Hours of Service of Drivers
Federal RegisterNov 5, 1996
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
SUMMARY: The FHWA is initiating this rulemaking to revise the FHWA's
hours-of-service (HOS) regulations. The FHWA is nearing completion of
several research projects and seeks the results of other relevant
research to consider in this effort. To assist the FHWA in gathering
all pertinent data to make informed decisions based upon scientific
evidence, the FHWA requests assistance in locating any other relevant
information, including research, operational tests, or pilot regulatory
programs conducted anywhere in the world, that may be used by the
agency in developing a revised program for the HOS of commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) drivers. This action is mandated by the ICC Termination
Act of 1995.
DATES: Comments to the general ANPRM should be received no later than
March 31, 1997. Late comments will be considered to the extent
practicable.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: Docket Clerk, Attn: FHWA Docket
No. MC-96-28, Federal Highway Administration, Department of
Transportation, Room 4232, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C.
20590. Persons who require acknowledgment of the receipt of their
comments must enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard. Comments may
be reviewed at the above address from 8:30 a.m. through 3:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding rulemaking
and operational issues: Mr. David Miller, Office of Motor Carrier
Research and Standards, (202) 366-1790; for information regarding human
factors and fatigue research programs: Ms. Deborah Freund, Office of
Motor Carrier Research and Standards, (202) 366-1790; and for
information regarding legal issues: Mr. Charles Medalen, Office of the
Chief Counsel, (202) 366-0834, Federal Highway Administration,
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C.
20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An electronic copy of this document may be
downloaded using a modem and suitable communications software from the
Federal Register electronic bulletin board service (telephone: 202-512-
1661). Internet users may reach the Federal Register's web page at:
http://www.access.gpo.gov./su__docs
Table of Contents
I. Purpose of This Rulemaking
II. Rulemaking Process
III. The History of the FHWA Hours-of-Service Problem
A. Early Hours-of-Service Problems Identified
B. ICC Regulates Hours-of-Service of Drivers
C. Transfer of Hours-of-Service Regulations to DOT
IV. Research
V. Additional Substantive Data Needed
VI. Questions
Appendix to Preamble
A. Research into the Hours-of-Service of Drivers
B. Future FHWA Research Envisioned
I. Purpose of This Rulemaking
On December 29, 1995, the ICC Termination Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
88, 109 Stat. 803, 958) was signed into law. Among other things,
section 408 of this Act requires the FHWA to issue an ANPRM addressing
the FHWA's current HOS regulations. This requirement is presented in
the context of legislation which also requires the FHWA to ensure the
development, coordination, and preservation of a transportation system
that meets the transportation needs of the United States. Section 13101
of title 49, U.S.C., (109 Stat. 852), in section 103 of the ICC
Termination Act, establishes the Transportation Policy for motor
carriers, which includes among others:
(1) Promote safe, adequate, economical, and efficient
transportation;
(2) Encourage sound economic conditions in transportation,
including sound economic conditions among carriers;
(3) Encourage fair wages and working conditions in the
transportation industry;
(4) Oversee transportation by motor carrier, to promote competitive
and efficient transportation services in order to--
(a) Encourage fair competition, and reasonable rates for
transportation by motor carriers of property;
(b) Promote efficiency in the motor carrier transportation system
and to require fair and expeditious decisions when required;
(c) Meet the needs of shippers, receivers, passengers, and
consumers;
(d) Allow a variety of quality and price options to meet changing
market demands and the diverse requirements of the shipping and
traveling public;
(e) Allow the most productive use of equipment and energy
resources;
(f) Enable efficient and well-managed carriers to earn adequate
profits, attract capital, and maintain fair wages and working
conditions;
(g) Provide and maintain service to small communities and small
shippers and intrastate bus services;
(h) Improve and maintain a sound, safe, and competitive privately
owned motor carrier system;
(i) Promote greater participation by minorities in the motor
carrier system; and
(j) Promote intermodal transportation.
The FHWA has much broader responsibilities under the Act than it
had in the past. The FHWA's major focus has been, and will continue to
be on, motor carrier safety, but now the FHWA must consider the
economic vitality and productivity of the motor carrier industry in its
economic regulation of motor carriers, drivers, and CMVs.
The FHWA has been considering modifications to its HOS regulations
to be more responsive to its goal of reducing highway crashes involving
CMVs. Its overall objective has not changed. The provision of the Act
concerning an HOS ANPRM is a catalyst to enhance safety while
maintaining, or increasing productivity. This process will review the
conventional HOS regulations, and variations or exemptions that may be
possible based upon scientific data. This process will also initiate an
exploration of alternative regulatory approaches and non-regulatory
approaches to promote an increased level of highway safety, coupled
with improved productivity.
