Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study – Real World Insights

December 2016

Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study – Real World Insights from Truck Parking Diaries

Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study – Real World

Insights from Truck Parking Diaries

December 2016

Caroline Boris Research Analyst

American Transportation Research Institute Minneapolis, MN

Rebecca M. Brewster President and COO

American Transportation Research Institute Atlanta, GA

950 N. Glebe Road, Suite 210

Arlington, VA 22203 www.atri-online.org

http://www.atri-online.org/

ATRI BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Ms. Judy McReynolds Chairman of the ATRI Board Chairman, President & CEO ArcBest Corporation Fort Smith, AR Mr. David S. Congdon Vice Chairman and CEO Old Dominion Freight Line Thomasville, NC Mr. Michael L. Ducker President & CEO FedEx Freight Memphis, TN Mr. Rich Freeland President & COO Cummins Inc. Columbus, IN Mr. Hugh H. Fugleberg President & COO Great West Casualty Company South Sioux City, NE Mr. Dave Huneryager President & CEO Tennessee Trucking Association Nashville, TN Mr. Derek Leathers President & CEO Werner Enterprises Omaha, NE Mr. Chris Lofgren President & CEO Schneider National, Inc. Green Bay, WI

Mr. Robert E. Low President and CEO Prime Inc. Springfield, MO Mr. Rich McArdle President UPS Freight Richmond, VA Mr. Jeffrey J. McCaig Chairman Trimac Transportation, Inc. Houston, TX Mr. Gregory L. Owen Head Coach & CEO Ability/ Tri-Modal Transportation Services Carson, CA Ms. Annette Sandberg President & CEO Transsafe Consulting, LLC Davenport, WA Ms. Rebecca M. Brewster President & COO American Transportation Research Institute Atlanta, GA Mr. Chris Spear President & CEO American Trucking Associations Arlington, VA

ATRI RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Mr. Steve L. Niswander RAC Chairman VP, Safety Policy & Regulatory Relations Groendyke Transport, Inc.

Mr. Doug Bennett

Director, Operations & Business Development U.S. AutoLogistics, L.L.C.

Ms. Amy Boerger Vice President – North American Engine Business Cummins Inc.

Mr. Andrew Boyle Executive VP & CFO Boyle Transportation

Mr. Randy Boyles Senior Vice President, Tailored Solutions PeopleNet

Ms. Cheryl Bynum Manager, SmartWay Transport Partnership U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mr. Louis Campion President Maryland Motor Truck Association, Inc.

Mr. Michael Conyngham Director of Research International Brotherhood of Teamsters

Mr. Bob Costello Chief Economist & Senior VP American Trucking Associations

Mr. Tom Cuthbertson Vice President, Regulatory Compliance Omnitracs LLC Mr. Dennis Dellinger President Cargo Transporters

Mr. Duke Drinkard Energy Manager Southeastern Freight Lines

Mr. Chip Duden Vice President, Strategic Business Analytics Werner Enterprises

Mr. Chad England Chief Executive Officer C.R. England Mr. Paul J. Enos Chief Executive Officer Nevada Trucking Association

Ms. Sherri Garner Brumbaugh President & CEO Garner Transportation Group

Dr. David W. Guess Executive Vice President, Safety & Regulatory Affairs Usher Transport, Inc.

Mr. Sanford Hodes Senior Vice President & Deputy General Counsel Ryder System, Inc.

Mr. Shannon Lively Vice President – Planning and Engineering ABF Freight System, Inc.

Ms. Michelle D. Livingstone Vice President – Transportation The Home Depot

Mr. Vladimir Livshits, Ph.D. System Analysis Program Manager Maricopa Association of Governments

Mr. Chris McLoughlin Cargo Risk Manager C.H. Robinson Mr. Scott Mugno

Vice President, Safety, Sustainability and Vehicle Maintenance FedEx Ground

Ms. Brenda Neville President Iowa Motor Truck Association

Mr. Dean Newell Vice President, Safety Maverick USA, Inc.

Major David L. Palmer Major, Texas Hwy Patrol Division Texas Dept. of Public Safety

Mr. Jonathan R. Peters, PhD Professor of Finance, Department of Business College of Staten Island – The City University of New York Ms. Karen Rasmussen President & CEO HELP Inc. Ms. Barbara Robinson Director American Truck Dealers (ATD) McLean, VA Mr. Wellington F. Roemer, III President & CEO Wellington F. Roemer Insurance, Inc. Mr. Steve Rogers Vice President, Truckload Operations J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc. Mr. Brett A. Sant

VP, Safety and Risk Management Knight Transportation, Inc. Ms. Andrea Sequin Director, Regulatory Services Schneider National, Inc. Mr. Brandon Shafer Director of Health and Safety UPS Freight Mr. Keith Tuttle Founder Motor Carrier Service Inc. Mr. Ronald Uriah Vice President, Safety Pitt-Ohio, LLC Mr. Tom Weakley Director of Operations Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association Foundation

Mr. Rusty Weiss Director, External Research DriveCam-Lytx Mr. Geoffrey Wood VP, Operations & Safety Canadian Trucking Alliance

Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study — Real World Insights from Truck Parking Diaries December 2016 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................... 3

1.0 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 4

2.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 6

3.0 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 7

4.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 8

4.1 Driver Demographics ........................................................................................ 8

4.2 Diary Participant Planning and Parking Behaviors ...................................... 12

4.3 Unauthorized and Undesignated Parking ..................................................... 15

4.4 Lost Productivity............................................................................................. 20

4.41 Time Spent Searching for Parking ........................................................ 21

4.42 Remaining Drive Time ............................................................................ 26

4.5 Lost Truck Parking Capacity ......................................................................... 28

4.6 Stop Locations ................................................................................................ 31

5.0 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... 34

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 36

APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................ 39

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................. 42

APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................ 45


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: For-Hire Industry Sector................................................................................. 8

Table 2: Fleet Size ......................................................................................................... 9

Table 3: Driver Operating Region Estimates and Diary Stop Locations ................ 10

Table 4: Primary Vehicle Configuration .................................................................... 11

Table 5: Driver Age ...................................................................................................... 11

Table 6: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Time-of-Day ............................... 17

Table 7: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Day-of-week ............................... 18

Table 8: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Urban/Suburban/Rural .............. 18

Table 9: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Location Type ............................ 19

Table 10: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Region ...................................... 20

Table 11: Search Time per Stop by Time-of-Day ...................................................... 23

Table 12: Search Time by Reason for Stop ............................................................... 24

Table 13: Daily Search Time by ELD Use .................................................................. 26

Table 14: Truck Parking Spaces Occupied by Non-CMVs by Time-of-Day ............ 30

Table 15: Spaces Occupied by Non-CMVs by Location ........................................... 31

Table 16: Factors Influencing Where Drivers Stop for 10-Hour Required HOS

Breaks .......................................................................................................................... 32

Table 17: Stop Locations for 10-Hour Required Breaks .......................................... 32

Table 18: Stop Location for 10-Hour Required Break by Gender ........................... 33

Table 19: Truck Parking Issues by Time-of-Day ....................................................... 34

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Average Length of Haul ................................................................................ 9

Figure 2: Qualifying Survey Operating Regions ....................................................... 10

Figure 3: Tools Used to Select Truck Parking Locations ........................................ 12

Figure 4: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking Frequency ..................................... 16

Figure 5: Daily Search Time ....................................................................................... 21

Figure 6: Minutes of Daily Search Time by Day-of-week ......................................... 22

Figure 7: Daily Search Time by Region ..................................................................... 24

Figure 8: Daily Non-Productive Search Time by Willingness to Reserve Parking 25

Figure 9: Average Remaining Drive Time ................................................................. 27

Figure 10: Average Remaining Drive Time by Compensation Structure ................ 28

Figure 11: Percent of Parking Stops with Non-CMVs Observed in Truck Parking

Spots by Region .......................................................................................................... 29

