WASHINGTON - There is going to be an interesting debate in the United States during the next year or two over the use of "electronic data recorders" in over-the-road trucks and buses.
A sorta subrosa discussion of the issue has been going on for the last half-dozen years since the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration first surfaced the idea.
The issue gained new momentum and increased visibility this past summer when a federal court threw out the now one-year-old hours-of-service rules for truckers. In its opinion, the court said the FMCSA was missing the boat by not considering electronic on-board recorders, or EOBRs as they are increasingly being called, for enforcing hours-of-service regulations.
Within a matter of weeks of the court decision, the FMCSA issued a request for comments on the current state of EOBR technology and potential amendments to its regulations concerning the use of on-board recording devices to document HOS compliance.
The deadline for issuing the comments recently closed and large segments of the truck and bus industries weighed in with their opinions, along with safety organizations, data recording suppliers and others.
Significantly, some major truck companies and trucking associations offered the FMCSA conditional support for mandating the use of EOBRs. Others in the trucking industry, however, still maintained that the technology should not be forced on truckers.
The seeming shift in position by powerful elements of the trucking industry caught some in the motorcoach industry by surprise.
It was just one year ago this week that the American Trucking Associations, the Truckload Carriers Association and the Distribution & Less Than Truckload Carriers Conference sent a detailed letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation saying they only supported the voluntary use of EOBRs. And even then, the trucking groups wanted a whole host of performance standards and other requirements to be established.
A year later, the tide may be turning among truckers and the movement undoubtedly has to do with a number of factors, including the court decision and its recommendations, the pending rewrite of the hours-of-service rules by the FMCSA, the fear the FMCSA may try to force something on the industry that is half-cocked or produces unintended consequences, and the possibility of a phase-in of EOBRs that would give some segments of the industry advantages over others.
Whatever the motivation, several large truck fleets, including Overnite Transportation Co., FedEx Express and J.B. Hunt Transport Inc., and the American Moving and Storage Association offered conditional support for the technology. Their backing was contained in the comments they submitted to the FMCSA.
At the same time, the American Trucking Associations, taking a cue from its big members, also edged closer to supporting EOBR technology, but the association did not fully endorse making it a requirement.
"ATA policy continues to support voluntary industry adoptions, use and evaluation of EOBR technology, as well as a performance criteria approach," the ATA said in its comments to the FMCSA. "Some ATA members, however, are beginning to voice qualified support for EOBR use, but they continue to express a number of legitimate concerns that need to be addressed."
J.B. Hunt told the FMCSA it support mandatory requirements for electronic on-board recorders but only if all carriers are required to install them simultaneously, with no phase-in.
One trucking group that voiced its continued opposition to an EOBR mandate was the Truckload Carriers Association. However, the TCA said the FMCSA could encourage the voluntary use of the technology with "strong tax incentives and legal protections."
Several groups filing comments on the issue shared the TCA's concern about legal protections and said a condition of their support for EOBR technology would be that the data be used only for HOS enforcement.
Meanwhile, the motorcoach industry's two associations, the American Bus Association and the United Motorcoach Association remain resolutely opposed to mandated EOBRs. Excerpts from the comments they filed with the FMCSA are elsewhere on this page.