Introduction
Hours of service (HOS) regulations are issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to govern the working hours of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. HOS rules limit when and for how long CMV drivers operate. These limits and regulations are based on exhaustive but highly debated scientific reviews designed to ensure that truck drivers get adequate rest to operate safely. HOS rules take into account existing fatigue research and the FMCSA has worked closely with organizations like the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies and the National Institute for Occupational Safety.
The FMCSA is proposing changes to HOS rules and is encouraging all interested parties to comment on the proposed rule changes.
History
The first HOS rules were enacted in December 1937 by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). There were some revisions in the early years but then the rules remained unchanged until 1962. Early HOS rules included limiting drivers to 10 hours of driving in a 24 hour period with at least 8 hours off duty. Drivers could be on duty 60 hours in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days. The 1962 revision dropped the 24 hour requirement and allowed drivers to operate 10 hours, take 8 hours off and then drive again. Those changes lasted for over 40 years.
The next notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) came in 2000 requiring that HOS rules be science based. It is hard to argue against that. The agency collected relevant studies and completed its comprehensive Commercial Motor Vehicle Driver Fatigue and Alertness Study (a joint effort with Canada and the trucking industry). FMCSA conducted nationwide public hearings on the NPRM and three two-day public roundtable discussions with expert panels on issues like traffic safety, human factors, and fatigue to evaluate the science and take regulatory actions. Finally on April 28, 2003, the agency announced the revised HOS rules. Driving time was extended from 10 to 11 hours but total on-duty hours were limited to 14 consecutive hours after coming on duty (as opposed to 15 cumulative on-duty hours). The rest period was increased from 8 to 10 hours. Drivers were given discretion to restart the calculation of weekly hours anytime they took an off duty break of at least 34 consecutive hours. A petition was filed against these rules in June 2003 by Public Citizens, Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways (CRASH) and Parents Against Tired Truckers (PATT). FMCSA published final amended rules in August 2005. The amended final rules addressed driver health issues and retained the 11 hours of driving, 14 hours on-duty window, 10 hours off duty and 34 hours restart period. These rules were also challenged by Public Citizen and Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association. On December 2007, to prevent disruption in enforcement and compliance, the interim final rule confirmed both the 11 hours of driving time and the 34 hours restart rule.
The industry adapted quite well to the new rules. Shippers and carriers recognized that with 1 less on-duty hour it was imperative to not tie up drivers at the dock loading and unloading trailers or just waiting for space. Carriers increased stop-off charges to discourage low utilization multi-stop loads and shippers responded by reducing multi-stop loads. The fear that tuck utilization would decline under the new rules was mitigated by improvements in logistics practices. Highway safety continued its steady and dramatic improvement in the post-deregulation (1980) era.
Proposed Rules
Agitation against the rules continued unabated on two fronts. Well-meaning but ill-informed self-proclaimed safety groups (CRASH, PATT) argued that the fewer hours a driver works and drives the safer he is. This ignores the obvious impact that the fewer hours drivers can work, the more drivers are required and that pressing the industry to hire more drivers means more inexperienced drivers and thus less safe drivers. Less productivity also means more trucks on the road for the same amount of freight which is also a safety hazard. The second group is the Teamsters who want to harm the productivity and increase the cost of non-union trucking for obvious reasons.
On December 23rd 2010, the FMCSA proposed new HOS rules. The key proposed changes from the current requirement include:
- Driving time would be limited to either 10 or 11 hours followed by 10 consecutive hours of off-duty time. The FMCSA is not willing to commit on the most vital element of the new rules, kicking the can down the road until after the comment period but does favor a reduction to 10 hours.
- The 34 hours restart is retained but subject to limits. A restart must include two periods between midnight and 6 a.m. and could be started no sooner than 7 days (168 hours) after the beginning of previous designated restart. The 7-day requirement creates a mandatory "weekend."
- Decreasing daily "on-duty" time from 14 to 13 hours. Drivers could still drive the 10 or 11 hours within the 14 hour "window".
- The on-duty window would be made more flexible allowing it to extend to 16 hours twice a week. The extra time cannot be driving or on-duty though, only administrative.
- Drivers are required to take a minimum 30 minute break after driving or working 7 hours coming off their last off-duty period.
Quite simply, this is nuts.
The industry has shown dramatically better safety results under the 2003 rules so there is no reason and no scientific evidence to justify reducing driving hours from 11 to 10. The industry hoped for simplification but got a hodgepodge of exceptions and loopholes that are going to be very difficult for drivers to follow. As if driver logs are not complicated enough already, how can the agency expect drivers to now make sure that it is OK twice a week to work 16 hours but not 3 times. Restricting the 34 hour restart to include two (2) midnight to 6 AM windows is not only complicated but easily turns 34 hours into 40 to 48 hours depending on when the 34 hours starts.
There is no doubt, that the proposed rules will harm productivity in the trucking industry and drive up the cost of putting products on retail shelves. There is no evidence that the increase in costs will result in safer highways or be offset by a decrease in costs associated with accidents. The FMCSA created a new driver health impact factor to justify the increased costs of its regulatory actions by claiming that better driver health and longevity would offset the loss of productivity. This is how the agency describes the benefits of the rule in its Regulatory Impact Analysis: "The benefits consist of safety benefits from the reduction in fatigue-related crashes and health benefits from drivers working long hours potentially getting more sleep and reducing their mortality risk." Rob Abbott, Vice President of Safety Policy at the ATA is a good interpreter: "In plain English, what they're saying is that while we won't necessarily see enough reduced crashes to justify the tremendous economic impact, drivers who get more rest, work shorter shifts and have longer breaks will get more sleep and over their lifetimes that means they'll be healthier and live longer lives." The agency calculates this health-related benefit to be worth $690 million.
What should you do?
The comment period is open until February 28, 2011. It is imperative that you comment online, through mail or by fax and express your dissatisfaction with the proposed changes. The fastest and easiest way to make your voice heard is via the web. Go to the government's regulatory web site, and click on "Submit a comment". In the dialogue box for "Enter Keyword or ID" enter: FMCSA-2004-19608 and click on "search". In the far right hand column of the search results click "submit a comment". I suggest you draft your comment in advance as the site allows only 20 minutes to type in your comment, which can be no more than 2000 words. You can cut and paste your drafted comment into the web site.
If President Obama is serious about reforming the regulatory process and eliminating regulations that place an undue burden on business (The Wall Street Journal), this is a good place to start. Scrap the revised rules and stick with what we have. It passes the best test of all – it works and safety is improving every year.