Figure 12: Percent of Parking Stops with Non-CMVs Observed in Truck Parking

Spots by Day-of-week ................................................................................................. 30


LIST OF ACRONYMS

AT Autonomous Truck

ATRI American Transportation Research Institute

CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle

DOT Department of Transportation

ELD Electronic Logging Device

FAST Act Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

FPM Freight Performance Measures

GPS Global Positioning System

HOS Hours-of-Service

MAASTO Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials

MPH Miles per Hour

RAC Research Advisory Committee

RV Recreational Vehicle


1.0 BACKGROUND

Safe, legal truck parking has historically been a major issue for motor carriers and commercial drivers, but the problem is now reaching a critical juncture. State budget woes have led to the elimination of many hundreds of public truck parking spaces. Evolving supply chains and truck operational changes have moved the truck parking “sweet spot” for many urban areas. Even planning issues such as zoning, property condemnation and “livable communities” have had a major impact on the quantity and location of critical truck parking. The American Transportation Research Institute’s (ATRI) annual industry survey, Critical Issues in the Trucking Industry, shows “truck parking” steadily increasing in rank since 2012 – starting as 8th most important industry issue in 2012 and currently ranked as the 4th most important industry issue.1 Among truck driver respondents, “truck parking” was the third highest ranked issue in 2016.2

In addition to existing capacity issues, regulatory changes have the potential to intensify existing truck parking shortages. In 2013, regulatory changes to commercial driver hours-of-service (HOS) exacerbated truck parking shortages by shifting truck travel to different times of the day and week.3 These HOS changes have since been suspended. Another regulatory change that will impact truck parking is the electronic logging device (ELD) mandate. Change of duty status will automatically be recorded if drivers are asked to move from a space during a required HOS break and if drive time is exhausted where there is no nearby truck parking, drivers may park in unsafe or illegal locations. Finally, the movement toward autonomous vehicles could dramatically impact the role that truck parking plays, particularly in relation to mandated HOS stops. Prior to passage of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), Congress focused attention on the lack of available safe truck parking with the Jason’s Law study requirement in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act. The Jason’s Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative Analysis (herein referred to as Jason’s Law Report) was released in 2015 and confirms that truck parking continues to be a major issue in the United States.4 The Federal Highway

1 American Transportation Research Institute. “Critical Issues in the Trucking Industry – 2016.” Arlington, VA. October 2016. 2 Ibid. 3 Murray, Daniel & Short, J. “Quantifying Impacts from the 34-Hour Restart Provisions.” American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA. April, 2015. 4 Federal Highway Administration and Department of Transportation. “Jason’s Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative Analysis.” August 2015. Accessed November 23, 2016. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/jasons_law.pdf

“Parking is a huge problem. I start

early and end my day early to help

my chances of finding a parking

space. The routes I travel are mostly

out west, and parking is not as hard

to find, with the exception of urban

areas. I have found that east of the

Mississippi River, you need to be

parked way before you are out of

drive time, or you won’t find a legal

place to park.”

Truckload Driver from

Wisconsin

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/jasons_law.pdf


Administration (FHWA) surveyed over 8,000 truck drivers, of which over 75 percent indicated they regularly have trouble finding parking at night. Numerous state Department of Transportation (DOT) representatives corroborated that truck parking is inadequate – 59 percent of states have truck parking shortages in public rest areas and 31 percent have truck parking shortages in private truck stops. Individual state DOT analyses and regional analyses of truck parking adequacy corroborate the Jason’s Law Report results. The assessment of current truck parking supply and demand in the Jason’s Law Report shows that major freight corridors and urban areas have the greatest number of truck parking spaces. However, the demand for truck parking in these locations exceeds truck parking supply, creating acute truck parking shortages on major freight corridors and near urban areas. The ongoing parking shortage was attributed to many causes, including land zoning, land prices, delivery schedules, lack of coordination between states, and disparate efforts to address parking shortages between states. Efforts to quantify truck parking adequacy are confounded by seasonal fluctuations in freight movement, severe weather events, and variations in demand due to time-of-day and day-of-week.

The Jason’s Law Report and the numerous studies undertaken by state DOTs support the need for expanding truck parking capacity along major interstate corridors to prevent fatigue-related crashes and give truck drivers the means to comply with federal HOS regulations and local parking laws. However, adding the needed capacity is expensive and rarely politically acceptable, so alternative methods of managing parking resources are being explored. Examples include “reservation-for-fee” systems that guarantee a parking space in advance, establishing “safe haven” parking locations, and the use of roadside signs to inform truck drivers of real-time parking availability.

In response to the growing criticality of truck parking, and the well documented shortage of public and private truck parking spaces, ATRI’s Research Advisory Committee (RAC)5 ranked “Managing Critical Truck Parking” as the most important research topic for the year at its 2015 annual meeting.

5 ATRI’s RAC is comprised of industry stakeholders representing motor carriers, trucking industry suppliers, labor and driver groups, law enforcement, federal government and academia. The RAC is charged with annually recommending a research agenda for the Institute.


2.0 INTRODUCTION

ATRI’s 2015 RAC-directed truck parking research was conducted through a series of discrete tasks, the results of each being documented in separate reports. This report details the findings of the “Truck Parking Diaries,” which collected and analyzed qualitative data on the daily issues truck drivers face related to truck parking.

Given the scope and complexity of the truck parking issue, ATRI researched the following truck parking issues discretely and in many instances concurrently. Each report will be publicly released on completion, followed by an overall “Managing Critical Truck Parking” synthesis.

1) Understanding Truck Driver Perspectives on Parking Reservation Systems

This first Tech Memo, released in September 2015, collected and analyzed response data from driver surveys conducted in March 2015 at the Mid-America Trucking Show (MATS), and a follow-up online truck driver survey. Data provided by more than 1,400 truck driver respondents provided insight on a variety of driver issues, including the role that “reservation-for-fee” systems may play, related space valuation and who should ultimately be responsible for truck parking fees.

2) Case Study: Real World Insights from Truck Parking Diaries

Much of the data collected by truck parking research studies lacks the detailed, qualitative information needed to fully understand the scope and extent of truck parking issues. This report uses truck driver diaries to examine issues and experiences from truck drivers as they ply thousands of truck driving miles. While the emphasis is on over-the-road driving experiences, all types of truck parking experiences were captured including rural versus urban, public versus private, and regional differences. Additionally, data collected from the truck parking diaries were compared to the Jason’s Law Report to confirm that granular data corroborates high-level driver survey data.

3) Utilizing Truck Global Positioning System (GPS) Data to Assess Parking Supply and Demand

This report documents how ATRI’s massive truck GPS database was used to develop more granularity on truck supply and demand, identifying truck parking demand and duration by time-of-day, day-of-week and month-of-year for any formal and/or informal locations used for truck parking. Most importantly, the data analysis provides important guidance on where truck parking investments are most needed based on utilization of existing truck parking facilities. At the time of publication, five public rest stops in Minnesota have been analyzed using this method to guide Minnesota DOT decisions on what locations would benefit most from expanding truck parking capacity.


3.0 METHODOLOGY

Driver participants were solicited with announcements posted in major trucking industry trade press, on SiriusXM’s Road Dog Trucking channel and through in-person contact at the Mid-America Trucking Show held March 31-April 2, 2016 in Louisville, Kentucky. Interested drivers were directed to an online qualifying survey (Appendix A) to provide contact information and general operating characteristics including:

Industry segment (e.g. for-hire or private)

For-hire industry sector (e.g. truckload, less-than-truckload, flatbed, etc.)

Employment status

Number of nights away from home each week

Region(s) of operations

Over 650 drivers submitted qualifying surveys. From that cohort, the research team selected participants using a variety of criteria to ensure a diverse representation of drivers. These criteria included industry sector, employment status and region(s) of operation. Drivers who indicated they spend zero nights away from home per week were excluded as a key focus of this research was to identify challenges when looking for parking for the required 10-hour break. A total of 587 were selected for participation.

