ATA rallies up support for EOBRs

Avatar photo

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The American Trucking Associations (ATA) has issued a call to members of the upcoming conference committee on the surface transportation bill, to support a proposal to mandate electronic logging devices (or electronic on-board recorders) to ensure compliance with hours-of-service rules.

This, after the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) labeled the proposed law “burdensome” and “expensive.”

“We urge conferees in both bodies to adopt the Senate’s requirement for carriers to use electronic logging devices to monitor drivers’ hours-of-service compliance,” ATA president and CEO Bill Graves said. “Clearly, these devices lead to greater compliance with maximum driving limits – which is very good for the trucking industry as a whole and highway safety.”

The ATA says its member carriers have found the technology improves compliance, safety and operating efficiency.

“Many logging devices, or electronic on-board recorders, have additional functions that aid in managing fuel use, routes and other aspects of fleet operations – reducing fuel consumption and making carriers more efficient and environmentally responsible,” Graves said. “In addition, research shows that drivers at fleets using electronic logging devices report improved morale.”

The ATA said Congress should require all large trucks to be equipped with an electronic logging device to further improve trucking’s compliance and safety record.

Avatar photo

Truck News is Canada's leading trucking newspaper - news and information for trucking companies, owner/operators, truck drivers and logistics professionals working in the Canadian trucking industry.

Have your say

This is a moderated forum. Comments will no longer be published unless they are accompanied by a first and last name and a verifiable email address. (Today's Trucking will not publish or share the email address.) Profane language and content deemed to be libelous, racist, or threatening in nature will not be published under any circumstances.


  • OOIDA has it right. There are thousands of owner operators out there that would be forced to absorb the costs of this unnecessary mandate. No one needs “Big Brother” watching over their shoulder every minute of every day. If a company chooses to use EOBR, so be it…it shouldnt be the Governments job to force it on those who do not want it.

  • Managing fuel use – I already have that,I have an on board computer that came from the factory in my truck, it tells me both my current MPG and my average MPG, I also do my own IFTA,which tells fuel costs, average miles per gallon and miles traveled. I use this to help me spot any possible mechanical issues and to help me get peak MPG.
    Managing Routes- I have both online computer and onboard GPS to manage my routes already. My GPS is also programmed to track mileage, state mileage, upcoming maintenance due,and a host of other information if I need it..such as nearby repair facilities,etc.
    Environmentally Responsible- I have an on board charging system and my mpg is monitored for best performance. My truck has regular overhead adjustments.
    I am an owner-operator, as you can see, no one has more vested interest than me to run my equipment as efficiently as possible.
    Unlike a large company, I don’t have a lot people, loads to track or worry about it getting there on time as I am the person responsible for it all, I call the shots.
    I run paper logs, I know how they need to be filled out and I do so. In all the roadside stops and inspections I’ve been through, I’ve never had a logbook violation,because I pay close attention to the requirements,and I stay well within them. I also log the mileage at each stop so an officer can verify my driving time vs mileage.I do not let anyone rush me to get a load there, I simply remind them of the law, if they don’t like it, comes first.
    Therefore..I do not need any expensive on board computer system, a system that in spite of any bells or whistles, cannot monitor my or anyones condition before or during driving, therefore it has no effect at all on safety.
    It doesn’t know my physical condition, therefore how can it make me or the public highways safer?
    It’s an expensive, burdensome piece of junk that’s not needed and will not improve safety, it’s just a tool that the large trucking companies like and think everyone else needs too.

  • seems to me that, the big corps are making it easy for the drivers out there that don’t know how to complete an accurate daily log book. it also makes it easier for them to compile their records and saves them bucks on their driver training programs and office work. for the small guy it is just another way the feds can manipulate us in an already over taxed industry.
    just as bad as paying property taxes in a stae you don’t reside in, just because you drive through it.

  • OK, so if EOBR’s are so great, why do you need legislation? If they improve morale and increase efficiency, put them in voluntarily. I guess the rest of us dummies will just have to endure low morale and productivity.
    This seems to parallel the great speed limiter debate whereby Mr Bradley preached how great they are…but we still needed a law to make it happen. Go figure.

