As CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles drivers operate on highways and roads throughout the country, who is actually going to enforce a new federal regulation against texting? Basically, the same state and local law enforcement agencies that police other rules of the road. You might wonder what’s the incentive for state and local governments to enforce federal rules? Possibly, a commitment to CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles safety — but definitely money. States that want to keep getting full federal highway funding and other transportation-related grants would have to begin enforcing the new rule within three years. They will even be required to adopt “compatible” regulations of their own that prohibit texting in purely in-state CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operations.
The proposed texting rule would fit into what’s a well-established federal-state enforcement system for CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operating safety. But the real enforcement challenge may be something the proposed rule doesn’t talk about: determining when a CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles texting violation is occurring. How will any law enforcement entity know when a driver is texting? Is there anything FMCSA Federal 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) could do about this problem?
The Details:
Role of states. Ensuring safe operation of CMVs Commercial Motor Vehicles (vehicles owned or used by a business) is a joint federal-state project. Federal law sets minimum safety standards for interstate CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operation and defines basic requirements for the CDL Commercial Driver's License (a license required to drive any vehicle that weighs over a certain amount, carries hazardous waste, or carries over fifteen passengers) program, but state and local law enforcement agencies are mainly responsible for enforcement. This state-federal cooperation is a condition for states to receive certain federal highway funds and other transportation-related grants. Here’s a quick summary of how states would be involved in enforcing a new FMCSA Federal 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) texting rule.
MCSAP money and FMCSR Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations: federal rules governing operation and safety of Commercial Motor Vehicles enforcement. The federal Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAPMotor Carrier Safety Assistance Program) provides grants to states for reducing the number and severity of CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles crashes. Reimbursable activities include highway patrol and inspection costs for enforcing CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles regulations. All states currently participate in MCSAP. One condition of participating is that states must adopt regulations “compatible with” the FMCSRs, including Part 390. These compatible state regulations must apply to both interstate and intrastate CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operations. (49 USC United States Code § 31104(h); 49 CFR Code of Federal Regulations § 350.341).
This means that states who want to keep their MCSAP Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program money would have to add a texting prohibition to their own CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles regulations within the next three years. One important consequence of this is that intrastate CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operation would then be covered by a state texting ban compatible with the federal ban in Part 390. (See the explanation in Which drivers are covered.)
Another MCSAP Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program funding condition is that states must agree to enforce (and provide evidence that they are enforcing) the FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations and their own compatible CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles regulations. States that can show a reduction in CMV-related fatal accidents can qualify for additional “incentive funds.”
Federal highway money and enforcing Part 383/CDL requirements. States set up and run the CDL Commercial Driver's License (a license required to drive any vehicle that weighs over a certain amount, carries hazardous waste, or carries over fifteen passengers) program, but unless a state wants to forfeit a percentage of its federal highway-aid funding, it must commit to several enforcement steps, including:
- Participation in/use of nationwide driver information databases: The state must be connected to the Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLISCommercial Driver Licensing Information System) , maintained by FMCSA, and the National Driver Register, maintained by NHTSA. These national clearinghouses allow access to all states’ records of drivers who are convicted of serious traffic offenses and whose licenses have been canceled, denied, revoked or suspended. States must check these records before issuing, renewing, upgrading or transferring a CDL.
- Prompt reporting of convictions: States must keep accurate CDLIS Commercial Driver Licensing Information System records of serious traffic violations by CDL Commercial Driver's License (a license required to drive any vehicle that weighs over a certain amount, carries hazardous waste, or carries over fifteen passengers) holders. If the CDL Commercial Driver's License (a license required to drive any vehicle that weighs over a certain amount, carries hazardous waste, or carries over fifteen passengers) was issued by another state, the conviction must be reported to the issuing state within 10 days.
- Imposing sanctions and respecting other states’ convictions. No later than 3 years after a final texting rule is adopted, states would have to adopt and enforce the requirement to disqualify CDL Commercial Driver's License (a license required to drive any vehicle that weighs over a certain amount, carries hazardous waste, or carries over fifteen passengers) holders convicted of violating state/local anti-texting laws. (We’ll discuss the details of disqualification in the next post.) Moreover, the state that issued the CDL would have to enforce disqualification based on CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles texting convictions in other states and localities, even if the issuing state doesn’t have its own anti-texting law. (49 CFR § 384.218, 49 CFR Code of Federal Regulations § 384.219)
States that fail to comply with these conditions can lose federal highway funding: up to 5% the first year, and 10% in following years.
Help FMCSA Federal 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) get it right. FMCSA’s proposed texting rule would fit into a well-established enforcement framework for CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles operating safety. (The next post will look at the penalty details for Part 383/CDL disqualification and for violating the Part 390 texting prohibition.) But the real enforcement challenge may be something that the agency hasn’t said much about: How do you tell when a CMV Commercial Motor Vechicles texting violation is occurring?
Of course, other safe vehicle operating rules (e.g., seatbelt laws) can involve driver behavior that is hard to observe from outside the vehicle. Does a ban on reading or sending texts while driving present significantly tougher enforcement issues? Are there solutions the agency should consider in this rulemaking? FMCSA Federal 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) has specifically asked for information on how existing anti-texting laws, as well as company policies on texting and other electronic device use, are enforced. Help FMCSA Federal 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) get it right by weighing in on how the texting ban will be enforced.
This comment was emailed to Regulation Room on 4/22 from the President of Morris Area Freewheelers.