These drivers were then contacted by email to confirm their participation and asked to provide a mailing address where the diary and related materials could be shipped. There was some participant attrition as part of this process, resulting in 325 diaries being shipped to drivers. A sample diary, along with the related materials sent to drivers can be found in Appendix B. The diary questions were pretested with a group of professional drivers who provided input on the diary instructions and level of effort required to complete diary entries.

Drivers were provided with a postage-paid return envelope to ship the completed diary back to ATRI and as an additional incentive to participate, the first 100 drivers who returned a completed diary (representing 14 days of truck parking activity) were sent a $50 gift card.

In total, 148 completed diaries were returned to ATRI between June and September 2016, representing a total of 2,035 days of truck parking activity and 4,763 unique stops. Since completing all diary fields was not compulsory, response rates differ from question to question.


4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Driver Demographics

First, drivers were asked in which segment of the trucking industry they operate; 87 percent of driver participants operate in the for-hire segment and 13 percent drive for private fleets. Drivers operating in the for-hire segment were then asked to identify the sector they primarily represent (Table 1). Respondents overwhelmingly represented the truckload sector (56.1%), followed by the flatbed sector (20.9%).

Table 1: For-Hire Industry Sector

Industry Sector Percent of

Diary Participants

Truckload 56.1%

Less-than-Truckload 4.1%

Flatbed 20.9%

Tanker 4.1%

Intermodal Drayage 0.7%

Other 5.4%

Express / Parcel Service 0.0%

No Response 8.8%

Next, drivers were asked to describe their employment type. The sample of participating drivers consisted of:

72.3 percent Employee Drivers;

25.7 percent Independent Contractors leased to a motor carrier; and

2.0 percent Owner-Operators with their own authority.

Table 2 displays the fleet size distribution of participating drivers. Fleet size figures were gathered by cross-referencing carrier data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA’s) Safety Management System website with driver-provided names of the carriers employing them.6,7 Half of respondents (50%) represent fleets of over 1,000 power units – over-representing large fleets relative to the industry as a whole, where approximately 29 percent of power units on the road belong to fleets of more than 1,000 power units.8

6 Carrier census data can be found at: https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/ 7 Queries returning multiple names for a carrier were omitted, and are classified as “no response.” 8 Government Accountability Office. “Federal Motor Carrier Safety Modifying the Compliance, Safety, Accountability Program Would Improve the Ability to Identify High Risk Carriers (GAO-14-114).” February 2014. Accessed November 15, 2016. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-114.

https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-114.


Table 2: Fleet Size

Power Units Percent of Diary

Participants

1-5 2.0%

6-10 0.7%

11-20 1.4%

21-100 7.4%

101-500 12.2%

501-1,000 4.1%

1,001+ 50.0%

No Response 22.3%

Eligible drivers were first identified by the number of nights spent away from home each week. Drivers spending no nights away from home were excluded, as researchers were interested in driver experiences related to finding parking for 10-hour required HOS breaks. Most drivers in this sample spend more than five nights away from home per week (90.4%), followed by three to four nights away (8.2%), then one to two nights away (1.4%).

Participants were asked to provide their average length of haul. The sample was roughly divided into thirds as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Average Length of Haul

Eligible drivers were further identified by asking drivers to estimate the percentage of operating miles spent in the regions depicted in Figure 2. Operating regions were reviewed throughout the diary distribution process to ensure data in all of the lower 48


states were collected in the truck driver diaries. Table 3 displays driver estimates of miles driven by region and the regional distribution of ATRI driver diary stops.

Figure 2: Qualifying Survey Operating Regions

Table 3: Driver Operating Region Estimates and Diary Stop Locations

Region

Average Percent of Operating

Miles

Percent of Diary Stops

Midwest 35.5% 34.5%

Northeast 18.6% 11.3%

Southeast 28.9% 32.7%

Southwest 19.2% 9.3%

West Coast 18.7% 10.4%

Canada 4.3% 1.7%

Participants also identified the primary vehicle configuration they operate. The distribution of primary vehicle configurations in this sample is shown in Table 4. Dry van configurations were the most common (41.2%), followed by flatbed (30.4%) and refrigerated trailers (16.2%).


Table 4: Primary Vehicle Configuration

Primary Vehicle Configuration Percent of Diary

Participants

Dry Van 41.2%

Flatbed 30.4%

Refrigerated Trailer 16.2%

Tanker 5.4%

Other 5.4%

Straight Truck 1.4%

The majority of drivers (91.2%) in this sample do not drive dedicated, regularly scheduled runs, creating additional variability and challenges in their parking options. A small number of the participating drivers (4.7%) operate as team drivers.

Similar to the trucking industry as a whole, participating drivers were predominantly male (88.4%). However, female drivers are over-represented in this sample (11.6%) relative to the industry at large, of which 5.8 percent of drivers are female.9 Driver age is shown in Table 5. Compared to the industry as a whole, this sample over-represents drivers between the ages of 45 to 65 years and under-represents other age groups.

Table 5: Driver Age

Age Diary

Participants Industry

Distribution10

Younger than 25 0.0% 4.9%

25 – 44 25.9% 39.6%

45 – 64 71.4% 49.4%

65+ 2.7% 6.1%

Drivers were asked how they were paid – the majority (74.1%) indicated that they are paid by the mile and 19.6 percent indicated that they are paid by the load. Drivers were also asked whether or not they use an ELD to record their HOS. The majority of drivers in this sample (85%) utilize an ELD.

9 American Trucking Associations. American Trucking Trends 2016. Arlington, VA. 2016. 10 Short, J. “White Paper: Analysis of Truck Driver Age Demographics Across Two Decades.” American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA. December 2014.


4.2 Diary Participant Planning and Parking Behaviors

Included in the diary package was a second survey designed to gather additional information on how drivers plan for truck parking as part of their trips. Most drivers indicated they select truck parking locations on their own (93.8%) and a small percentage of drivers (4.1%) indicated that they do not do any advance planning for their parking locations. Less than one percent of drivers in this sample had parking locations chosen by their carrier or dispatcher (0.7%).

Next, drivers were asked about the tools they used to select truck parking locations (Figure 3). Drivers predominantly used websites or smartphone applications (55.5%), GPS (53.4%) and books (37.7%) for selecting parking locations. Driver-specified responses of “other” primarily indicated that parking locations were planned based on past experience and/or Google Earth. Truck parking reservations, a system where a driver pays a fee for a guaranteed parking space, are also available on the smartphone applications frequently used by drivers to find parking. Almost half of drivers in this sample (45.6%) have used a parking reservation system before and 15 percent have the reservation fees covered by their carrier.

Figure 3: Tools Used to Select Truck Parking Locations

When drivers are not able to find available parking but need to rest, they may be forced to park on roadway shoulders or entrance/exit ramps, which is illegal in most locations and can create a safety hazard for the drivers and other motorists. Seven percent of drivers indicated that they have been ticketed for parking on a shoulder or entrance ramp in states that include: Indiana, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming. Additionally, two drivers indicated they have been asked to leave a ramp or road shoulder but not ticketed. One driver indicated they have received a ticket for


parking in a closed weigh station, however, these closed weigh stations do represent an opportunity to expand available truck parking supply.