The FHWA believes that there have been changes to many elements of
the motor carrier industry that suggest a change in the HOS regulations
is necessary. The CMVs of today offer improved ride characteristics and
better climate control to enhance driver alertness and comfort. Roads
and highways are now built and maintained better than in the 1930's
when the HOS regulations were first developed. Shipper/consignee
demands and driver pay issues also affect the HOS issue. Improvements
in technologies and logistics, including global positioning systems
(GPS), satellite communications, in-vehicle cellular communications,
and emerging intelligent transportation system (ITS)
[[Page 57253]]
and ITS-influenced technologies allow for greater operational
flexibility. On the other hand, congestion, truck size, and other
factors which increase the burden on drivers have changed
substantially, as well. All of these factors, taken together, suggest
that a comprehensive review of the HOS rules is appropriate.
In 1992, as a part of the FHWA's Zero-base regulatory review of the
motor carrier safety regulations, the FHWA began to re-evaluate the
current HOS regulations to respond to changes in the highway
environment and the motor carrier industry that operates in it. The
FHWA has proposed, in numerous meetings and correspondence, to build a
performance-based system of regulations to replace or augment, as
appropriate, the current prescriptive-based system. The FHWA's research
into driver fatigue and loss of alertness began in the 1970's, was
dormant during most of the 1980's, and was renewed and expanded over
the last six years.
The FHWA believes this rulemaking will produce two results. In the
short term, it will generate proposals for changes to the conventional
HOS regulations to make them more responsive to safety, while
maintaining or enhancing productivity. In the long term, it should
begin a transformation of the HOS regulations into a combination of a
new performance-based regulatory scheme which would address driver
alertness and fitness for duty. Use of such a performance-based system
could be voluntary. Motor carriers not wishing to use such a system
would continue to be subject to a modified version of the current,
prescriptive system. The short-term changes would reflect the findings
of recently completed research that should increase productivity while
enhancing operational safety.
A performace-based system of HOS regulations would recognize the
use of technology to record and track a driver's level of alertness at
intervals each day. The driver's HOS, hours of rest, fatigue-producing
extra-curricular activities, and other activities would be recorded by
a device. The device would report the level of fatigue at a given time
and the amount of additional time that might be worked before rest
would be necessary for a particular driver. If adopted by a motor
carrier, the FHWA believes this type of system would replace any manual
or electronic recordation system that is currently being used to meet
the HOS requirements of Part 395. The FHWA is studying four new and
different technologies that might be used in a performance-based
regulatory scheme. A further discussion of this research study is
provided in the research appendix to this document under the subheading
Driver Work and Rest Needs Study.
This ANPRM seeks substantive information on research and
operational studies in addition to those discussed later in this
document or already contained in the public docket. Comments are sought
from all interested parties, around the world, that may help the FHWA
to formulate both new conventional regulations and a performance-based
system that would assist motor carriers in the safe use of their
drivers. The FHWA would like to gather research and data to assist the
agency in developing a system that ensures that drivers are alert while
driving CMVs on public roads.
The FHWA is not proposing specific rules or requirements at this
time. This document merely seeks additional information that the FHWA
may use to formulate proposals that (1) would minimize crashes and
regulatory burdens, (2) are supportable either by data or by the best
available professional judgment, (3) are cost-effective, simple to
understand, comply with, and (4) are enforceable. The FHWA has an
enormous amount of data on this subject already. The research known to
exist, presented later in this document, is voluminous. The purpose of
this ANPRM is to conduct one last comprehensive worldwide search for
any relevant research and information before making specific proposals.
II. Rulemaking Process
This document is the first in a series of actions to attain the
FHWA's HOS goals. As stated previously, it does not propose regulatory
changes. It seeks answers to many questions. The FHWA needs specific
answers to these questions, and the presentation of supporting
information, to ensure that future proposed rulemakings are based upon
sound scientific research and factual data. The FHWA does not want to
base changes to the rules upon anecdotal information or intuitive
opinions.
Based upon public comments to this ANPRM, additional completed
research, and research data submitted, the FHWA will formulate specific
proposals and publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). The NPRM
will also provide a comment period for additional public response to
specific proposals. Unless modified due to comments on this ANPRM or
new information, the FHWA now anticipates that a final rule may be
developed and published as early as 1999 for a new prescriptive set of
HOS regulations (similar to the 10-hour, 15-hour, etc. rules) and as
early as the year 2000 for a performance-based set of regulations.
III. The History of The FHWA Hours-of-Service Problem
Copies of all historical regulatory documents mentioned below are
included in the public docket, number MC-96-28 and will be available
for examination at the above given address.
A. Early Hours-of-Service Problems Identified
The development of the motor carrier industry began shortly after
World War I. It had become a serious competitor to the railroads and
water carriers prior to the Great Depression of 1929. The motor carrier
industry was initially regulated by many of the States, but these
regulations were not uniform and universal in their application. The
Congress had discussed the issues related to the infant motor carrier
industry from 1909 through 1932. See Regulation of Transportation
Agencies, S. Doc. No. 152, 73d Cong. 2d Sess. (February 28, 1934).
