LOL, yeah I remember those days when the CSA was in the low teens. 4 months later and WHAM! 97.6% All it takes is for an inspector or two to re-interpret how the rules should be applied. Violations show up on CSA even though I plead not guilty to the charges and am awaiting court appearance. Nice.

That really does suck and I hope it turns out as well as it can for you.

The ladder I just bought is a 13 foot, multi-position, 300lb capacity job that (I just found out for sure today) folds down small enough to easily fit into one of my trailer tool boxes and actually lay flat. With some of these DOT geniuses, I wonder if they could get away with saying that bungeeing tarps to the top of a headache rack would constitute improperly secured equipment.

And when you BEAT it in court it STILL stays on the CSA.........ask me how I know........LOL

You have to go thru the "data Q" to contest it, then it goes to the officer who wrote it, and most likeley he will laugh and throw it in the trash, of course he might admit he was wrong and then....................HUH?......sorry, day dreamin again.

The CSA system is stacked AGAINST the driver.

They can pretty much say or write ANYTHING they want, then its up to YOU to fight it.

And GONE are the days where they will point something out and let you correct it, now they write it up and then tell you correct it.

I have not looked at what my score is, nor will I.

Basically I couldnt care less, when and if I get a letter like rank got, I will deal with it, no need getting all stressed out over some points, I haul 75% or more of unregulated (exempt) commodities, I can trip lease anything else I need to haul, so having my own authority is really not even nessesary.

yeah.....the driver and the company. the violations stay with the company even if the driver leaves....which I'm sure you know. Yeah, I've been through the data q process before under the old safe stat system. I won that and had the fatality removed from the record but it was still a PITA, just like everything else in this business. You spend way more time complying with regs than you do do running the business.

I'm going to have to spend $2400 in legal fees to fight this BS and when I win.....will I get my money back? Nope. What a crock. Reminds me of Boss Hogg on the Dukes of Hazzard.

Yeah, but I bet you won't meet anyone in this process who looks like Daisy Duke. http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/...9/46839685.gif

Yep. I can tell your first hand that something like that will get you ~27 CSA points and OOS. One of our drivers was ticketed in the Marsellus shale area of PA for having chains on the catwalk tied down with bungees. 27 points and OOS. Bungees are not a securement device. They have no WLL. Any that does not have a WLL (or, in the case of chain, a grade stamped into the links) is not a securement device. I guess I'll have to ask the judge why people are allowed to put bags of salt, brooms, shovels, windshield washer, reefer fuel and all manner of things back there.

I used to have a rubbermaid tote secured to my catwalk with bungees similar to the milk crates that people have used for years. I was written up in at the Gan scale in ON (no CSA points) and the DOT man told me I needed to get a strap with a WLL on there or he would charge me $300 next time he saw me. So I did. Then the DOT man in Corfu, NY was going to write me up because he just didn't like rubbermaid I guess. That's when I decided to dig that old headache rack out of the scrap pile and put it on my truck. BTW, the only reason he didn't was because he found a chain with a bent link and he put me OOS for "damaged tie down".... (another 27 points).

I want to know how they can ticket flatbedders for "failing to prevent loose or shifting cargo" when we are secured wayy better than 99% of dry van loads. All of those over turned vans got that way because loose cargo shifted.

They're not allowed, there was a purolator (or fedex or ups I cant remember) delivery driver charged for having a bag of salt bungeed to the back step of the truck here in Ontario.

I don’t mind the rules, whatever they are. I can always comply, as long as we (one DOT officer to the next and me) agree on what they are. My BIG gripe is that enforcement is NOT uniform. There’s an interesting study that an investment arm of Well-Fargo did about CSA, and they found that one of the biggest problems is that some states inspect much more than others and some states have a knack of finding violations much more frequently than others. The result is if one carrier frequents these overly aggressive states and is very safe and compliant, it still may have worse CSA scores than a “renegade” carrier that runs only in states that are much more laid back about inspections and violations.

