ATA Challenges Hours Schedule, Safety Advocates Challenge Content
Oliver B.Patton
Washington Editor
As the new hours of service regulations went into effect Oct. 1, there was action on several fronts to delay enforcement or alter the rule.
The American Trucking Associations asked state governors to make sure police follow the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's policy of "soft" enforcement through the end of the year.
ATA said that even though the safety agency is taking a hands-off approach except when a violation is especially serious, some states still can go ahead with full enforcement if they choose to. To forestall that, ATA President and CEO Bill Graves asked the governors to follow FMCSA's lead.
This situation exists because some states automatically adopt FMCSA regulations when they go into effect, which means that they can begin enforcement right away. Other states take more time because they must go through an administrative or legislative process to put the rules into effect. Graves wanted the governors in the automatic states to know that both the industry and the enforcement community need time to adjust to changes in the rule.
At the same time, ATA had legislation introduced in the House to postpone enforcement of the new sleeper berth provision until Jan. 1, 2006.
"It would be unwise and irresponsible to subject truck drivers and motor carriers to fines, citations, and out-of-service violations because they have not been given adequate time to understand and comply with the new sleeper berth rule," the bill says.
It was introduced by Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, and referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
The sleeper berth provision is of particular concern to ATA and others in the industry. Formerly, team and solo drivers could split their 10-hour break into two periods, neither of which could be less than two hours. Now they may still split their time, but one of the periods in the berth must be at least eight hours. The second period of at least two hours may be taken in or out of the berth. The intent, the agency said, is to give drivers seven to eight hours of continuous rest "to maintain a healthy lifestyle."
Industry interests say that this limits flexibility and will be hard to enforce, and that carriers and enforcement personnel will need all of FMCSA's grace period to adjust their operations.
Still pending at FMCSA is a petition by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association to let drivers follow the pre-October sleeper rule.
In another development, safety advocates and the Teamsters union asked FMCSA to reconsider key provisions of the rule.
The petition repeats arguments that the advocates have made in the past against the agency's policies and processes, and can be seen as a prelude to a possible court suit against the rule, although no such action had been taken as HDT went to press.
The petition was filed by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways, the Teamsters union, Parents Against Tired Truckers, Public Citizen and the Trauma Foundation. They claim that the agency failed to justify key provisions of the 2003 rule, as well as parts of the recent revisions.
Specifically, they say the agency did not justify longer weekly hours, the 11th hour of driving time, the 34-hour restart and the possibility of a 21-hour shift schedule. They also challenge the recent decision to permit short-haul drivers to work 16-hour shifts two days a week. And they want the agency to expedite its rulemaking for onboard electronic recorders.
They contend that the agency gives more weight to economic efficiency than to safety and driver health.
"Time and again the preamble to [the] 2005 final rule cites the economic efficiencies that benefit the trucking industry as outweighing the safety costs that will be borne by the public," the petition says.
"In every instance where safety and economic burdens are balanced, the agency has opted to choose economic productivity of the trucking industry instead of determining the issue in favor of public safety. The determinations made in the 2005 final rule are openly contrary to the agency's mission and highest priority, and should be reconsidered."
The agency is reviewing the petition, said spokesman Jim Lewis.
Washington Report continued...