Finally, drivers were asked for any additional thoughts they have on parking-related issues. Of drivers who responded to this open-ended question, common themes included:

Time-of-day Impacts. The most common parking issue reported was the impact of time-of-day on parking issues – with 61.6 percent of drivers reporting that time-of-day impacts truck parking availability. Some drivers in the sample avoid truck parking challenges by operating at night or beginning their duty cycle in the early morning. Other drivers provided estimates of when finding available parking is most difficult. Most drivers who provided a time-of-day where finding parking becomes uncertain specified a time between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Reserved Parking. Truck parking reservations were the second most cited parking issue (25.6%). Comments related to truck parking reservation systems usually fell into two bins. The first bin is that truck parking reservations effectively reduce parking supply, observing that these spots go unused and that free parking spaces reach capacity. This perspective also reflects that drivers are generally unwilling to pay for parking.11 The second bin focused on drivers who were willing to use a reservation system when they expected that no free truck parking would be available, often because of time-of-day or regional demand patterns. Public Rest Areas. Issues related to public rest areas were the next most cited issue in the free responses, with almost one quarter of drivers referencing public rest areas (24.4%). The closing of public rest areas and the distance between parking locations were identified as problematic by drivers. Distance between parking locations has a tangible impact on public safety, as research has found that collisions (both fatigue-related and non-fatigue-related) decreased immediately downstream from public rest areas, then increased approximately 30 miles downstream of public rest areas.12 Closing public rest areas aggravates existing safety issues by effectively increasing the distance between truck parking locations. Another issue cited was parking time limits at public rest areas. Required 10-hour HOS breaks usually exceed these time

11 Boris, C., & Johnson, M. September 2015. “Managing Critical Truck Parking Tech Memo #1: Commercial Driver Perspectives on Truck Parking.” American Transportation Research Institute: Arlington, VA. 12 Banerjee, I., Lee, J., Jang, K., Pande, S., & Ragland, D. May 2009. “Rest Areas—Reducing Accidents Involving Driver Fatigue.” University of California Berkeley Traffic Safety Center and California Department of Transportation. Accessed November 23, 2016. http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/researchreports/reports/2009/2009-05_design_and_construction.pdf.

“I will not pay for parking if I

can avoid it. I will never

reserve a spot.”

LTL Driver from Ontario

http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/researchreports/reports/2009/2009-05_design_and_construction.pdf

http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/researchreports/reports/2009/2009-05_design_and_construction.pdf


limits, which range between two and ten hours.13 Where time limits are enforced, drivers may face the choice of having their vehicle towed/ticketed or violating the HOS rules. Regional Issues and Urban Locations. Drivers also described specific regions where finding truck parking is difficult (20.1%), suggesting that solutions may best be pursued at a regional level. A number of drivers also described finding parking in urban areas as difficult (8.1%).

Shipper and Receiver Policies. Shipper/receiver policies were referenced in 17.4 percent of responses. Policies preventing drivers from parking on shipper/receiver properties outside of appointment times aggravate existing parking issues.

13 Federal Highway Administration and Department of Transportation. “Jason’s Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative Analysis.” August 2015. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/jasons_law.pdf.

“Also, having, and knowing, how to use

the many tools available, particularly on

the internet, is absolutely tantamount to

being successful on the road. I will say

that parking in, or near large cities in

general, is considerably more difficult.”

Drop Deck Driver from Georgia

“I agree that it is an industry problem as large shippers

drive truck volumes, but prohibit parking at their

distribution centers, causing major HOS issues.

Truckload Driver from Ohio

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/jasons_law.pdf


4.3 Unauthorized and Undesignated Parking

Unauthorized parking, or parking at a location such as a ramp or road shoulder where truck parking is illegal, is often considered symptomatic of the truck parking shortage or the result of truck drivers’ lack of awareness of available parking nearby.14 The impending ELD mandate will likely impact the current issues related to unauthorized parking, as an ELD-equipped vehicle automatically records change of duty status. In circumstances where a driver runs out of HOS and cannot find a legal parking space, the driver must choose between violating the HOS rules and parking illegally. Unauthorized parking creates safety issues by exposing parked trucks to traffic conditions in locations where trucks are not designed to be parked. While most shoulder crashes are caused by driver inattention, there is still a safety imperative to prevent these crashes from occurring by parking in a safe location.15 Additionally, road shoulder pavement is not designed for extended parking use by heavy vehicles.

Undesignated parking, where a parking space is “created” in a location where parking is permitted but a space is unmarked, is another parking challenge faced by drivers. Undesignated parking creates numerous issues, as “created” spaces do not consider the space requirements to maneuver a truck safely, increasing the risk of property damage. When choosing where to park, a number of drivers indicated that they consider whether they are likely to be blocked into a space or hit when another driver parks in an undesignated location.

The issues of unauthorized and undesignated parking are addressed together in this analysis due to the similarity in conditions that lead drivers to park in these location types. Possible reasons for drivers choosing to park in an unauthorized/undesignated location despite the associated risks include: HOS constraints, no available parking, or lack of knowledge of available parking. Therefore, unauthorized/undesignated parking is used here as a proxy for inadequate parking.

Unauthorized/undesignated parking is categorized here if a driver indicated that the location they parked in is not a designated parking space or if their parking

14 Trombly, J. W., et al. 2003. “NCHRP Synthesis 317 Dealing with Truck Parking Demands.” Transportation Research Board. National Academies of Science. Washington, D.C. 15 Roberts, G.L., Lynn, C.W. February 2003. “Passenger Vehicle Crashes Into Stationary Large Trucks: Incidence and Possible Countermeasures.” Virginia Department of Transportation.

“Parking on a ramp or outside

of striped parking spaces in rest

areas is not permitted. We lose

our contract, even if someone

just snaps a photo and sends it

in. A breakdown with safety

triangles deployed is the only

exception.”

LTL Driver from North

Carolina

“I personally refuse to park

on ramps or road shoulders.

I will go over hours first.”

Flatbed Driver from

Ontario


location was a ramp or road shoulder. In this sample, drivers parked in an unauthorized/undesignated parking location in three percent of all recorded parking stops. This may underestimate the prevalence of unauthorized truck parking contained in the diary data. For example, locations such as a parking lot or city street where truck parking is not permitted may be omitted if the driver did not indicate that their parking spot was unauthorized

The average number of unauthorized/ undesignated parking stops per day as reported in the diaries is shown in Figure 4. Some drivers never parked in unauthorized locations (10.8%), which may be the result of adherence to company policy or aversion to legal consequences (e.g. tickets for parking in an unauthorized locations or being forced to move despite HOS duty status). Most drivers parked in an unauthorized/undesignated location three to four times per week (36.5%), followed by once or twice per week (25.7%). A small percentage of drivers (9.5%) in the sample rely heavily on shoulder and ramp parking to meet their parking needs – equating to parking in an unauthorized/undesignated at least once per day.

Figure 4: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking Frequency

“Truck drivers face many challenges when

it comes to parking. Sometimes the

opportunity to park at a customer presents

itself, but for most drivers, that is rarely

an option. We are being run out of

shopping centers, ticketed for utilizing

wide on and off ramps, and towed/ticketed

for parking on the street. This leaves our

only true option to be truck stops or the

occasional rest area. If we use rest areas,

we have increased potential to be harassed

by DOT with ‘surprise inspections’ and told

to move because we have violated time

limits set on parking.”

Tank Truck Driver from North

Carolina


Table 6 shows the prevalence of unauthorized/undesignated parking by time-of-day. In this sample, unauthorized/undesignated parking occurred the most during the early morning hours (midnight – 4:59 a.m.) and the least during the afternoon (noon – 3:59 p.m.). These results are similar to the findings of Jason’s Law Report, where drivers identified 7:00 p.m. to 11:59 p.m. as the worst time to find parking, followed by midnight – 4:59 a.m.16 The Jason’s Law Report also surveyed 387 private truck stop operators, of whom 48 percent reported parking demand exceeding supply between the hours of midnight to 4:59 a.m., corroborating the time in the ATRI sample where unauthorized/undesignated parking is most prevalent. However, in the drivers’ open-ended responses, many indicated that available parking is severely reduced in the early evening hours. Drivers often indicated that finding available truck parking becomes difficult after the hours of 4:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.

Table 6: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Time-of-Day

Time

Mid

nig

ht

-

4:5

9 a

.m.

5:0

0 a

.m.

-

8:5

9 a

.m.

9:0

0 a

.m.

-

11:5

9 a

.m.

No

on

–

3:5

9 p

.m.

4:0

0 p

.m.