I really like the aforementioned study because it was conducted by an investment firm that doesn’t have much of a dog in the fight. The study was commissioned to determine whether or not investors should avoid investing in carriers with high CSA scores. The conclusion is that CSA scores have little or no correlation to how safe a carrier is. This study is posted on the NASTC website. Try this link if you are interested. They want you to give them your name, company name and email address before they will allow you to download the report. I think NASTC wants to see how many carriers (and who) are interested enough to download the report.

Wells Fargo CSA Study PDF request form

I guess straps it is, then. See, this is a great example of how and why CAD is so valuable for the few who actually use it to trade information. You might have just saved me a lot of time, money and grief.

exactly. we went from excellent to terrible on cargo violations virtually overnight and we never hanged a thing. someone, somewhere just said let's start writing tickets for this stuff that's all.

I got raked over the coals in Tilbury Ont 2 weeks ago because one of the ten chains I was using had the grade #'s worn done to point that he couldn't easily read them. I didn't get a ticket but was told to paint the links that were marked on all chains and they would be checking for them. He also informed me that I HAD to keep border receipts even if my company doesn't require them to be handed in. He didnt seem tp care that at Windsor-Detroit some of the booths give out receipts and some don't. I guess I'll have to print my own lol. Luckily I had a fax and dinner receipt that matched my logbook from the night before or I'm pretty sure I was getting a ticket.

It really ticks me off that there is no logic behind their crap. When is a bungee ok and when isn't it? Good enough to secure a tarp on the load but not good enough to secure the same tarp when rolled up on the cat walk. What a joke.

You have an excellent point about the tarp, and I’ve been pondering that same issue. The only way the bungee argument might be supported (at least the part about securing it to a headache rack) is that in the regs, in the section that defines securement devices, bungees are not listed anywhere. Still, that leaves the question of why are they allowed to be used for securing the tarp over a load. Your guess is as good as mine.

I think I saw 500+ securement violations today.

It must be a violation to use bungees to secure your boomer handles closed and also a violation to use bungees to tie up the excess chain. And also a violation to that guy that is keeping the tool box door on his trailer closed with a bungee. All those trucks with the bungee bundle dangling under truck/trailer must be in violation since a bungee obviously cannot hang from a bungee....the bungee bundle must be secured by a strap or chain that has a WLL. And to those that had their oversize load banners and flags attached with bungees...big no no. 27 CSA points for you too.

this interesting headache rack setup was parked beside me at Dundalk today. Thought I would snap a pic for ya. Also snapped one of my load.
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/h...0811110854.jpg
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/h...0811134950.jpg

Man, I read your post and couldn't stop laughing.........of course I'm laughing with you, just had the same discussion with a buddy.......seems you can no longer use bungees for anything, maybe they will offer permits for them......for a small fee that is...........

The whole CSA nonsense is outta hand.....

I know those aren’t bungees being used on your truck to secure flags to your front bumper, right?

I wonder if duct tape has a WLL.

yeah I was on a roll there wasn't I? :)

My bungees have a wll on them.

I've been looking for them. What brand are they and where did you them them Allan?

Fort Garry Industries in Winnipeg, mb. Product is called happi-hookers or something like that. Not cheap either, around $2.00 a bungee.

Here's an article from late 2010 saying that in Canada at least,

"Bungee cords and tarp straps are not suitable for use as tiedowns, and are equally unsuited to having an assigned Working Load Limit (WLL). There is no intention to prohibit the use of these devices as supplementary restraint for light weight cargo and equipment," CCMTA added in its guidance."

No bungee jumping cargo securement rules - Today's Trucking, the truck news site.

I love how they won’t come out and just say what they mean. Does that article mean they can or cannot be used to strap tarps to a headache rack?

Does light weight mean a tarp, because the ACTUAL weight of the tarp (some) is over 100 pounds.

