Final Summary of Discussion
Final Summary Introduction
Regulation Room is an open government pilot project aimed at increasing the breadth and quality of public participation in the rulemaking process. It is a collaboration between the Cornell eRulemaking Initiative (CeRI), which owns, designs, and operates the site, and the Department of Transportation, which has selected Regulation Room as its flagship initiative under the Open Government Directive.
From February 6–May 22, 2011, people could use Regulation Room to learn about and discuss a new rule, “Electronic On-board Recorders and Hours of Service Supporting Documents,” proposed by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration The agency proposing the EOBR rule (FMCSAFederal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (The agency proposing the EOBR Electronic on-Board Recorder (A device attached to commercial motor vehicles that tracks the number of hours drivers spend on the road) rule)) . This time frame coincided with the official comment period for the rule, which closed May 23, 2011.
On May 16 & 17, the Regulation Room team posted Draft Summaries of the discussion. All registered users were invited by email to review the drafts and suggest additions or changes until Sunday, May 22. In that time, 601 unique visitors visited the site and 5 commenters posted 10 suggestions. The team reviewed all suggestions and then prepared the Final Summaries that appear below.
On May 23, these Summaries were submitted, via Regulations.gov, to DOT Department of Transportation as a formal public comment in the rulemaking. (For more on the legal significance of this, see the FAQs.) Registered users received an email notifying them that the Final Summary had been posted on the site and submitted to DOT.
You may submit an individual comment directly to DOT Department of Transportation on the proposed rule by visiting Regulations.gov by midnight on Monday, May 23, 2011. DOT’s general policy is to consider late-submitted comments to the extent possible, but you should file your comment as close to May 23 as possible.
Materials from the Discussion Phase, including the Draft and Final Summaries, will remain available on Regulation Room for public review. A file of all content submitted by users will be made available to DOT Department of Transportation at its option. (This file will not include any personally identifiable information you did not choose to make publicly viewable on the site. See Privacy & Conditions.)
During the 106 days the rule was open on Regulation Room, a total of 5,328 unique visitors came to the site. There were 8,855 total visits, with people spending an average of 3.41 minutes on the site. Of the issue posts, the average time on the page was longest for What Will It Cost (4.48 minutes) and shortest for Would Penalties/Enforcement Change (2.13 minutes). The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was viewed 136 times; the proposed rule text was viewed 106 times.
Anyone could read material on the site, but registration was required to participate in the discussion. 104 people registered during the time the rule was open.
Based on answers to a survey at registration, 27% of those who registered said that they had previously submitted a comment in a federal rulemaking. A second survey question asked people to describe their interest in the rule. More than one category could be selected, so the numbers add up to more than 104.
Based on these responses, 33% were both CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles Drivers and CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles Owner/Managers. 61% of CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles Owner/Managers were Independent Owner-Operators or Owner/Operators leased to another carrier. 22% of all respondents said they use or have used an EOBR, AOBRD, or fleet A group of motor vehicles owned or leased by businesses or government agencies management system.
- CMV Driver: 54
- Long haul: 45
- Short haul: 29
- Passenger carrier: 2
- Hazmat: 11
- Other: 3 (including one who drove for agricultural purposes 4 times a year)
- CMV Owner/Manager: 61
- Independent Owner-Operator: 18
- Owner/Op leased to another carrier: 19
- Trucking business: 24
- Bus/motorcoach: 1
- Other: 10
- Number of vehicles/units: 21 responded
- 9 responded the number of vehicles units was 1
- 2 responded the number of vehicles/units was 2
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 3
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 10
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 11
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 40
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 3
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 70+
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 134
- 1 responded the number of vehicles/units was 5000+
- 2 did not identify the number of vehicles/units
- Use/have used EOBR, AOBRD or fleet A group of motor vehicles owned or leased by businesses or government agencies mgt system: 23
- Equipment manufacturer/supplier: 8
- Law Enforcement: 2
- Advocacy group: 3
- Interested member of the public: 9
- Researcher: 1 Field: Natural Language Processing
- Other: 4 (1 identified him/herself as a retired driver and DOT Department of Transportation educator)
NOTE: Regulation Room does not attempt to check whether people correctly identify their interests. For this reason, whenever the summary states a commenter’s interest, the description is based solely on information given by the commenter.
Of the 104 registered users, 68 posted 235 comments while the discussion was open. Site moderators posted a total of 111 comments. Comments by users were distributed as follows (these totals do not include moderator posts):
- Who would have to use and EOBR: 103 comments by 48 users
- What about privacy concerns: 33 comments by 11 users
- What will this cost: 64 comments by 21 users
- What about supporting documents: 11 comments by 5 users
- Would penalties/enforcement change: 20 comments by 12 users
- When would it take effect: 4 comments by an estimated 4 users
Four other people who did not comment elsewhere on the site endorsed comments. These included an independent owner/operator leased to another carrier, a short haul generally, <150 mi. from base for property carriers driver, an independent owner/operator who has used an EOBR Electronic on-Board Recorder (A device attached to commercial motor vehicles that tracks the number of hours drivers spend on the road) or other similar device, and one individual who did not indicate his/her interest.
Additionally, five users posted 10 comments on the Draft Summaries.
Final Summaries of Discussion
- Who would have to use and EOBR?
- What about privacy concerns?
- What will this cost?
- What about supporting documents?
- Would penalties/enforcement change?
- When would it take effect?
Thank you for being part of the Regulation Room experiment in making important federal rulemakings more accessible to the public!
To help us make Regulation Room better, please take this SHORT survey on your experience. (If you’ve already taken the survey on using RegulationRoom for the EOBR Electronic on-Board Recorder (A device attached to commercial motor vehicles that tracks the number of hours drivers spend on the road) rule, please don’t take it again.)