  • I love how the I’m against EOBR’S alway claim they know how to fill out a log book, but they are the ones getting the log book fines for violating the 11/14 and log not current. Then they also claim big brother will be looking over their shoulder, not the case since the info only goes to the company not to the Feds.

    Yes I understand that EOBR’S will have to have a button pused for off duty on duty and sleeper berth, but that’s a simple thing to do. Mybe a driver has to push a button to send info for the day to the office, simple again.

    Will it give a large company a advantage, nope because everyone is supposed to be logging legal. The only ones that will be hurt by having a EOBR are the drivers who cheat on their logs and no one else.

  • The fact is…The large trucking companies have the most citations and worst safety records compared to the small outfits, why? Is it lack of training on logbooks, no mechanical training or ability to recognize a mechanical problem and make their own simple repairs if needed, or is it being pushed? I can disable an on board recorder and falsify whatever I do after that just as easily as I could falsify a logbook if I chose to, so that arguement doesn’t hold water. If an on board recorder goes down, how do you backtrack your last 7 days or each day forward until it’s repaired?
    You’d use paper logs wouldn’t you? Do you leave your truck on the side of the road and have it towed because the EOBR went down?
    My Point. I keep reading how EOBR’s are being pushed in the name of safety, yet still see no connection, how? They make a driver no safer than a paper log does…it’s just a preference is all, nothing more.
    It makes it easier for big trucking management to track freignt and drivers, but for the little guy it’s a waste of money. There is no way that system or the subscription to use it is going to be cheaper than a paper logbook at $5 a month.
    If the Feds want see logs whether it by EOBR’s or paper,they have that right at anytime. “Safety” latley has been high and accidents are at one of their lowest points, I suppose that is due to EOBR’s? Bunk.
    There’s only one way to improve safety and it’s never changed…plenty of training,rest, being alert, recognizing mechanical problems and repairing them, watching out for hazards and the other guy and driving for conditions.
    Keeping safety always at the forefront. EOBR’s don’t have zip to do with any of that.

  • as a new to e-log driver, let me first state that I started on Paper drawing my lines and making my comments and even put the start and end millage of the day on each log. NEVER been late with a load on either side of the trip (pick up or Delivery) and NEVER had a violation, in-fact actually was told by a scale master that I should be a log book instructor. Under paper logs I start my day and made a mental note of what time I have to stop either before the 11th or 14th hour depending on my daily activity. If I didn’t stop at all, or if I did. Normally I always stopped at the 12th hour because of fuel, loading/unloading, meal breaks etc etc. Was put on E-logs with the carrier I driver for and for the first time felt pressure to run it out because I now have this box on my dash that counts down from 11:00 to 00:00. I never worried about what time it was before, if I felt tired I’d stop and take up to a 3 hr nap if time allowed sometimes less, if I was hungry I’d eat etc, now I look at the display and it’s telling me if I stop I’ll only have 6 hrs left oh wait make that 5hr 59min left better keep rolling I guess (yawning)

  • The ATA needs to get away from the EOBR issue and get to what they really need to do. They need to push the issue about drivers getting paid for WAITING TIME (with no free time), fueling, pre and post trip insp. and paperwork. With that in hand, DRIVER’s would opt to run legal and therefore there would be no falsification in paper logs. BUT the ATA is not going to do that because that would cost shippers and consignees $$$ and that would hurt the ATA’s backers behind all of this crap!

  • Mandating EOBRs would be a big step in the wrong direction. To allow the government to electronically surveil the American people is in violation of the constitution. Just because the technology exsists to do it doesn’t mean they should. I believe this will set precedent for the expansion of government surveillance. Alreday there is a proposal to put something similar into all new cars. Sure, law enforcement would love to tag and electronically track all American citizens to see if they break the law. Our founidng fathers must be turning in their graves.

    The old mandate has already been struck down in court due to the harrasment issue. On that subject, I have heard stories of a certain big company giving a full set of fresh hours on a driver’s EOBR after a day of driving. The judge that ruled against the mandate said that there are other issues that could be pursued against EOBRs including the 4th ammendment. So, the mandate has already had legal trouble, how can they issue the same mandate again? Also, didn’t the Supreme Court rule against the placement of GPS on a suspects car without a warrant? The Supreme Court may ultimately outlaw EOBRs. How could any real American be for this sort of thing? It’s outrageous.