Coalition members detail varied, diverse reasons why an ELD delay is needed

By Land Line staff | 9/27/2017

With reasons as varied as the trucking operations they represent, a coalition detailed impending problems that truckers will face with the upcoming electronic logging mandate during an event Wednesday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

The groups came together to highlight the many reasons why there should be a delay in the Dec. 18 compliance deadline for the electronic logging mandate.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association is just one member of the group of 31 organizations in the coalition. Industries represented include agriculture, pyrotechnics, utility contractors, livestock and several others that will be negatively affected by the mandate.

“The electronic logging device mandate is written so broadly that it has far reaching implications well beyond the traditional trucking industry,” said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of OOIDA.

The group supports a bill proposed by U.S. Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, that would delay the ELD mandate for two years. Babin’s bill, H.R. 3282, the ELD Extension Act of 2017, would postpone the current implementation date from December 2017 to December 2019.

The coalition says the mandate should be delayed until the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration addresses numerous unresolved issues identified by impacted stakeholders.

There are significant technological and real-world concerns that have not been addressed by FMCSA. Among these concerns:

  • certification of devices (or lack thereof), 
  • connectivity problems in remote areas of the country, 
  • cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and 
  • the ability of law enforcement to access data. 

The FMCSA’s inability or refusal to resolve these issues makes the enactment of H.R. 3282 unquestionably necessary.

Listen to the full press conference here:

The ELD mandate is estimated to cost affected stakeholders more than $2 billion, making it one of the most expensive federal transportation rulemakings over the last decade. This is a massive, unfunded mandate that provides no safety, economic, or productivity benefits for most ensnared by the mandate. Notwithstanding the significant costs associated with the rule, it simply will not be ready for implementation on Dec. 18.

H.R. 3282 will provide FMCSA and impacted stakeholders more time to work out fundamental problems associated with the rule.

Commercial truck drivers are restricted to a limited number of working and driving hours under current regulations.

The FMCSA’s mandate requires that truck drivers use ELDs to track their driving and nondriving activities even though such devices can only track movement and location of a vehicle. OOIDA contends that requiring electronic monitoring devices on commercial vehicles does not advance safety since they are no more reliable than paper logbooks for recording compliance with hours-of-service regulations.

Copyright © OOIDA