The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), which had been in
existence since 1888, recommended Federal regulation of motor carriers
as early as 1928. The lack of uniform regulations, or none at all in
some States, generated allegations of disturbing abuses and concerns in
both the economic and safety arenas. The Federal Coordinator of
Transportation, a post created in 1933 by the Emergency Railroad
Transportation Act of 1933 (June 16, 1933, Pub. L. 73-68, 48 Stat. 211)
to promote transportation development for the Nation, studied the
highway transportation situation. In 1934, the Federal Coordinator
recommended regulation of motor carrier activities by the Federal
Government. The report concluded that motor carriers should be
regulated in a way similar to the railroad industry, which had been
regulated by the ICC for the previous 50 years. The report recommended
regulating the economic, as well as the safety, aspects of the motor
carrier industry.
Following this report, the Congress again discussed the regulation
of motor carriers and passed the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (August 9,
1935, Pub. L. 74-255, 49 Stat. 543)(MCA). The MCA was enacted as Part
II of the Interstate Commerce Act (49 USC 13101 et seq., Chap. 104, 24
Stat. 379, February 4, 1887, as amended) and placed responsibilities on
the ICC to regulate motor carriers in the areas of economic health and
safety of operations.
[[Page 57254]]
B. ICC Regulates Hours-of-Service of Drivers
The ICC issued a general set of motor carrier safety regulations in
1937. These first regulations did not include HOS rules. Later, HOS
regulations were issued, only to be delayed while additional hearings
were held on the issue, which had become controversial within the
industry.
In August 1937, the Federal Coordinator of Transportation reported
that the Bureau of Public Roads (BPR), the predecessor of the Federal
and Federally-assisted construction programs of the FHWA, had collected
data on the HOS of about 7,000 drivers of for-hire vehicles in 1936. In
a hearing before the ICC, the BPR presented a report that noted that,
of vehicles using only one driver per vehicle after a period of rest,
23.0 percent of the drivers had worked more than 12 hours, 10.4 percent
had worked more than 15 hours, 3.7 percent had worked more than 20
hours, and 1.3 percent had worked in excess of 27 hours. The Federal
Coordinator also reported that the States had widely varying HOS rules.
The CMV drivers in 34 States were allowed to operate motor vehicles
between 7 and 14 continuous hours after a period of rest of between 6
to 12 hours. Additionally, 41 States had allowed between 8 and 16 hours
of driving within a 24 hour period of time.
In view of these findings and other evidence submitted at the
hearings, the ICC issued regulations on January 4, 1938 (3 FR 7), to
limit the HOS of interstate truck drivers engaged in for-hire service.
The order of the ICC prescribed, in part, that no driver of a for-hire
interstate motor vehicle should be on duty longer than 60 hours in any
one week or 15 hours in any one day, with a further limitation of 12
hours, actually at work, in any one day. These regulations were stayed
by the ICC before the July 1, 1938, effective date, and a new set of
regulations was promulgated to become effective three months later. In
subsequent proceedings, the ICC considered the advisability of further
altering the regulations. Responding to the Federal Coordinator's
report, congressional hearings, and public hearings, the ICC adopted
regulations establishing maximum hours of driving and on-duty time. The
new HOS regulations became effective on March 1, 1939.
These rules required motor carriers, for-hire common and contract,
to limit drivers to a total of 10 hours of driving in any period of 24
consecutive hours unless the driver was off duty for 8 consecutive
hours immediately following the 10 hours of driving. In addition,
drivers were limited to 60 hours on-duty time in any week (168
consecutive hours). For motor carriers that operated vehicles every day
of the week, the limit was set at 70 hours in any period of 192
consecutive hours. These rules were extended to private motor carriers
of property in October, 1940 and provided exceptions for driver-
salesmen who were employed by private motor carriers of property, for
farmers of certain agricultural commodities, and for drivers making
local deliveries for retail stores or retail catalog goods between
December 10 and 25 of each year.
The regulations issued in 1938 and 1939 reflected testimony
provided at the ICC hearings, and were not based upon scientific
inquiry even though a scientific study was considered at the time. That
study is discussed later in this document under the heading ``Research
into the HOS of Drivers.''
On March 29, 1962, in Ex-Parte No. MC-40, Sub No. 1, the ICC issued
the ``15 hour rule'' requiring that no driver be required or permitted
to drive more than 2 hours after having been on duty 13 hours following
8 consecutive hours off duty. Also, in this rulemaking, the ICC removed
the prohibition that a driver may only drive 10 hours in any 24 hour
period and added an exception to the 60/70 hour rule for oil field
related transportation. On February 21, 1963, the ICC amended the 15-
hour rule, to state that no driver shall be on duty more than 15 hours
following 8 consecutive hours off duty. The ICC, on this date, also
amended the 60 hour and 70 hour rules by defining the 7 and 8 day time
periods for the calculation of the time period of one week. By these
actions, the ICC established the current HOS regulations applicable to
most of the motor carrier industry (the 10-hour driving time limit, 15-
hour on-duty time limit, and the 60/70 hour on-duty time limit in a 7/8
day period).