-

6:5

9 p

.m.

7:0

0 p

.m.

-

11:5

9 p

.m.

Authorized / Designated Parking Space

64.96% 77.59% 83.38% 84.52% 81.03% 71.78%

Unauthorized / Undesignated Parking Space

35.04% 22.41% 16.62% 15.48% 18.97% 28.22%

The Jason’s Law Report survey results also indicated that it is easier to find truck parking on the weekend. In Table 7, the proportion of observed unauthorized/undesignated parking is broken out by day. Unauthorized/undesignated parking, segmented by day of the week, supports the Jason’s Law Report results that

16 Federal Highway Administration and Department of Transportation. “Jason’s Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative Analysis.” August 2015. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm

“It's a free-for-all at night to find a

space, especially if there are not striped

parking spaces. Even when spaces are

marked, some pull in and park

alongside a curb instead of a spot, or

park illegally in other areas, making

movement by other trucks hazardous.

And, believe it or not, some will pull

forward in the fuel line and go into the

sleeper and sleep.”

Truckload Driver from Texas

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/jasons_law/truckparkingsurvey/index.htm


parking is easier to find on weekends relative to weekdays. A similar relationship was also observed in ATRI research on the impacts of the 34-hour restart provisions implemented in 2013, where an increase of truck volumes operating during the day and on weekdays was observed.17 The specific 34-hour restart provisions which led to that shift have since been suspended by Congress.

Table 7: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Day-of-Week

Su

nd

ay

Mo

nd

ay

Tu

esd

ay

We

dn

esd

ay

Th

urs

da

y

Fri

day

Sa

turd

ay


81.3% 78.6% 78.9% 80.9% 78.1% 80.3% 80.2%


18.7% 21.4% 21.1% 19.1% 21.9% 19.7% 19.8%

Researchers next examined the sample’s prevalence of unauthorized/undesignated by whether the parking location was urban, suburban, or rural (Table 8). In this sample, unauthorized/undesignated truck parking was observed most frequently at urban locations, where over one quarter of parking stops were in an unauthorized or undesignated location. This result highlights the increased difficulty in finding parking in urban areas, as was identified in the Jason’s Law Report.

Table 8: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Urban/Suburban/Rural

Rural Suburban Urban


83.51% 78.71% 73.54%


16.49% 21.29% 26.46%

17 Murray, D., Short, J. (2015). Technical Memorandum: Quantifying Impacts from the 34-Hour Restart Provisions. American Transportation Research Institute, Arlington, VA. http://atri-online.org/

http://atri-online.org/


Table 9 displays the prevalence of unauthorized/undesignated parking by location type, focusing on private truck stops and public rest areas. In this assessment, unauthorized/undesignated parking occurred more frequently at private truck stops. Numerous factors contribute to the relatively higher occurrence of unauthorized parking at truck stops, including driver preferences for a location’s amenities, HOS limitations, facility design issues, proximity to the driver’s destination, and the management of parking spaces by truck stop employees or law enforcement.

Table 9: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Location Type

Location Type Private Truck

Stop Public Rest

Area


88.4% 91.6%


11.6% 8.4%

Next, the relationship between unauthorized/undesignated parking and region of the country was examined (Table 10). To facilitate comparisons with the Jason’s Law Report, researchers used the same definitions of regions. See Appendix C for a comprehensive list of states included in each of the regions shown in Table 10.

As noted in Table 10, unauthorized/undesignated parking does not appear to correlate to the findings of the Jason’s Law Report, where most survey respondents indicated the Northeast, Pacific, and South Atlantic regions have insufficient parking. The differences between diary data and Jason’s Law Report data may be attributed to interactions between several confounding factors, including, time-of-day/day-of-week demand fluctuations, differences in enforcement of illegal parking, and individual driver preferences. Driver risk preferences vary (as demonstrated in Figure 4) and company policy may prohibit parking in an unauthorized location.


Table 10: Unauthorized/Undesignated Parking by Region

Region

No

rth

east

So

uth

Atl

an

tic

Mid

We

st

/

Ea

st

No

rth

Ce

ntr

al

Mid

we

st

/

We

st

No

rth

Ce

ntr

al

So

uth

Ea

st

So

uth

We

st

Mo

un

tain

Pa

cif

ic


82.69% 80.88% 79.35% 81.30% 81.42% 79.07% 80.12% 79.19%


17.31% 19.12% 20.65% 18.70% 18.58% 20.93% 19.88% 20.81%

Another question of interest in this research was the impact of ELD utilization and driver compensation structure on whether a driver parked in unauthorized/undesignated parking locations. However, these relationships were unable to be explored due to the overwhelming prevalence of ELD usage (85.0%) and per mile compensation (74.1%) in this sample.

4.4 Lost Productivity

The parking diaries also gathered information on productivity losses related to parking issues. Other truck parking research has suggested that drivers devote a significant amount of time each day to finding available parking. A truck driver survey of over 1,300 drivers completed for the Kansas DOT found that a majority of drivers spend at least 30 minutes on average searching for parking in Kansas. Almost half (47%) reported search times of 30 minutes to an hour and almost one third reported search times of more than an hour (31%).18 Preliminary findings of a survey of over 2,600 drivers operating in the region represented by the Mid America Association of State Transportation Officials (MAASTO) corroborate the findings of the Kansas driver survey, with over half of respondents reporting that they spend over 30 minutes on average searching for truck parking in the MAASTO region.19 Expending available drive and on-duty time while looking for available parking has a noticeable effect on driver pay, as most drivers in this sample and the industry-at-large are paid per mile or per load.

18 Shirk, Alexandra and Dan Murray. “Kansas Truck Parking Survey Analysis.” Kansas Department of Transportation. September 2015. 19 States comprising MAASTO include: Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky.


The following sections examine the effect of parking shortages on driver productivity using two data fields from the driver diaries: time spent searching for parking and remaining drive time.

4.41 Time Spent Searching for Parking

Drivers reported the available drive time, in minutes, they spent searching for parking rather than driving revenue-earning miles for each stop made (herein referred to as “search time”). Search time per stop was then aggregated to calculate total daily search time, aligning with the 24-hour duty cycles that HOS follow. Since numerous driver surveys indicate that spending over 30 minutes searching for parking is a normal condition, daily search times of less than five minutes was omitted from this analysis.

Figure 5 displays the distribution of daily search time. Less than 10 percent of days in this sample involved search time of more than 30 minutes. The disparity observed between the results of the driver surveys described above and search time reported in the diaries could be the result of several factors. Possible explanations for this disparity include exaggerated driver estimates of search times in surveys and underestimated search times in truck parking diaries. While the disparity between search time in the diaries and truck driver surveys is concerning, relationships derived from diary search times still have merit. However, it is likely that diary search times underestimate time spent searching for parking, given the numerous, robust driver survey findings that most drivers spend at least 30 minutes on average searching for parking.

Figure 5: Daily Search Time


Figure 6 displays daily search time by day-of-week. Here, diary results corroborate the Jason’s Law Report driver survey results – locating parking is more difficult on weekdays, particularly earlier in the week, than on weekends. Improvements in driver productivity could be achieved by shifting days of operations to weekends away from early weekdays. However, shifting days of operations may not be feasible as drivers may not be in a position to control appointment times at shippers and receivers.

Figure 6: Minutes of Daily Search Time by Day-of-Week

Next, search time by time-of-day was analyzed (Table 11). The search times displayed in Table 11 are per stop, not per day. Drivers devoted the most available drive time to finding parking between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 11:59 p.m., peak demand periods for truck parking. Similarly, the Jason’s Law Report identifies 7:00 p.m. – midnight, followed by midnight – 5:00 a.m. as the times of day that finding truck parking is most difficult for drivers.


Table 11: Search Time per Stop by Time-of-Day

Time-of-day

Mid

nig

ht

-

4:5

9 a

.m.

5:0

0 a

.m. -

8:5

9 a

.m.

