Black Boxes: There's Still Time To Have Your Say
When the proposed rulemaking appears, you'll need to move fast.
Once again, the feds have their sights set on requiring electronic onboard recorders in trucks. It's time to roll out whatever ammunition you have to make your case - for or against - the new rule.
The government couldn't make its first proposal stick back in 2000; it went down along with the proposed hours of service rules. Presumably the new recorder proposal will again aim to verify carriers' compliance (or lack thereof) with the hours rules. That would likely mean that medium trucks, as well as heavies, would come under the onboard recorder law.
As things stand now, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is analyzing comments from the trucking industry in response to FMCSA's September advance notice of proposed rulemaking. Those comments, along with government research and comments from other parties, will be used to develop a proposed rule.
The rule will be published - probably in the next few months - in the Federal Register, and further comments will be invited before it's finalized.
Historically, that second comment period has been pretty brief. That's why, if you didn't submit comments earlier, now is the time to put them together. That way you'll be ready to send them on short notice.
In 2000, the feds' proposed rule asked that the onboard recorders be tamper-proof and perform these functions:
• Driver identification.
• In-vehicle display or printout of time record for driver and law enforcement.
• Compute total driving, on-duty and off-duty hours in relation to daily weekly or longer period.
• Calculate time/location so duty status changes can be recorded.
At this point there appears to be no reason why the new proposed rulemaking will be substantially different. But it is clear that both FMCSA and the National Transportation Safety Board are serious about mandating recorders.
Most in the industry are opposed to a mandate; they'd rather recorders be applied on a voluntary basis.
We agree.
The Truckload Carriers Assn. developed a questionnaire for its members to use in response to the September advance notice of proposed rulemaking. Questions in it may help you develop your own comments. They go like this:
• Do you think electronic onboard recorders are needed, and are they technologically adequate to monitor hours of service?
• Has your company had prior experience with them?
• What are your fears and concerns of a federal mandate (cost, privacy, reliability, potential to worsen the driver shortage, existing experience, who owns the data, etc.)?
• Are there any circumstances under which the recorders would be acceptable to your company?
Those questions reflect the concerns of just about everyone in trucking, and no doubt most of what the government folks see from us will be anti-mandate.
Today's fears of a black box mandate are not unlike those of the early days of anti-lock braking, when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration forced a rule on the industry. Failures were rampant. Airport control towers, traffic lights and other signals allegedly caused trucks and buses to lose braking. A number catastrophic accidents were blamed on anti-lock before the Supreme Court threw the rule out. The technology wasn't ready.
That said, a lot of good things could come from using electronic onboard recorders. Some of the latest devices can go far beyond hours enforcement. They can include GPS, and are capable of recording speeding events, heavy braking, fast acceleration and tailgating to help measure driver performance.
Such things could help you weed out (or retrain) inefficient or unsafe drivers, which would translate to your bottom line.
But a mandate isn't the way to go.
Doug Condra
President
E-mail Doug Condra at dcondra@truckinginfo.com, or write PO Box W. Newport Beach, Calif. 92656.