C. Transfer of Hours of Service Regulations to DOT
Serious debate began in the mid-1960's about the establishment of a
cabinet level department to administer the transportation safety
responsibilities of the Federal Government in all modes. In 1966, the
Congress passed the Department of Transportation Act (49 USC 101 et
seq.) which created the DOT. The DOT Act was effective April 1, 1967.
The Congress transferred the ICC's motor carrier safety
responsibilities to the DOT, where they were then delegated to the
Federal Highway Administrator.
The FHWA published an ANPRM on February 12, 1976 (41 FR 6275). The
comments to this ANPRM did not provide sufficient data to determine
whether the HOS should be amended. A second ANPRM was issued on May 22,
1978 (43 FR 21905). This second advance notice invited comments on
three different plans for limiting driver's HOS. The three proposed
plans were identified as plans I, II, and III. Plans I and II were
alternative proposals covering single driver operations. Plan III was a
proposal that would have been applicable only to sleeper berth
operations using two drivers. Some of the major differences between
each of the three plans may be seen in Table 1.
Table 1.--May 22, 1978 ANPRM Proposed HOS Revisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan III--sleeper berth
Requirement Plan I--single driver Plan II--single driver operation using two
operation operation drivers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Cumulative Limits (Maximum Weekly 60 hours in 7 60 hours in 7 Not Specified.
Hours). consecutive days with consecutive days with
36 hour extended rest 36 hour extended rest
period. period.
2. Duty Tour Limits (Maximum On-Duty 12 hours............... 15 consecutive hours... 80 consecutive hours.
Time).
3. Minimum Off--Duty Time............ 04 hours on 04 hours on 02 hours on
duty=8 hours off duty. duty=8 hours off duty. duty=12 hours off
duty.
4-12 hours on duty=12 4-12 hours on duty=12 2040 hours
hours off duty. hours off duty. on duty=24 hours off
duty.
1213 hours 4060 hours
on duty=14 hours off on duty=36 hours off
duty. duty.
[[Page 57255]]
1314 hours 6080 hours
on duty=16 hours off on duty=48 hours off
duty. duty.
1415 hours
on duty=18 hours off
duty..
4. Driving Limitation................ 10 hours or 450 miles.. 11 hours or 500 miles.. Dictated by time spent.
5. Driving Relief Periods............ 30 minutes every 2\1/2\ 30 minutes every 3 30 minutes for each
hours. hours. change of duty status.
6. Intermittent Duty Status Allowed?. Yes--But only for meal No..................... No.
periods.
7. Mandatory Meal Periods?........... Yes--1 hour as off duty Yes--1 hour as on duty Not Specified.
time.
8. Special Provisions for Night No..................... Yes.................... No.
Driving Assignments?.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 1200 docket comments were submitted in response to the May 22,
1978 ANPRM, and the FHWA held seven public hearings throughout the
Nation. The hearings generated 9,000 pages of testimony and
submissions. On September 3, 1981 (46 FR 44198), the FHWA terminated
the rulemaking based upon the economic impact that the proposed options
would have had on motor carrier operations and the Nation's
distribution system. The projected costs of each of the FHWA's three
major options for revising the HOS regulations were considered to be
significantly greater than the proposed benefits. See Booz, Allen, and
Hamilton, Inc. Assessments of the Impacts of Proposed HOS Revisions,
prepared for the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (Washington, DC: June
24, 1981). A copy is available in the FHWA docket.
The FHWA published a notice for public comment on January 24, 1980
(45 FR 5781), which, among other things, requested comments on a
petition submitted by participants in the White House-established Ad
Hoc Working Group on Truck Owner-Operator Problems. The FHWA requested
comments on potential safety impacts of expanding the driving time
limit to 12 hours in a 24-hour period and the on-duty limit to 96 hours
in an 8-day period.
Over 700 docket comments were received. Ninety-four percent of the
comments opposed the expanded HOS regulations. On December 15, 1980 (45
FR 82284), the FHWA denied the petition and closed the docket. In this
December 15 document, the FHWA published a summary of the findings of
three DOT research studies on fatigue, mentioned later in this
document, and analyses of 12 other research papers on fatigue. (Copies
of the three research reports have been placed in this FHWA docket.)