9:0

0 a

.m. -

11:5

9 a

.m.

No

on

–

3:5

9 p

.m.

4:0

0 p

.m. -

6:5

9 p

.m.

7:0

0 p

.m. -

11:5

9 p

.m.

1 - 14 Minutes 1.3% 10.3% 6.4% 16.7% 30.8% 34.6%

15 Minutes or More

1.8% 8.9% 7.1% 18.8% 28.6% 34.8%

Next, researchers examined regional influences on daily search time (Figure 7). Since daily travel is not always contained within one region, days where the majority of stops occurred in one region are analyzed here. The Jason’s Law Report data also indicated truck parking issues vary by region, identifying the most severe truck parking shortages in the Northeast, South Atlantic, and Midwest East/North Central regions. As previously noted, results from the truck driver diaries do not mirror these results completely, with the South Atlantic region having the most search times of more than 15 minutes reported, followed by the Southeast region, then the Southwest region. The disparities between the diary data and Jason’s Law data are potentially the result of variations in reporting accuracy, as the diary data is granular, while the Jason’s Law Report is survey-based and retrospective. Other confounding factors, like time-of-day/day-of-week demand fluctuations or whether parking is near an urban area may also contribute to this disparity.


Figure 7: Daily Search Time by Region

Search time, broken out by the reason for stopping, is shown in Table 12. Drivers spent more time searching for parking for the 10-hour required break than for stops unrelated to the 10-hour break. This is likely due to the need for increased amenities, security and other parking features that drivers look for when taking their 10-hour break versus stopping for other reasons.

Table 12: Search Time by Reason for Stop

Reason for Stop 0

Minutes 1 - 14

Minutes

15 Minutes or More

10-Hour Required HOS Break 59.6% 31.7% 8.6%

Not 10-Hour Required HOS Break 77.9% 20.8% 1.3%

Next, researchers explored the potential impacts of parking reservation system use and ELD utilization on search times.


Figure 8: Daily Non-Productive Search Time by Willingness to Reserve Parking

Figure 8 displays the distribution of search time, segmented by the willingness of the driver to use parking reservation systems.20 While parking reservation systems were expected to reduce search time, the opposite is observed in this sample. Drivers willing to use reserved parking were more likely to spend more than 15 minutes searching for parking (16.2%) relative to drivers who do not use reserved parking (11.9%). This unexpected result suggests that drivers in this sample utilize parking reservations when free parking is not available or if the driver anticipates that no parking will be available when or where they stop for their 10-hour required break. Parking reservations in this sample were not related to region or day-of-week, but time-of-day impacted whether drivers utilized parking reservation systems. Reservation parking system use peaked between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 4:59 a.m., the times previously identified as being the most challenging for drivers to find available parking.

The relationship between ELD use and search time is shown in Table 13. Drivers utilizing ELDs were more likely to spend over 30 minutes searching for parking (10.6%) than drivers that do not use an ELD (5.7%). The observed relationship between ELD use and search time suggests that the ELD mandate will negatively impact search time for drivers not already using ELDs.

20 In this instance, “reserves parking” group is comprised of drivers who have reserved parking in the past and/or reserved parking during the course of the 14-day diary.

“ELD leaves no room for

dealing with full truck stops

making it nearly impossible

to preplan.”

Flatbed Driver from

Alabama


Table 13: Daily Search Time by ELD Use

4.42 Remaining Drive Time

Anecdotally it has been reported by both commercial drivers and motor carriers that drivers will park their trucks in advance of running out of available HOS drive hours out of concern over their ability to find parking farther down the road. Through the truck parking diaries the research team sought to quantify this “remaining drive time” (revenue time foregone due to early parking).

Figure 9 displays driver 14-day averages of remaining drive time. Driver averages of 31 to 60 minutes of remaining drive time per day was the most frequent (39.9%), followed by driver averages of 61 to 120 minutes of unused drive time (32.4%). A median of 56 minutes of remaining drive time was observed in this sample. Assuming average truck speeds of 39.98 miles per hour (MPH)21, 250 days worked per year, and remaining drive time of 56 minutes per day, over 9,300 additional revenue-earning miles could be driven per driver each year. Utilizing ATRI’s Operational Costs of Trucking driver wage cost of $0.499 per mile, this loss of revenue time/miles equates to reduced earnings of $4,600 per driver per year.22 With average driver pay at $42,500 annually, the lack of

21 ATRI derived this speed using several datasets from the ATRI/FHWA Freight Performance Measures (FPM) program. ATRI analyzed one full week of national FPM data in each of the four seasons in 2010 (February, May, August, October). This dataset consisted of over 110 million truck speed data points. The average speed figure was also validated by multiple motor carriers from various sectors of the industry. The 39.98 mph figure more accurately represents an average operational speed since it includes speeds in all types of operational conditions. 22 Torrey, W.F., & Murray, D. September 2016. “Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2016 Update.” American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

Less than 15 Minutes

16 - 30 Minutes

More than 30 Minutes

ELD 70.7% 18.7% 10.6%

No ELD 77.4% 17.0% 5.7%

“Near metro areas, truck stops fill up

fast. If you are able to park you will

surely get blocked in by drivers

creating their own parking space in a

non-parking area. Parking early and

choosing a parking place where you

won’t get blocked is the only

advantage you have. Sacrificing

drive time is a must to find a safe and

legal place to park, or you may be

forced to violate HOS rules.

Compromising my safety, safety of

assigned equipment, and public safety

is not an option for me.”


Pennsylvania


available parking is effectively reducing the average driver’s wages by 10 percent annually.23

Figure 9: Average Remaining Drive Time

Average remaining drive time (per driver) by compensation structure is shown in Figure 10. Drivers compensated per load were more likely to have at least an hour of unutilized drive time on average (60.7%) relative to drivers compensated per mile (37.8%), indicating that these drivers may take a more conservative approach to securing parking when it is available rather than risking accumulating more miles in hopes of finding available parking downstream.

23 Bureau of Labor Statistics (May 2015). “Occupational Employment Statistics.” Available Online: http://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm. Accessed November 23, 2016.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm


Figure 10: Average Remaining Drive Time by Compensation Structure

Several other driver characteristics, including ELD use, parking reservation system use, and frequency a driver parked for 10-hour breaks at customers, were examined but were not found to have a relationship with unused drive time.

4.5 Lost Truck Parking Capacity

Another issue exacerbating the impact of insufficient parking supply for drivers is the use of truck parking spaces by vehicles not subject to HOS or with the space requirements of a tractor trailer combination, such as recreational vehicles (RVs), bobtails, or construction equipment. These other vehicles utilizing truck parking spaces are referred to here as non-commercial motor vehicles (non-CMVs). A 1996 study found that ten percent of truck parking capacity is reduced by non-CMV occupation of truck parking spaces.24 In the ATRI truck parking diaries, drivers were asked to document the number of truck parking spaces occupied by non-CMVs to build on existing knowledge on the effect non-CMV use of truck parking spaces impacts truck drivers. The analyses of lost capacity are segmented by whether any parking capacity is lost due to non-CMVs, rather than the count of non-CMVs. Specific numbers of lost spaces are omitted here because of the large bins that were reported. Management of truck parking spaces could mitigate some of the issues introduced by non-CMV use of truck parking spaces.

24 Trucking Research Institute, Apogee Research, Inc., & Wilbur Smith Associates. May 1996. “Commercial Driver Rest Area Requirements: Making Space For Safety.” Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/commercial.pdf

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/commercial.pdf


Figure 11 displays the regional distribution of truck parking spaces occupied by non-CMVs. The Southeast region had the most observations of non-CMV occupation of truck parking spaces (42.1%), while the Midwest West/North Central region had the least (33.3%). Occupation of truck parking spaces by non-CMVs did not appear to vary by whether a location was designated as urban, suburban, or rural.