This is exactly what I’m referring to. WTF does “supplementary” mean to the DOT? By strict definition, “supplementary” means “in addition to”. So if that is what they mean, then you would have to have some other “primary” securement method even to secure the tarp over the load and then supplement that with bungees to assist in the reduction of the tarp flapping in the breeze. So are we headed toward having to use a few two inch straps as primary securement and then add on all the bungees? This would probably be an acceptable idea if the tarps came with the straps sewn into them, but as things are now, you’re just going to tear up your tarps.

As usual it is up to the interpretation of the officer...........so if hes having a bad day.........so are you.

This is why CSA is such a crock, and so is the data Q way of contesting or protesting what you think is wrong.

The deck is stacked AGAINST the drivers, no doubt about it.

So what about tarp loads where you can't throw a strap over everything without destroying the tarp?

Finally... Almost done!
 

You guys know there's difference when your tarp is covering a load and is attached with 50 bungees or rolled up and secured with 2 bungees. Y'all are being obtuse! A rolled up tarp will become a road hazard if it comes loose. A tarp covering a load ain't going anywhere if a few bungees break.

Sorry, but the DOT are the ones being obtuse. In their eyes, no number of bungees is acceptable. A milk crate on the catwalk secured with 100 brand new bungees is still a violation.

Once again, this goes back to consistent enforcement across all states and applicable to all kinds of trucks. I don’t mind whatever rules they want to implement as long as they write every truck (whether reefer, van, open deck or any other configuration) a ticket for non-compliance. As long as we’re on an even playing field, I don’t mind playing the game. I’ve seen some extremely dangerous things on trucks, including large items sitting completely unsecured on catwalks and even dunage and spare tires laying unsecured on a flatbed. I wouldn’t mind using straps instead of bungees to secure a tarp to my headache rack, but there is nothing in the regs or load securement handbook listing anything smaller than 1 ¾” straps as a securement device and the smallest commonly available size of 2” seems a bit like overkill for the job. This would be a great opportunity for some enterprising manufacturer to make 1/2” wide and 4’ to 6’ long straps with a stamped WLL so they would be considered a proper load securement device by the DOT. I’m thinking about buying some small straps and getting a stamping set and marking them with a WLL myself. Problem solved.

I thought I wrote "tarp" and not "milk crate". My bad!

The regs have a whole list of rope sizes and WLLs. What the heck is rope legally used to secure beside (unrolled) tarps?

Why isn't my 1" straps with 400 lb. WLL legal for dunnage? I figure if it has the WLL marking it is legal right?

The regs would seem to indicate that anything with a stamped WLL is a legal load securement device. I’ve looked on-line and can’t seem to find any one inchers with a WLL stamped on them. I think I’d stick with my standard 4” straps for securing dunage. The sliding winches are more convenient, at least for me than using a ratchet strap, but I’d have no problem using them for my tarps.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]995[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]994[/ATTACH]this could amuse you blokes ,in N.Z logs or timber is only allowed to be restrained by chains each chain to be more than maximin of half the wieght of the load,in the case of logs if they are not more than 1foot in your measurement over the staunchen you must have a belly strop also chain ,look at this.hope it worked other 1 is our railways log cartage ,over roads across roads and alongside roads,and 1 load binder only 2.5 ton rated. police paid by same goverment that owns railways.lol try another railway pic[ATTACH=CONFIG]996[/ATTACH]

From what I read, and the way I understand it, I would use a couple of 2-inch straps to secure the tarps to the headache rack. Probably use a couple of old ones that are frayed in the middle and shorten them just for the tarps. Might take a few minutes longer to secure them, but less chance of spending more time behind a weigh station. I've had tarps that covered an entire oversized load, and they weigh in at several hundred pounds. Takes two good men to lift them. Sure did not want to be putting them back myself.

Not the point. Rolled up tarp or milk crate or a bag of salt is all the same diff. It's all "cargo" and it doesn't matter how little it weighs or many bungees you put on it.