On October 30, 1987 (52 FR 41718), the FHWA made additional changes
to the HOS regulations. The FHWA amended the 60/70 hour rule to allow a
driver to be on-duty, but not driving, after the 60th or 70th hour. In
addition, the definition of on-duty time was amended. A final rule
addressing declared emergency responses was published on July 30, 1992
(57 FR 33638). This rule allows a total exemption from the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). Before a driver returns to
normal regulated interstate operations, the FHWA allows a 24-hour
restart of the clock similar to the March 29, 1962, oilfield
transportation exception. Drivers who provide direct assistance to a
declared emergency relief effort and have been on duty for more than
60/70 hours in 7/8 days were allowed to return to driving, in
interstate commerce, after a minimum of 24 consecutive hours off duty.
On August 19, 1992 (57 FR 37504), the FHWA proposed changes similar
in scope to the 1962 oilfield transportation exception, but that would
have been applicable to all motor carriers and drivers subject to the
FMCSRs. The FHWA requested comments on eleven issues relating to the
proposal. Nearly 68,000 comments were received. Virtually no
substantive information was presented in these comments to support a
change in the regulations. Except in very general terms, the FHWA
received little discussion of potential impacts upon highway safety
that could result from increasing the available on-duty hours. The
FHWA, therefore, declined to make the proposed changes to the rule, and
on February 3, 1993 (58 FR 6937), the FHWA withdrew the proposal and
closed the docket.
As mentioned above, the FHWA began a ``Zero-base'' review of the
safety regulations, including the HOS requirements in 1992. This
program will reconsider all of the FMCSRs in an effort to determine
whether they could be more performance-oriented and less prescriptive
(57 FR 37392; August 18, 1992). The FHWA realizes that such an effort
is a multi-stage, multi-year task. The ``Zero-base'' review is
continuing and is projected to be completed in late 1998.
On December 8, 1994 (59 FR 63322), the FHWA invited and received
comments on the issue of a waiver of the HOS regulations for those
transporting crops and farm supplies. Docket comments were received
from over 175 respondents, almost all of which were in support of the
waiver concept.
The 1996 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 104-50, 109 Stat. 436) and the National
Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-59, 109 Stat.
568)(NHS Act) congressionally mandated a waiver of the HOS regulations
for those individuals transporting crops and farm supplies. Section 345
of the NHS Act created four specific exemptions from HOS provisions of
the FMCSRs. On April 3, 1996, the FHWA published a final rule exempting
specific types of operators and operations from the requirements of 49
CFR Part 395 (61 FR 14677).
The first exemption applies to drivers transporting agricultural
commodities or farm supplies during planting and harvesting seasons, if
the transportation is limited to the area within a 100 air-mile radius
of the source of the commodities or the distribution point for the farm
supplies. The FHWA was directed to exempt these drivers from the
maximum driving and on-duty time regulations of the FMCSRs.
The second exemption relates to drivers who are primarily involved
in the transportation of ground water drilling rigs. These rigs include
any vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, semi-trailer, or specialized
mobile equipment propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used on
highways to
[[Page 57256]]
transport water well field operating equipment, including water well
drilling and pump service rigs equipped to access ground water. The
water drilling rig exception in the NHS Act permits these drivers to
``restart the clock,'' which means that at any point at which the
driver is off-duty for 24 or more consecutive hours, the period of 7 or
8 days ends as of the beginning of that off-duty period, and the clock
restarts for purposes of computing the 7 or 8 day period when the
driver goes on duty again. Thus, this exemption enables the motor
carrier to designate the time of day at which the period of 7 or 8 days
begins. The definition of ``24-hour period'' in the NHS Act authorizes
the carrier to designate the time of day at which the 24-hour period
begins, which may vary between the various terminals from which drivers
are dispatched.
The third exemption applies to drivers used primarily in the
transportation of construction materials and equipment, which is
defined as the transportation of construction and pavement materials,
construction equipment, and construction maintenance vehicles. The
driver must be en route to or from an ``active construction site,''
which must be at a stage between initial mobilization of equipment and
materials to the site, and final completion of the construction
project. The construction site must also be within a 50 air-mile radius
of the driver's normal work reporting location, and this exemption does
not apply to the transportation of hazardous materials in a quantity
requiring placarding. This exemption allows these construction drivers
to restart the calculation of a 7 or 8 day period under the hours of
service regulations in the same fashion as provided in the second
exemption.
The fourth and final exemption applies these same provisions to
drivers of utility service vehicles. In order to qualify as a utility
service vehicle, the vehicle must be operated primarily within the
service area of the utility's subscribers. In addition, it must be used
in furtherance of the repair, maintenance, or operation of any physical
facilities necessary for the delivery of public utility service and
must be engaged in any activity necessarily related to the ultimate
delivery of public utility services to the consumer, including travel
to, from, upon, or between activity sites. The public utility, which
includes those delivering electric, gas, water, sanitary sewer,
telephone, and television service, need not be the actual owner of the
vehicle in question. This exemption likewise enables utility drivers to
restart the calculation of a 7 or 8 day period after the driver has
been off duty for at least 24 hours consecutively.
