Profile: cln37
This is cln37's Profile page. Use it to view cln37's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments cln37 has endorsed.
What's Happening Now
I understand MODERATOR however you are thinking that the dot police are angles, you moderator I do not believe you have been in a truck and dealt with them. Yes I understand that DOT cops are not suppose to brake the law in order to enforce the law. When is the last time you seen a dot cop parked on an over pass using lazier to catch speeders. Over passes have a no parking zone, so tell me they are not breaking the law to catch speeders. Or parking on the shoulder of the road in which is emergency parking only to catch speeders. They also have a way of stretching their heads in your window to take a look around your truck. Yes the EBOR to some is just away to enforce the HOS laws. It is the FMCSA distrust of drivers, and have totally lost the trust of owner operators and the little guy. So… more »
Thank you for your response, trucking. The moderators of the Regulation Room don’t take a position on the rule or the police, and our job is to be neutral. It sounds like you have had some experiences where you thought your privacy was violated. Could you tell us a bit more about these experiences and how you think they might be worse with an EOBR? You might also be interested in commenting on our enforcement post here .
hours on-duty, off-duty, driving. o other information is required.
Location is not required, unless you of course you wanted to start a Vehicle Miles TAX using trucks as a guinea pig. If so, recommend going to congress as the constitution requires all bills requiring taxation to originate there.
The Congress passed and the President signed the FISMA Act of 2002 to require Federal Agencies to complete the required Information Assurance certifications prior to implementing an electronic information gathering system. If DOT would complete the required Information Security Assurance certifications required by law, the answer would be found during the certification process.
Creative trucker beats speed-limiter ticket in Canada
Persistence and creativity have paid off so far for trucker Lee Ingratta.
The one-truck owner-operator from Gravenhurst, Ontario, has captured the attention of the trucking community for the method he used to beat a ticket for an alleged violation of the provincial law that requires trucks to be equipped with speed-limiting devices.
A judge tossed Ingratta’s case out of court on June 4. Not surprisingly, provincial enforcement officials have filed an appeal.
During a stop at a scale house in July 2009, an inspector with the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario asked Ingratta for permission to connect an external device to a port on Ingratta’s Peterbilt to check for compliance with the speed-limiter law. Under the law, computerized… more »
Things got interesting from there.
“He came over with this little gizmo and wanted to plug it in to the computer,” said Ingratta, a self-proclaimed “computer guy” who even owned his own computer shop for 25 years before returning to trucking in 2004.
“I’m thinking to myself, if he plugs this in to one guy’s truck, and then he takes it out and tries to plug it in to my truck, what happens if there’s a little charge of static electricity in this thing? Is he grounding the thing out? Is he going to zap my computer? No, he’s not plugging it in until he signs this waiver.”
The “just in case” waiver Ingratta drafted and carried with him says that he will consent to a speed-limiter inspection only if the officer or agency takes full responsibility for any damage that may occur as a result. The officer disregarded the waiver and cited Ingratta for “refusal” to allow entry to the computer port.
The judge, however, said Ingratta did not refuse and tossed the case. It’s not over yet, however, as the province isn’t going down without a fight of its own.
“The Ministry is aware of the case and is appealing the decision,” MTO spokesman Bob Nichols told Land Line. “As the case is still before the courts, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”
The Owner-Operators Business Association of Canada, of which Ingratta is a member, went public with the news of the case following Ingratta’s court decision.
“I think the fact that the province is appealing shows they’re concerned about that,” OBAC Executive Director Joanne Ritchie told Land Line.
Ritchie said OBAC began raising concerns several years ago about issues of driver privacy and the potential for computer-related problems resulting from port-data exchanges.
“This whole thing about warranty issues – they’re worried about that because they could get themselves into trouble because that tool they use is not licensed software,” Ritchie said. “Engine makers don’t give that to just anybody and it’s very expensive.”
Drivers Against Speed Limiter Legislation, a Facebook group operated by trucker Scott Mooney, was abuzz this week with the news about Ingratta’s case.
Mooney, a member of OBAC and OOIDA, is currently fighting a speed-limiter ticket of his own in Napanee, Ontario. His argument is about the safety aspects and speed differentials that speed limiters on one class of vehicles can cause on the highways. He also has concerns with privacy and the potential for the province to inadvertently void warranties.
“Dealerships do not want any unauthorized personnel tampering with a truck’s ECM,” Mooney said.
“If you as an owner-operator have problems with your computer, and you go in to your dealership and they find out that the last person that accessed the computer was MTO, they can use that to say somebody who wasn’t qualified was into this thing, and that voids your warranty.”
Mooney’s own case has been set for July 21 in provincial court in Napanee.
Meanwhile, Ingratta is gearing up for the appeal in his case, which has yet to have a date set.
“Either they’re going to keep shoving this stuff down our throat and we keep taking it, or we need to stand up for ourselves,” Ingratta said.
“It’s our equipment, and it’s our trucks. We have a right. We have some rights left, anyway.”
– By David Tanner, associate editor
david_tanner@landlinemag.com « less
the only way a driver makes any money is when the truck is moving. If the shipper or reciever holds you up, your not making a dime. So you either fix the logs, or go broke, Its that simple. The Federal goverment knows this, they just look the other way. If everyone had to log legal because of the eobr’s, there would be a need for more trucks on the road, more drivers, improved freeways to handle the trucks just to keep up with whats being shipped now. Everything will go up. The ecomony can’t handle that.
No comments
You might want to check out What will this cost? , because the driver fatigue problem is mentioned there. Leave a comment on that post letting us know how you think FMCSA did in dealing with that problem.
It sounds like you might have something to say about a different proposed rule on HOS changes. You can comment on that proposed rule here.
Hi trucking. The DOT does not have the authority to look inside of anyone’s truck. As for law enforcement officials, they must still follow regular legal procedures before looking inside of a truck. Using an EOBR would not void any of those procedures. The EOBRs do not provide personally identifiable information that could lead to profiling. Please see this section Information Collected regarding the information that the EOBRs do collect.
Thank you for your response, trucking. The moderators of the Regulation Room don’t take a position on the rule or the police, and our job is to be neutral. It sounds like you have had some experiences where you thought your privacy was violated. Could you tell us a bit more about these experiences and how you think they might be worse with an EOBR? You might also be interested in commenting on our enforcement post here .
Do you know any more details about this Canadian case, or more situations where there have been problems with law enforcement officers damaging EOBRs or other devices? This kind of information could be really useful for DOT to know about, if we can get some more specifics.
Thank you for bringing up an important safety and security issue, rdb. Do you think having a wired EOBR during data transmission would lessen some of these issues? What are some ways that you think might help increase the security of EOBR data?
Hi rdb. Which specific pieces of information do you think the EOBR needs to record? You can find what they currently must record here.
It sounds like you feel that when drivers violate HOS rules, it’s often because of things outside their control, like your example of shippers and receivers holding them up. It would be great to hear more about your experiences with Peoplenet. What did you like about it?
FMCSA has only identified certain data that an EOBR must collect (you can see that list here). But you point out that they could be used for other things, like waking up a driver on break. Do you have any other examples or concerns about possible misuse of EOBRs?
Hi damnin. Would you share with us your source for the statistics that you cite for the low number of truck crashes?
Hi damnin. Why do you believe that the EOBR data will micromanage your time and create more fatigue?
You can comment on another post by clicking on the “reply” button that appears on the bottom right hand corner of the post. You seem to be suggesting that EOBRs are very inflexible. What are some suggestions on how to make the EOBRs more workable? How does your experience with the elogs compare to that of the EOBR?