Mid-Year Meeting Minutes

Date: July 26, 2004, Monday
Place: Grand Summit Hotel & Conference Center, Park City, Utah
Minutes taken by Stephen Burks

Mike Belzer reviewed the Task Force's charge: to set up a research agenda for trucking industry research with the involvement of industry stakeholders. Pointed out that the three-year initial lifespan of the Task Force is up next year, and that we need to complete the charge.
We were reminded that the Task Force, as a part of the TRB (an arm of the National Academies of Science) cannot take positions on the answers to research questions, nor can it-without a pretty complicated process-conduct actual research itself. Its primary function is to establish what the important research questions are, and organize public discussion of them within the constituencies served by the TRB. This function is carried out in several ways, but the primary ones are (1) establishing session topics for January meeting sessions, (2) issuing calls for papers (generally on research already conducted) to be submitted for those sessions, and also (3) creating "problem statements", which are submitted to the (admittedly long and complex process) by which Federally funded research projects are selected and implemented.
Discussion was held about the degree to which we have important industry stakeholders adequately represented in the Task Force. Although not everyone was present in Park City, the Task Force has representatives from (1) OOIDA, (2) IBT, (3) ATA, (3) LTL carriers (Roadway, Con-Way), (4) TL carriers (Schneider), (5) small and medium-sized carrier association (California Trucking Association), (6) private carriers (former head of their national association). It was agreed that we could use some increased strength in some of these areas, and that having a big shipper or two, especially one that operates a private fleet in addition to purchasing for-hire transportation, would be good.
It was a consensus that a Membership Subcommittee should be established, to work especially on industry contacts and potential members. The initial members for the committee were John Siebert (chair), Rebecca Brewster of ATRI (she was not present, and is to be asked), Mike Belzer, Don Osterberg, and a representative from ConWay Southern, to be named later by the CEO.
There was further discussion of the functions of the Task Force. It was pointed out that to the extent there is Federal funding for trucking-industry-relevant research, the stakeholder members of the Task Force might well exercise significant influence on the direction of research by serving as reviewers for project proposals.
There was an extended discussion of the various types of Federally funded research programs that now exist or may exist in the near future which could support projects of interest to the Task Force. These include (1) National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP; likely to be funded in the next highway reauthorization), (2) National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP; proposals to this need to be aimed at the intersection of industry and state DOT interests; about 40 projects per year), (3) Future of Strategic Highway Research Program ("F-Sharp"; has emphasis on safety, reliability of transit/travel times, capacity, and infrastructure renewal), (4) Truck and Bus Safety Cooperative Research Program (small program within FMCSA, about 4 projects a year), (5) Synthesis of Current Practices Project (didn't get full details on this). Each of these requires a fairly cumbersome process to generate RFP's in particular areas, and likewise to make project proposals in response to an RFP, so they ae best suited to topics of longer-term interest, as they do not move quickly.
There was also an extended discussion of how the TRB has been restructured and where interests in trucking fit. There are distinct higher-level divisions for (1) Rail, (2) Maritime, and (3) Freight. Trucking resides in Freight, but then there are several lower-level segments that appear to cut across modes within Freight. If we generate enough activity there may eventually be a trucking section on a par with rail and maritime. In the meantime, our Task Force can to some extent act as a "single point of contact" by keeping track of everything of interest to trucking researchers.
In this regard the "TRB Truck Summary" was mentioned. This item lists all TRB's truck-related activities curing the last year, along with deliverables, including recently generated papers.
It was noted that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and NIOSH within it, represent a parallel organization and funding source for trucking research that overlaps with its interests (e.g. work zone safety, other aspects of safety and occupational health in trucking). Similar comments were made about the Department of Labor (DOL), which has identified trucking as one of five critical high-growth industries over the next few decades, and so is interested in the trucking labor market.
It was also explained by our staff person that the only administrative method within TRB at present for handling funds that come to TRB from other government agencies is through the medium of funded "policy issues research". This kind of work requires getting approval from the TRB executive committee. Our staff person suggested that the best procedure would be to do our homework on defining problems that can be addressed within the traditional scope of TRB's usual funding sources first, though.
It was agreed that we need to establish a "Problem Statements" subcommittee, the task of which will be to identify and list the long term research projects of interest to industry stakeholders, to be submitted to the internal TRB process that may eventually result in one or more RFPs for funded research projects. Members: Mike Belzer, Dave Miller, Don Osterberg, John Siebert, Lee Husting, Pete Swan.
A suggested initial procedure is to survey all the Task Force members and friends as to possible topics to generate a wide-ranging list. Several of us noted that the current problems with HOS (the new regulations were recently overturned by a Federal court) are the obvious short-to-medium term topic of central interest.
The other standard subcommittee that is usually formed is for liaisons with other committees. We did not establish an explicit subcommittee for this, but several individuals were named as liaisons to particular other groups. I copied down: Pete Swan (Committee on Economics and Regulation of Freight Transportation), John Siebert (invitational FMCSA October conference), someone was named as connecting to the Committee on Hazardous Materials Transportation, and there were a couple I did not catch.