For each of the four exemptions described above, other than the
water well drilling exemption, the NHS Act provided the Secretary with
the authority to negate or modify the exemption upon a determination,
after a rulemaking proceeding, that the exemption is not in the public
interest and would have a significant adverse impact on the safety of
CMVs. This ANPRM does not serve as the rulemaking to make such a
determination to negate or modify the congressionally mandated
exemptions. The FHWA is considering such issues in a different
rulemaking action to be published in the future.
This ANPRM primarily serves as the first rulemaking document in the
``Zero-base'' process to ultimately amend or revise the HOS rules. The
FHWA envisions the possibility of eventually replacing, in whole or in
part, the current set of prescriptive requirements (10-hours driving,
15-hours on-duty, 60/70 hours on duty in 7/8 days) with a set of
performance-based requirements. The FHWA has initiated extensive
research, some of which is completed, addressing the HOS issue
(discussed later in this document) and will compile a record of
information that could be applied to the FHWA's future proposal to
amend the regulations.
In 1990 and 1995, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
produced reports which sought to address the problem of CMV driver
fatigue. The NTSB concluded in its more recent effort that the critical
factors in predicting fatigue-related accidents were: (1) Duration of
the most recent sleep period; (2) the amount of sleep in the previous
24 hours; and (3) fragmented sleep patterns. Its recommendations to the
FHWA included calls for:
(1) Rulemaking to address the regulatory issues identified--
(a) Require sufficient rest provisions to enable drivers to obtain
at least 8 continuous hours of sleep after driving for 10 hours or
being on duty for 15 hours;
(b) Eliminate the allowance that provides drivers the use of
sleeper berth equipment to cumulate 8 hours off-duty time in two
separate periods;
(c) Prohibit employers, shippers, receivers, brokers, and drivers
from accepting and scheduling shipments which would require the driver
to exceed the HOS regulations in order to meet delivery deadlines;
(2) Mandating automatic on-board recording devices to monitor
driver activities;
(3) Evaluation of driver compensation issues and their potential
effect on HOS violations, accidents or fatigue; and
(4) Development and dissemination of training and materials to
inform CMV drivers of the hazards of fatigued operation.
The FHWA continues to work with the Board on the fatigue problem.
However, the FHWA believes the information provided from the NTSB's
study conducted to date has not yet produced a sufficient range of
scientifically valid findings that will allow the FHWA to propose,
today, a wholesale revision of current rules governing on- and off-duty
driver activities.
In March 1995, the FHWA held a Truck and Bus Summit in Kansas City,
Missouri. The FHWA assembled participants who represented every segment
of the U.S. motor coach and trucking industries. The number one issue
of concern to the participants was driver fatigue.
Accordingly, the FHWA will continue to pursue a number of related
studies that will contribute to a better understanding of the
implications of fatigue upon highway safety. An approach geared toward
driver proficiency will provide a much more viable, long-term solution
to ensuring driver alertness. The FHWA's research on fitness-for-duty
and work-and-rest cycles, for example, could generate devices and
methods to quantitatively assess a driver's readiness and fitness to
operate a CMV, based upon the operator's level of physical activity and
his or her work and rest cycle history.
At the same time, the FHWA will continue to sponsor task forces,
symposia, and working group meetings with domestic and foreign
researchers and the scientific, medical, and safety communities to
broaden collective knowledge and to facilitate an intelligent approach
to resolution of this important issue. The FHWA will pursue efforts,
both directly or through cooperative efforts with other safety-spirited
organizations, to distribute fatigue-related accident countermeasure
pamphlets, educational brochures, and public service announcements.
Through these efforts, the FHWA hopes to raise public awareness on the
subject and facilitate effective corrective actions.
The organization Parents Against Tired Truckers (PATT) petitioned
the FHWA in March, 1996 to adopt an HOS rule that allows up to 12 hours
maximum on-duty time and then would require a minimum of 12 hours off-
duty
[[Page 57257]]
for rest. The PATT states that such a requirement would provide for the
safety of CMV operators and the motoring public by promoting ``alert
drivers based upon the human body's need for rest and naturally
occurring circadian rhythms experienced by every human.'' The petition
also recommends that drivers maintain one log book (record of duty
status (RODS)) annually. The log book would begin on January 1 and end
on December 31, with an allowance for on-board computerized logs. This
PATT petition will be incorporated into this rulemaking and will be
available for review in the FHWA docket.
IV. Research
The first scientific study which addressed the HOS of U.S.
commercial drivers was performed in the late 1930's. In the 1970's and
the late 1980's, a few research studies were conducted. Many research
studies have been and continue to be conducted over the last six years.
These studies have advanced the collective understanding of loss of
alertness, fatigue, sleep deprivation, and work/rest cycles for many
operations that work round-the-clock. Many specific studies have been
conducted in relation to CMV operations and have focused upon the
desire to change the FHWA's HOS regulations. These studies are
voluminous and a summary of each one is contained in the Appendix to
this preamble at the end of this document.