Figure 11: Percent of Parking Stops with Non-CMVs25 Observed in Truck Parking

Spots by Region

Non-CMV occupation of truck parking spaces, by day-of-week is shown in Figure 12. Observations of non-CMVs occupying of truck parking spaces peaks on Sundays (40.2%), followed by Saturdays and Mondays (37.3%). The weekend peaks of non-CMV demand for parking spaces observed here are likely the result of weekend travel patterns for the general population.

25Non-CMVs include RVs, construction equipment and bobtails.


Figure 12: Percent of Parking Stops with Non-CMVs Observed in Truck Parking Spots by Day-of-Week

Table 14 displays whether a parking area had spaces occupied by non-CMVs, by time-of-day. In this sample, non-CMV use of truck parking spaces and truck driver demand for parking spaces for long breaks peak simultaneously. The concurrent nature of these peak demand periods aggravates existing truck parking shortages.

Table 14: Truck Parking Spaces Occupied by Non-CMVs by Time-of-Day

Time

Mid

nig

ht.

-

4:5

9 a

.m.

5:0

0 a

.m. -

8:5

9 a

.m.

9:0

0 a

.m. -

11:5

9 a

.m.

No

on

–

3:5

9 p

.m.

4:0

0 p

.m. -

6:5

9 p

.m.

7:0

0 p

.m. -

11:5

9 p

.m.

Percent of Parking Stops with Non-CMVs Observed in Truck Parking Spots

37.5% 29.5% 33.7% 34.7% 40.1% 41.7%

Non-CMV occupation of truck parking spaces by location type is shown in Table 15, and is most likely to be observed in public rest areas (48.8%) than private truck stops (43.0%) in this sample. Differences in management of truck parking use by employees of truck stops or law enforcement may explain this disparity.


Table 15: Spaces Occupied by Non-CMVs by Location

Location Type Percent of Parking Stops

with Non-CMVs Observed in Truck Parking Spots

Public Rest Area 48.8%

Private Truck Stop 43.0%

4.6 Stop Locations

Drivers were asked what factors influenced their stop location choice (Table 16). Factors relating to productivity, proximity to route/destination and width of space/ease of access, were among the top five factors selected. The choice of ease of access corroborates some drivers’ additional comments that they refuse to park in spaces where they are likely to be blocked in by drivers who arrive later, and are concerned about collisions resulting in property damage. Parking availability and basic human needs (restroom/showers and food) were also ranked in the top five factors when choosing where to stop. Company policy and customer loyalty programs also influence stop locations for 10-hour required breaks. The relative lack of emphasis on internet (6.9%) may be the result of the relative ubiquity of mobile hotspots and smartphone technologies. Weather conditions were not a factor in this research as the diaries were completed between April and August.

“Even when parking is found there are

times I am not able to go into the bunk

until I have trucks parked on both sides

of me. I have been hit in truck stops

three times in the last 18 months by

other drivers backing in.”

Flatbed Driver from Pennsylvania


Table 16: Factors Influencing Where Drivers Stop for 10-Hour Required HOS

Breaks

Important Factor Percent of Responses

Proximity to Route / Destination 96.5%

Restroom / Showers 79.8%

Expected Parking Availability 75.5%

Width of Parking Space / Ease of Access 31.9%

Restaurant 30.5%

Security 20.3%

Company Policy / Loyalty Program 18.1%

Internet 6.9%

Laundry 4.0%

Maintenance / Service Center 3.7%

Weather Conditions 3.6%

The most frequent stop locations for 10-hour required breaks are shown in Table 17. In this sample, drivers primarily spent the 10-hour mandated breaks at private truck stops (71.4%), followed by public rest areas (9.6%). Drivers also stopped at customers (shippers/receivers/consignees) and businesses (grocery stores/shopping malls) with regularity. The amenities offered at private truck stops likely explain driver preferences for spending the 10-hour HOS required breaks at private truck stops.

Table 17: Stop Locations for 10-Hour Required Breaks

Location Type Percent

Private Truck Stop 71.4%

Public Rest Area 9.6%

Customer 8.9%

Business 4.3%

Terminal 4.1%

Table 18 displays the stop location distributions by gender. While the majority of men and women in this sample preferred stopping at private truck stops for their 10-hour breaks, more women than men were willing to use public rest stops for their 10-hour breaks (17% and 11% respectively).


Table 18: Stop Location for 10-Hour Required Break by Gender

Gender Public Rest Area Private Truck Stop

Male 11% 89%

Female 17% 83%

“I am reluctant to eat by myself in a sit down restaurant. The women I know

would rather think ahead, go grocery shopping and prepare a healthy, quiet

meal in the truck while watching our favorite program on DVD. We would also

rather use our own porta-potty instead of public facilities, especially at night.

So since we have everything we need in our micro homes, all we need is a legal

parking space. Rest areas also have more RV dumps and are much quieter at

night.”

Female Truckload Driver from Missouri


5.0 CONCLUSIONS

The truck parking diary research collected highly detailed data to provide greater understanding of the impact of truck parking shortages on commercial drivers. The importance of truck parking availability to truck drivers is demonstrated by the rank drivers ascribed to expected truck parking availability – the third most important factor when choosing where to stop for their 10-hour required break. The effects of truck parking shortages are further demonstrated through the remaining drive time, search time, and unauthorized/undesignated truck parking observed in the truck parking diaries.

The truck parking diary findings, which related to time-of-day, day-of-week, and some region-related issues, reinforced findings from truck driver surveys in the Jason’s Law Report.

Weekends had lower demand for parking than weekdays. On weekends, unauthorized/undesignated parking occurred less often and drivers spent less non-productive search time finding parking. However, more non-CMV occupation of truck parking spaces was observed on weekends in this sample.

Parking demand fluctuates significantly depending on the time-of-day, with peak demand occurring in the evening and early morning hours (Table 19). The parking diaries data reinforced this assertion. Search time peaked between 4:00 p.m. – 11:59 p.m. Unauthorized/undesignated parking peaked later than search time during the hours of 7:00 p.m. – 4:59 a.m., the result of drivers arriving at a parking location during peak demand periods when most available parking has been taken. The issues of insufficient supply are further exacerbated by the peak truck parking demand period aligning with the same times as when non-CMVs are most likely to occupy truck parking spaces. More flexible shipper/receiver appointment times could allow drivers to shift when they operate to less busy times, partially alleviating time-of-day parking issues.

Table 19: Truck Parking Issues by Time-of-Day

Parking Issue

Mid

nig

ht

-

4:5

9 a

.m.

5:0

0 a

.m.

-

8:5

9 a

.m.

9:0

0 a

.m.

-

11:5

9 a

.m.

No

on

-

3:5

9 p

.m.

4:0

0 p

.m. -

6:5

9 p

.m.

7:0

0 p

.m. -

11:5

9 p

.m.

Search Time Peak

Non-CMV Occupation of Truck Parking Spaces

Peak

Unauthorized Parking Peak Peak


Regional truck parking diary data did not align perfectly with the truck driver survey results from the Jason’s Law Report. Regions identified as problematic in the truck parking diaries frequently included the South Atlantic, Southwest, and Pacific regions. These disparities may be the result of variations in accuracy of diary entries across respondents or overestimating the impact of truck parking issues on retrospective surveys such as the one done for the Jason’s Law Report.

Diary data provided insight into the negative impact that the ELD mandate may have on existing truck parking supply issues. Diary data shows drivers with ELDs spent more time searching for parking than drivers without ELDs. The observed increase in search time for ELD users is likely caused by the differential in flexibility between ELDs and paper logs – ELDs automatically record change of duty status to the minute, while paper logs use 15-minute blocks. The ELD mandate will take away the flexibility that drivers with paper logs currently have and drivers may adjust behaviors to find safe parking with reduced flexibility. These behavioral changes may include using drive time to search for parking.

ATRI driver respondents “gave up” an average of 56 minutes of available drive time per day parking early rather than risking not being able to find parking down the road. This unused drive time effectively reduces an individual driver’s productivity by 9,300 revenue-earning miles annually – which equates to lost wages of $4,600 annually. These productivity losses may reduce driver wages by up to 10 percent.