Regulation Room,
Distracted driving due to cell phones can be stopped.
Making it illegal won’t stop the carnage.
Making it impossible will.
Software now exists that renders cellphones inoperable when the built-in GPS indicates the phone is moving over some threshold, e.g. 10 mph.
You can purchase and install this software now.
Legislation that forces manufacturers to make this software part of the phone’s firmware can be used to stop distracted driving.
Just look at our drunk driving laws. They are total failures.
People get killed by drunk drivers every day.
This technological problem can be totally solved by technology.
Driving while texting is DWB – Driving While Blind.. You may as well be blind.
It has already been proven that cell phone use in cars renders driver safety statistics comparable to drunk driving, regardless of whether they are doing it hands free or not.
And the carnage continues.
In-Cab video devices are used by a rare few companies, more for time – motion studies for looking at ways to save cost, more so, than keeping tabs on the drivers themselves. Another problem with in-cab systems is invasion of privacy, which always becomes a debate when discussing HOS and other regulatory means. Trying to implement this type of system just in fleet trucks would be near impossible, then you add in the million plus Owner Operators that not only not allow such intrusions, but could not afford the technology to start with. As stated in a previous post, the only way that such a regulation would be enforceable, would be to regulate the technology and the providers to such, that motion over a set speed would disable the devices ability to text. This would have to be done on a nationwide basis, and effect every one that owns such a device. Oh can you hear the cries now. “It is my right to use my device anywhere, anytime” < sorry Charlie – Driving is not a right, it is a privilege enabled by the states.
One issue not explicitly mentioned here is that the use of speed or motion based disablement technologies seems based on the assumption that a driver is unaccompanied while working. Are there technologies which overcome this issue? Even if there are, is this the type of technology that truckers, employers, citizens, etc. would like to see in their vehicles?
A wonderful idea and a wonderful website!
Thanks for joining the community.
Do you think that trlrider’s idea is a workable solution? Would you suggest something different?
Large fleets have very accurate means to track their trucks, the loads, and most critical data on the operation of the truck. These systems, one such is Qualcomm, also allow for dispatch to truck, and truck to dispatch communications, i.e. texting of sorts, and even some fleets have accounts set-up so drivers can use the system for e-mail. A few fleets, very few also have video data recorders in the cab. There is no system that I am aware of, that would allow a Fleet Manager, Dispatcher or anyone for that matter, to track communication exchanges from a drivers personal cell phone, laptop or other device capable of relaying wireless messages. Many fleets have rule in their drivers handbooks, prohibiting the use of a variety of devices, including personal cell phone while the vehicle is in motion. But these rules are hard to enforce, rely on an honor system, and rarely become an issue unless a driver is involved in a MVA and the cell phone records are investigated or the company is using the rules to justify firing a driver.
Welcome to Regulation Room and thank you for your thoughtful comments.
Do you think that the cab video data recorders should be required in every cab? Do you think that this could be a more effective way to enforce the proposed texting regulation?
Quote:”How will any law enforcement entity know when a driver is texting?”End Quote
This is an interesting question, and one that can lead to abuse of the rule by any law enforcement entity that may choose to do so. Officer going down the road, and just decides to pull over a truck and accuse the driver of TWD, request to see the drivers phone, driver refuses – instant ticket and road side inspection, or, driver give the officer the phone, officer sees that a text message was sent 45 minutes ago, officer: where you sitting still when this was sent? Driver – yes Officer: let me see your log book showing that you stopped. OOPS – driver did not log the 3 minutes he pulled over in the rest area to send a quick message home. Instant ticket.
Here is a solution: Instead of the FMCSA or anyone else for that matter passing a non-enforceable and discriminatory law on Commecial drivers, mandate that any cell phone – yes, the general motoring public also, have a program that would turn off all texting, e-mail, internet, etc functions if the phone is travelling at a speed of say, over 5 mph. The cell phone manufacturers could easily flash every phone in use today with a string of code, that would prevent texting at any speed over 5 mph, thus ending the debate over CMV operators, under 18 drivers, etc. Oh yes, this includes all the lawyers, doctors, politicians, and the list goes on. But, what if I am just riding as a passenger – hmm, sorry Charlie, no exceptions.
I cannot count the number of times when I was on the road, that I was cut off, nearly side-swiped, rear ended or any other almost accident, that the driver of the smaller vehicle was distracted playing with a phone, pda, laptop, or other. Of the thousands of decisions a CMV driver has to make a minute, 75% or better are involved in protecting the motoring public that are not aware of their surroundings.
Trlrider, this is a very interesting proposal.
What do others in the community think about this as a potential solution?
The hiway money and license incentives relate to people who are actually caught texting. But how do you catch them, realistically? That’s why the idea of having the carriers self-investigate and self-report occurred to me.
Would there be a way to have the carriers themselves report on it? Sort of like the NCAA requires colleges to self-investigate and self-report rules violations. I guess this would require the carriers to maintain logs of all communications by their drivers, but I would assume most fleets are being closely tracked anyway.
Interesting proposal. Do the highway money and license incentives seem insufficient, or do you see this as just another alternative?
Also, this proposal raises interesting questions about driver privacy, effects on small businesses, and the kind of federal involvement that FMCSA is proposing. Are there any drivers or small business owners out there who know about fleet tracking? Anyone who has had an analogous experience with self-regulated industries?
Perhaps the device itself or the data/cellphone service provider would be required to provide usage data at the time of suspected texting?