V. Additional Substantive Data Needed
This ANPRM seeks additional substantive information on research,
operational tests, and pilot regulatory programs that have not been
discussed in this document or in the ``Driver Fatigue and Alertness
Study'' literature reviews in the FHWA docket. The FHWA urges all
interested parties to provide comments to help the agency take initial
steps to formulate new conventional regulations and a performance-based
system of the HOS requirements. The FHWA would like to gather any
research and data that could be used in developing a system that
ensures drivers will be alert while driving CMVs on public roads. The
FHWA is not proposing specific HOS rules or requirements in this
document. The FHWA is simply seeking additional information that may
assist us in formulating proposals that would minimize crashes and
regulatory burdens and that are cost-effective and simple to
understand, comply with, and enforce.
VI. Questions
The FHWA needs public comment on the following specific questions.
When responding to these questions, the FHWA asks you to identify each
question by number and repeat that question in its entirety. Your
cooperation will greatly expedite our compilation, review, and analysis
of the docket comments. The FHWA would then, based upon research and
comments relating to these questions, draft a new set of proposed HOS
regulations. For example, the FHWA might keep the concept of the
current HOS but simply change the specifics. The FHWA believes many
driving performance and sleep/fatigue research findings could be
applied directly to specific issues, so it would be possible to assess
and compile comments directly relating to each issue. The FHWA believes
that a consensus might emerge relating to most, if not all, of the
following elements.
Research
1. Is there any other HOS-related research that should be
considered that the FHWA has not mentioned in this document?
a. What non-CMV HOS-related research should be considered that
would be applicable to CMV operation (such as research on airline
pilots, railroad engineers, non-transportation-related workers, etc.)
and why?
b. Are there additional HOS-related research studies from foreign
countries that FHWA should consider?
Conventional Hours-of-Service
Driving Time (10 hour rule)
2. The FHWA regulations currently allow a driver to continuously
drive up to a maximum of 10 hours after having had a minimum of 8 hours
off duty. What should be the maximum allowable continuous driving time
to enhance safety based upon scientific data? Please provide the
scientific data that supports your answer.
Total on-Duty Time (15 hour rule)
3. The FHWA regulations currently allow a driver to drive and
perform other non-driving duties up to a maximum of 15 hours after
having had a minimum of 8 hours off duty. Should the FHWA provide a
maximum continuous on-duty time period (driving time and on-duty time)
for safety purposes based upon scientific data? Please provide the
scientific data that supports your answer.
4. Should non-driving duty time be counted differently from driving
time based upon scientific data? (e.g., loading, unloading, waiting,
administrative time) Why? Please provide the scientific data that
supports your answers.
Cumulative on-Duty Time (60 and 70 hour rules)
5. The FHWA regulations currently allow a driver to drive and
perform other non-driving duties up to a maximum of 60 hours in a 7 day
period of time or, up to a maximum of 70 hours in an 8 day period of
time, dependent upon how many days a week the motor carrier conducts
business. The driver may continue to be on-duty after the 60th or 70th
hour; however, the driver is not allowed to drive CMVs. Is there a need
or rationale to continue this provision? If so, what should be the
maximum cumulative on-duty time and the applicable time period for
safety purposes? Should there be two different periods? Please provide
research data that supports your answers.
6. As stated previously in this document, Congress legislated 24-
hour re-start provisions for certain types of motor carriers in section
345 of the National Highway Systems Designation Act of 1995, Pub. L.
104-59, 109 Stat. 568 (see also 61 FR 14677, April 3, 1996 for
implementing regulations), and the FHWA allows 24-hour restarts for
certain oilfield operations and certain emergency relief periods. Based
upon scientific data, should there be a re-start provision (i.e., a
minimum number of continuous hours off-duty to trigger a restart of the
cumulative on-duty time period)? Why? Please provide the scientific
data that supports your answer.
Off-Duty Time
7. The FHWA regulations currently require a driver to have a
minimum of 8 consecutive hours off-duty prior to driving for a maximum
of 10 hours or being on-duty for a maximum of 15 hours. What should the
minimum consecutive off-duty time be for safety based upon scientific
data? Please provide the scientific data that supports your answer.
Total Circadian Cycle
8. What should be the total daily work/rest cycle based upon
scientific data (i.e., the ``circadian cycle'' implications of
questions 2, 3, and 5 for safety purposes)? Please provide the
scientific data that supports your answer. [Currently, a daily work-
rest cycle of 18 hours is allowed by the FHWA HOS regulations.]
[[Page 57258]]
Split Sleep--General
9. The FHWA regulations currently allow two periods totaling a
minimum of 8 hours and the shortest of the two periods must be at least
2 hours in lieu of a consecutive 8 hour period of time. Based upon
scientific data, should there be allowances for split-sleep off-duty
hours? Please provide the scientific data that supports your answer.
