typical arterial street each day, with 7.4 % of those vehicles being trucks, and 49.4 % of those trucks being construction vehicles.
• The city’s funding shortfall for road repairs is approximately $2,975,000.

      Using the assumption noted above, the portion of the city’s shortfall associated with refuse and construction vehicles following the previously described methodology.

The refuse industry will be able to pass their fees directly back to the residents of Livermore on their monthly trash bills. The construction industry will be passing it on to the developers or specific home owners on a project-by-project basis as part of the development fees from the city.

The study analysis does not account for the potential impact of any non-vehicle-related factors (e.g., repair and maintenance of underground utilities). To the extent any such factors affect street maintenance, and rehabilitation costs, the impact attributed to the different vehicle types would be affected.  The analysis was based on the various assumptions noted, including the total number of vehicle trips and average Equivalent Single Axle Loadings (ESAL) associated with the various vehicles types.  This analysis was based on the City’s street maintenance cost and funding data from the City’s Infrastructure Maintenance and Rehabilitation report.

City of Richmond – Permit fees and Annual Permits

• Permit Fees:  The City is currently charging $30, which is in excessive allowable by law for transportation permits. We have requested that they charge no more than Caltrans per the CVC of $16.
• Annual Permit:  The City currently doesn’t issue Annuals to the Industry; it is my understanding that certain sectors of local agencies do receive them.  We are working with staff to expand or modify that program.  We are also discussing that these permits be issue to a company.

This will be both a cost savings in time and manpower for both the City staff and Industry.

City of Palmdale – More Through Local Truck Routes Needed
Working with city staff, they have agreed that there is a need for additional truck routes which will help facilitate efficient goods movement and eliminate the problem with local deliveries. We will keep you posted.

City of San Carlos – Permit Fees
The city recently increased transportation fees to $132 per permit for the first loaded trailer plus $50 for each additional trailer requested. We have requested that the city reduce their permit fees to $16 to be in compliance with CVC 35782 (b).

Town of Tiburon – Permit Fees, Permit delays
We were contacted by a member that was informed that there have been a couple new changes:

• Permit fees – The town has increased their Transportation Permits to $235 per permit which is conflict with the CVC 35782 (b).

We have requested that the town reduce their permit fees to $16 to be in compliance with CVC 35782 (b).

• Permit Delay - They are also requiring a 3-5 day notice before issuance of a permit.

We have also explained the adverse effect the 3-5 day delay will have on the construction industry and efficient goods movement.  We explained that our industry rarely has even 24-hour notice to be able to move equipment.  The crane industry, for example, is only one phone call away from their next rental, which is just the nature of this business.  We have requested Annual Permits be issued and a reconsideration of the new requirement.

Local Business License – Your Motor Carrier Permit is your “kind-of” free pass
We recently had a member that had received notices regarding business license fees that were past due.

The Uniform Business License Tax that you pay at the time your Motor Carrier Permit (MCP) permit is issued or renewed is in lieu of all city, county, or city and county excise or license taxes of any kind, character, or description.

We contacted the City of Los Angeles and explained that trucking companies are not required to obtain a business license to be or work a jurisdiction.  They agreed and requested a copy of the affected member’s Motor Carrier Permit and would rescind any monies owed.

Respectfully submitted,

Gregory D. Dineen
Industry Transportation Consultant

cc:        John Hakel, AGC                                  D. Cash Benton, SCCA
            Richard Paine, ECA                              Sam Meyer, MCOG
            Richard Lambros, BIA                          Lee Brown, CDTOA
            Aimee Shook, DCA                               Jeff Hunter, CTTA
            Michael Vlaming, COA                         Michael Lewis, CIAQC
            Doug Ball, SC&RA