ATA Seeks Hours-of-Service Reprieve
Group Asks Court for Delay, FMCSA for New Rule
By Sean McNally, Senior Reporter
This story appears in the Sept. 10 print edition of Transport Topics.
With less than two weeks left before a federal appeals court ruling goes into effect nullifying key parts of the driver hours-of-service rule, American Trucking Associations asked the court and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to temporarily maintain current driver hours.
On Sept. 6, ATA asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to delay implementing its July ruling that eliminated the 11th hour of driving per day and the provision allowing drivers to reset weekly driving allotments by taking 34 consecutive hours off.
“We had planned to file the motion with the court in case FMCSA did not step forward with a new rulemaking before the court’s mandate could take effect, and it appears that’s exactly what is happening,” said ATA spokesman Clayton Boyce.
The agency has had little comment since the court’s ruling and has yet to publicly state whether it will ask the court to delay implementation of its ruling or issue a revised rule.
ATA’s petition said, “A stay of the mandate is needed to prevent serious disruption to trucking operations.”
“The trucking industry and its customers could not instantaneously shift to an hours-of-service regime with a different daily driving limit and without the 34-hour restart,” ATA said. “Rather, such a conversion would require months of preparation.”
In order to get that time, ATA also asked FMCSA itself to publish “an interim final rule” to preserve the 11th hour of driving and 34-hour restart, “as well as an expedited notice of proposed rulemaking process to address the issues identified” by the court.
In July, the court rejected an HOS rule written by FMCSA for the second time in three years. The first ruling, in 2004, cited driver health, while the most recent decision chided the agency for
not following appropriate procedures in crafting the regulation (7-30, p. 1).
ATA cited actions by Congress following the 2004 decision to grant FMCSA more time to propose a replacement rule as precedent for staying the decision.
“As a practical matter, the extensive compliance and operational changes required to transition to a new HOS regime re-quire months,” ATA said, “a fact that surely influenced Congress’ decision to leave the 2003 HOS rules in place pending a new rulemaking following this court’s 2004 HOS decision.”
In 2004, Congress granted FMCSA a year to issue a new regulation governing driver hours of service. The new rule retained most of the provisions included in the previous struck-down regulation — the 11th hour of driving, a mandatory 10-hour rest period and a maximum workday of 14 consecutive hours — but did make changes in how drivers could use the 34-hour restart.
The association also made an economic argument in seeking the stay, telling the court “immediate vacation of the provisions . . . [would] impose substantial transition costs, costs that the industry, its customers and state law enforcement may have to incur again once FMCSA adopts new HOS rules.”
ATA told FMCSA in its petition the court’s decision “has again created a great deal of confusion and uncertainty” and “as a practical matter, it is simply impossible for the trucking industry and its customers to instantly transition” to a new rule.
“In the past, several months of transition time were needed to implement HOS changes, and any immediate or future HOS rule modifications will require equal, if not even more, time,” ATA said.
Because of that, ATA asked the agency to issue a temporary rule that would maintain the provisions struck down by the court and “initiate an expedited rulemaking process and make a commitment to a firm, six-to-12-month deadline for completion” of a new rule.
FMCSA said in a statement it was “carefully” reviewing ATA’s request “as we analyze FMCSA’s next steps regarding hours of service, which will soon be issued.”
The agency did not say when its plans for the rule would be released, nor did it comment on ATA’s filing with the court.
“The preservation of the status quo during the pendency of a new FMCSA rulemaking would not compromise driver health or safety and would be in the public interest,” ATA told the court.
If ATA’s efforts are thwarted and FMCSA fails to act before Sept. 14, safety officials have said drivers would no longer be subject to the 11-hour limit and could drive up to 14 hours a day, but they would still be subject to FMCSA’s weekly driving limits of 60 hours in seven days or 70 hours in eight days.
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), chairman of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, told Transport Topics that in light of the court’s decision, Congress may have to “revisit” the hours-of-service issue.
This story appears in the Sept. 10 print edition of Transport Topics.
With less than two weeks left before a federal appeals court ruling goes into effect nullifying key parts of the driver hours-of-service rule, American Trucking Associations asked the court and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to temporarily maintain current driver hours.
On Sept. 6, ATA asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to delay implementing its July ruling that eliminated the 11th hour of driving per day and the provision allowing drivers to reset weekly driving allotments by taking 34 consecutive hours off.
“We had planned to file the motion with the court in case FMCSA did not step forward with a new rulemaking before the court’s mandate could take effect, and it appears that’s exactly what is happening,” said ATA spokesman Clayton Boyce.
The agency has had little comment since the court’s ruling and has yet to publicly state whether it will ask the court to delay implementation of its ruling or issue a revised rule.
ATA’s petition said, “A stay of the mandate is needed to prevent serious disruption to trucking operations.”
“The trucking industry and its customers could not instantaneously shift to an hours-of-service regime with a different daily driving limit and without the 34-hour restart,” ATA said. “Rather, such a conversion would require months of preparation.”
In order to get that time, ATA also asked FMCSA itself to publish “an interim final rule” to preserve the 11th hour of driving and 34-hour restart, “as well as an expedited notice of proposed rulemaking process to address the issues identified” by the court.
In July, the court rejected an HOS rule written by FMCSA for the second time in three years. The first ruling, in 2004, cited driver health, while the most recent decision chided the agency for
not following appropriate procedures in crafting the regulation (7-30, p. 1).
ATA cited actions by Congress following the 2004 decision to grant FMCSA more time to propose a replacement rule as precedent for staying the decision.
“As a practical matter, the extensive compliance and operational changes required to transition to a new HOS regime re-quire months,” ATA said, “a fact that surely influenced Congress’ decision to leave the 2003 HOS rules in place pending a new rulemaking following this court’s 2004 HOS decision.”
In 2004, Congress granted FMCSA a year to issue a new regulation governing driver hours of service. The new rule retained most of the provisions included in the previous struck-down regulation — the 11th hour of driving, a mandatory 10-hour rest period and a maximum workday of 14 consecutive hours — but did make changes in how drivers could use the 34-hour restart.
The association also made an economic argument in seeking the stay, telling the court “immediate vacation of the provisions . . . [would] impose substantial transition costs, costs that the industry, its customers and state law enforcement may have to incur again once FMCSA adopts new HOS rules.”
ATA told FMCSA in its petition the court’s decision “has again created a great deal of confusion and uncertainty” and “as a practical matter, it is simply impossible for the trucking industry and its customers to instantly transition” to a new rule.
“In the past, several months of transition time were needed to implement HOS changes, and any immediate or future HOS rule modifications will require equal, if not even more, time,” ATA said.
Because of that, ATA asked the agency to issue a temporary rule that would maintain the provisions struck down by the court and “initiate an expedited rulemaking process and make a commitment to a firm, six-to-12-month deadline for completion” of a new rule.
FMCSA said in a statement it was “carefully” reviewing ATA’s request “as we analyze FMCSA’s next steps regarding hours of service, which will soon be issued.”
The agency did not say when its plans for the rule would be released, nor did it comment on ATA’s filing with the court.
“The preservation of the status quo during the pendency of a new FMCSA rulemaking would not compromise driver health or safety and would be in the public interest,” ATA told the court.
If ATA’s efforts are thwarted and FMCSA fails to act before Sept. 14, safety officials have said drivers would no longer be subject to the 11-hour limit and could drive up to 14 hours a day, but they would still be subject to FMCSA’s weekly driving limits of 60 hours in seven days or 70 hours in eight days.
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), chairman of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, told Transport Topics that in light of the court’s decision, Congress may have to “revisit” the hours-of-service issue.
