Some Electronic Onboard Recorder Makers Applaud Mandate
Others Decry Plan’s ‘Punitive’ Aspects
Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.
Manufacturers of electronic onboard recorders had differing views of the federal government’s proposal to require recorders for some motor carriers, with some saying the government was treating EOBRs punitively and others hailing the move as an important safety development.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration proposed requiring carriers with a high rate of driver-hours violations to install the technology and providing relief from certain recordkeeping regulations for carriers that voluntarily adopt the technology. (Click here for previous coverage.)John Lewis, chief executive officer of GeoLogic Solutions, told Transport Topics he thought the agency had erred in using an EOBR mandate as a punishment.For the full story, see the Feb. 5 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.
Manufacturers of electronic onboard recorders had differing views of the federal government’s proposal to require recorders for some motor carriers, with some saying the government was treating EOBRs punitively and others hailing the move as an important safety development.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration proposed requiring carriers with a high rate of driver-hours violations to install the technology and providing relief from certain recordkeeping regulations for carriers that voluntarily adopt the technology. (Click here for previous coverage.)John Lewis, chief executive officer of GeoLogic Solutions, told Transport Topics he thought the agency had erred in using an EOBR mandate as a punishment.For the full story, see the Feb. 5 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.