Factors related to where drivers choose to stop for 10-hour required HOS breaks are largely practical – with proximity to route ranked first, followed by restroom/shower access, expected parking availability, and width of space/ease of access. For 10-hour required HOS breaks, drivers devoted more time to finding parking to ensure that they had all of these basic amenities. Conditions could potentially be improved by adding to truck parking along major freight corridors and near urban areas, providing parking with basic facilities. Such locations may lack the amenities desired for longer breaks, but would meet drivers’ most basic needs (proximity, restrooms/showers, available parking).

Finally, while the Truck Driver Diary research did not specifically solicit parking-related information or impacts associated with “autonomous trucks” (ATs), ATRI’s recent report on the impact that ATs will have on truck parking detailed the significant impacts on the dynamics of truck parking supply and demand that ATs would have.26

26 Short, J. & Murray, D. November 2016. “Identifying Autonomous Vehicle Technology Impacts on the Trucking Industry.” American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

“I was 43 miles from truck stops in

Ruther Glen, VA but only had 41 minutes

left to drive. My truck is governed at 62

mph. If I had a faster truck, I surely

would have made it there before hitting

my 11-hour limit.”

LTL Driver from Ontario


7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The results from the truck parking diaries provide insight to the potential solutions that various industry stakeholders could employ to improve truck parking issues and public safety. These actions are delineated as follows.

Public Sector. Numerous opportunities for improving truck parking availability exist for state transportation agencies. Some states are creating information systems that

provide real-time parking availability information to drivers, to better match existing supply with demand. However, many existing parking issues are caused by inadequate parking supply. Low cost solutions to inadequate parking supply include increasing public rest area time limits to allow drivers to take mandatory HOS breaks and allowing parking at public facilities such as weigh stations and public works facilities. Long-term solutions require increased investments, such as reopening public rest areas that have been closed, expanding existing facilities, or developing new facilities. Local laws may currently limit private parking capacity through

truck stop size and/or location zoning restrictions. A less capital-intense method of improving truck parking supply may be to reduce the legal obstacles that private truck stop operators face when opening or expanding facilities.

Truck Stop Operators. Private truck stops are drivers’ preferred location in ATRI’s research for 10-hour required HOS breaks. Currently, truck parking reservation systems are available at two major chains, TA/Petro and Pilot/Flying J. At the time of publication, both chains operate parking reservation systems where reservations start at 4 p.m. – which the truck parking diaries and Jason’s Law Report data identified to be peak times for parking-related issues. While these systems may help match available supply with demand, reservation systems do not solve the issues of inadequate supply overall. Inadequate supply could be improved by expanding existing private sector parking locations or building new ones. However, these solutions are capital-intense and face numerous legal obstacles, although there is some precedent for private truck stops using public sector funding. The primary areas identified for improvement in the diary data relate to non-CMV (RVs, bobtail trucks, dropped trailers, construction equipment) use of truck parking spaces. While truck stop operators also want to serve patrons driving non-CMVs, several steps to improve space

“The first thing states do when they

cut budgets is to close rest areas. So

we cannot depend on them to be open

when we need them. Some states are

‘no trucks allowed’ in some rest areas

or restricted to 2 hrs. And if we use

them, we risk having our break

interrupted by a DOT inspection.”


Oklahoma

“I’ve been kicked out of truck stops due

to overcrowding. I’ve been kicked out

of rest areas wondering if I will have

a safe haven for my 10-hour break. It

is the most stressful aspect of the job.”

Flatbed Driver from Alabama


utilization may be taken. The first relates to driver parking behavior, where multiple spots are needlessly used by a single vehicle. Truck stop enforcement of “parking manners” to maximize existing supply could improve capacity issues. Another issue identified in the diaries is the use of truck parking spaces by bobtail trucks. Dedicated bobtail truck parking or allowing bobtail trucks to park in the car lot would prevent bobtail trucks from using parking that could accommodate a tractor trailer combination.

Motor Carriers. Motor carrier policies and shipper/receiver relations present opportunities for improved driver productivity. Improvements in productivity may produce other positive results including increased driver compensation associated with increased revenue time/mileage.

Carrier Paid Reservations. Reservation fees are covered by the carrier for 15 percent of drivers in this sample. These policies may encourage drivers to use reservation systems when they would not otherwise, providing drivers with certainty of safe and legal parking during peak demand days/hours. Carrier-paid reservation fees may be beneficial in several situations. First, if fleet drivers typically use drive time to search for parking instead of driving revenue-earning miles, productivity gains from parking certainty could potentially exceed the costs of a reservation fee. Driver retention rates could potentially improve from carrier-paid reservations by reducing the stress drivers face finding parking and allowing drivers to drive more revenue-earning miles. If carrier-paid reservation fees improve driver retention rates, reduced training costs could accrue. Second, the transport of specialized cargo may be easier with the use of reservation systems. Examples include the time-of-day legal restrictions states have for over-size/over-weight vehicle configurations and the need for security for the transport of hazardous materials or high value cargo. Consideration for how motor carrier policies interact with time drivers spend searching for parking may be relevant, such as a policy where observed illegal parking (when not broken down) is grounds for immediate termination.

“With more truck stops implementing

reserved parking spots, it makes it

more challenging if your company

doesn’t reimburse reservation fees. I

assume most companies don’t. It's

nice to have a spot available late at

night when you pull in, but most of the

spots go unused each night. I haven’t

seen more than half of the available

spots used at the stops I’ve been to.

But, if you're not willing to pay $12,

they are just unavailable spots.”

Truckload Driver from Arkansas


Shipper/Receiver Relations. Providing drivers more flexibility in appointment times with shippers/receivers would allow drivers to shift times of operation to off-peak hours, and seek parking during off-peak hours. 660 Minutes identifies numerous strategies to reduce inefficient time spent at shippers/receivers, including, reducing loading/unloading time, switching from live loading to drop and hook operations, and making appointment times more flexible.27

Truck Drivers. Driver behavior is the primary area where drivers can impact truck parking issues. While the parking diaries did not directly relate planning behaviors to productivity outcomes, the drivers’ open-ended responses indicate that planning is crucial to maximizing revenue-earning miles. Drivers, to the extent that appointment times allow, can further improve their productivity by shifting hours of operations. Time spent searching for parking can be reduced by taking 10-hour required HOS breaks during off-peak demand hours, typically 5:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Shifting days of operation to include weekends may additionally improve productivity, as the truck parking diaries demonstrate fewer parking issues on weekends relative to weekdays. Additionally, if drivers collectively parked in designated spaces (never taking up multiple spaces if not over-size/over-weight), some additional parking capacity may be realized.

27 JB Hunt. “660 Minutes: How Improving Driver Efficiency Increases Capacity.” 2015. http://blog.jbhunt.com/wp-content/themes/files/pdf/660_Minutes.pdf. Accessed November 28, 2016.

“If a driver cannot find safe, legal

parking, he will be faced with the

options of running in violation of

federally mandated HOS, or putting

themselves at risk of a ticket or tow.

A driver cannot always plan every

trip to ensure an early enough

stopping time to guarantee parking.

We are told when and where to pick

up and then when and where to

deliver.”

Tank Truck Driver from North

Carolina


APPENDIX A: Pre-Aualifying Survey




APPENDIX B:

Sample of Truck Parking Pre-Diary Participant Survey and Diary Page




APPENDIX C: Region Definitions from Jason’s Law Report

Northeast: New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,

Massachusetts, Rhode Island

South Atlantic: Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,

Florida

Midwest/East North Central: Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio

Midwest/West North Central: Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,

Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa

Southeast: Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Alabama

Southwest: Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana

Mountain: Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico

Pacific: Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii

December 2016

Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study – Real World Insights from Truck Parking Diaries

Documents

Managing Critical Truck Parking Case Study – Real World Insights