Trucking Alliance Opposes HOS Fix in Senate Bill

May 2, 2016

By David Cullen

SHARING TOOLS        | Print Subscribe
Photo: Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
Photo: Virginia Tech Transportation Institute

A coalition of major carriers has come out firmly opposed to language put forth by the Senate Appropriations Committee to fix earlier legislative wording that muddied the future status of the 34-hour restart provision of the Hours of Service rule.

In a May 2 statement, the group also argues that Congress should leave the Hours of Service rule alone-- at least until data on driver fatigue is compiled after the upcoming electronic logging device mandate has gone into effect.

In its statement, The Trucking Alliance “urges the U.S. Senate to delete the proposed ’73 hours in a 7-day period’ provision from the bill” because HOS rules “should rely on sound science and statistical data to reduce truck driver fatigue.” 

The HOS provision in the Senate’s FY2017 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill (S.2844) reads: “If the 34-hour restart rule in effect on June 30, 2013, is restored, then drivers who use the 34-hour restart may not drive after being on duty more than 73 hours in a 7-day period." 

The Alliance statement, which was approved by  member companies JB Hunt Transport, Maverick Transportation, Dupre Logistics, and Knight Transportation, gives several reasons why the “73/7” provision should be dropped from the final THUD bill:

  • “Congress has mandated that interstate trucking companies install electronic logging devices by December 2017 to verify truck driver hours-of-service compliance. The statistical data produced by this technology should guide future changes in truck driver hours of service rules, rather than a political decision by Congress.” 
  • “The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration should keep its rulemaking authority over all aspects of truck driver hours of service rules. Codifying any part of the rule, as this language does, would make it virtually impossible for the FMCSA to change the rule, if ELD data show adjustments to the rule are necessary to reduce truck driver fatigue.” 
  • “The proposed ’73-hours in a 7-day period’ would create widespread confusion throughout the industry, since drivers operate under either a ’60-hour/7 days limit’ or a ’70-hour/8 days limit.’"
  • "Congress would unwittingly override existing rules and by adopting this language, actually create an additional 13 hours of work for drivers who are on the 60 hour/7-days schedule.”

The statement adds that the Alliance wants the Senate to  avoid "codifying" that provision as doing so would “also pre-empt the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration from making changes if this political change proves unsafe” once enough fatigue data from ELDs becomes available. 

As of now, the bill has been cleared for debate and amending on the floor of the Senate. The HOS repair must also be addressed by the House Appropriations Committee, which is expected to include it in their version of the THUD bill.

Related: Senate Bill Includes Hours-of-Service Fix; Demands Speed-Limiter Rule




  1. 1. Paul [ May 03, 2016 @ 07:45AM ]

    Once again we have people who have never seen the inside of a truck let alone been on the road in one, making rules for our industry. I guess I must be an exception because I really don't need a machine or a book to tell me when to sleep. I know because my body tells me....duh. And log book be damned, if I'm tired in the middle of the day, I'll take a nap. Driving tired is miserable, it's unsafe, and I won't do it. I'll manipulate my book to show I played by their rules, but actually did it by my rules. Bottom line is its safer....and that's what we all want, right. So, congress, why don't you try LESS rules and more flexibility instead of more rules and NO flexibility? And by the way, if you think ELD's are going to be the cure, you're wrong....people who want to skirt the rules, in no time, will find all the ways to defeat these new watchdog machines. Why don't we just have congress drive all the trucks by remote control? Then they can finally have the total control they want!!!

  2. 2. Bill [ May 04, 2016 @ 08:21AM ]

    Companies like J.B. Hunt and those others mentioned above are the reason the fmcsa mandated electronic logs in the first place. Those companies fought on the fmcsa' side to get them mandated because they already had them in their trucks, and they wanted owner operators to put them in their trucks as well. That's why they want congress out of it, because they have fmcsa eating out of their hands! Those large companies are also pushing for speed limiters and increased minimum liability coverage because they already have speed limiters and they are self insured, so raising the insurance minimums won't cost them a penny, but it will cost the independents.


Comment On This Story

Comment: (Maximum 2000 characters)  
Leave this field empty:
* Please note that every comment is moderated.


We offer e-newsletters that deliver targeted news and information for the entire fleet industry.


ELDs and Telematics

sponsored by
sponsor logo

Scott Sutarik from Geotab will answer your questions and challenges

View All

Sleeper Cab Power

Steve Carlson from Xantrex will answer your questions and challenges

View All