Rest Breaks
10. The FHWA understands that mandatory rest breaks are required in
Europe and Australia during a long driving period. The FHWA understands
that this was once required under Canadian regulations, also. The FHWA
is very interested in receiving comments from foreign motor carriers,
drivers, and government officials in Europe, Australia, and other
nations in response to this question. Should the FHWA require mandatory
rest breaks (suggested number and duration) during a long driving
period? Why? Please provide the scientific data that supports your
answer.
Performance-Based Regulations
11. Has our scientific knowledge and data progressed to the point
where performance-based regulations are technically feasible and
operationally practical? (e.g., fleet management performance,
individual driving performance--on-board monitoring, fitness for duty
performance monitoring) If so, please cite studies. If not, what
research and regulatory actions should be taken now to facilitate an
eventual conversion to a primarily performance-based regulatory
approach?
Regulation of Driver Pay
12. Drivers are generally paid by the mile. If they do not have
sufficient income, drivers may have to supplement their income by
working additional hours outside of the motor carrier industry or
violating the HOS regulations. This may compromise the intent of new
HOS regulations and may only be mitigated in a performance-based
system. In addition, CMV drivers are currently exempt from the overtime
provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 213(b)(1)).
Should new HOS regulations depend upon how a driver is paid? How should
such pay issues, (e.g., mileage, hourly, load, or some other measure)
be addressed? Should legislation be sought to remove the FLSA exemption
based upon scientific data? Why? What data is there to support your
answer?
In addition to seeking specific recommendations (and rationales)
relating to the questions above, the FHWA seeks comments on the
following issues related to these HOS provisions:
Compliance Monitoring
13. For prescriptive-based regulations and performance-based
regulations, answer each of the following questions separately. How
should HOS regulatory compliance be measured or monitored? Who should
monitor HOS regulatory compliance? How should HOS regulatory compliance
be verified?
14. The FHWA regulations allow on-board monitoring devices to be
used in lieu of conventional log books. Should the FHWA require on-
board monitoring devices or other electronic methods (e.g., global
positioning systems)? If the FHWA required these devices to be used,
what would be the costs for small entities to purchase and maintain on-
board monitoring devices or other electronic methods? This will help
the FHWA determine the impacts upon small entities as is required under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612).
The FHWA also would like to know the answers to the following
questions, but does not need these answers to formulate specific
proposals for new HOS regulations.
Conventional Hours-of-Service
Driving Time
15. The FHWA regulations currently require all CMV driving time to
be recorded. What other motor vehicles (i.e., personal conveyances,
automobiles, light duty trucks, small vans) should be included in the
definition of driving time to enhance safety and productivity based
upon scientific data? Please provide the scientific data that supports
your answer.
Adverse Driving Conditions
16. The FHWA regulations currently allow 2 extra continuous driving
hours if the driver encounters adverse driving conditions. How many, if
any, extra continuous driving time hours should be allowed due to
adverse driving conditions to enhance safety and productivity based
upon scientific data? Please provide the scientific data that supports
your answer.
Off-Duty Time
17. The FHWA has previously allowed time spent traveling in a CMV
(bobtail or fully loaded) from en route terminals to motels and
restaurants in the vicinity of the en route terminal to be considered
off-duty. (A bobtail CMV is a tractor operating without a trailer.) The
FHWA recently rescinded this interpretation because this practice may
produce additional fatigue and reduce available sleep time. Should the
FHWA consider time spent traveling in a CMV (bobtail or fully loaded)
from en route terminals to motels and restaurants in the vicinity of
the en route terminal as driving time or off-duty time for safety
purposes? Why? Please provide data that supports your answer.
18. The FHWA has previously allowed time spent traveling in a CMV
(fully loaded or empty) from the work reporting/releasing location to
the driver's residence to be considered off-duty. The FHWA recently
rescinded this interpretation also because this practice may also
produce additional fatigue and reduce available sleep time. This is
especially true when a driver resides a long distance from the terminal
where the driver is released from duty. When dispatched from the
driver's residence, the FHWA's previous interpretation required the
driver to consider the time as on-duty, driving time. Should the FHWA
consider time spent traveling in a CMV (fully loaded or empty) from the
work reporting/releasing location to the driver's residence as driving
time or off-duty time for safety purposes? Why? Please provide data
that supports your answer.
Total Circadian Cycle
19. Should there be specific clock-time or ``circadian trough/
peak'' provisions for safety purposes? Why? Please provide the
scientific data that supports your answer.
20. Should early morning driving time (e.g., 1:00 a.m. to 5:00
a.m.) be more restricted than driving time during normal daylight
driving time? Why? Please provide the scientific data that supports
your answer.
21. Should there be regulatory relief for late morning or evening
driving time (e.g., 8:00 a.m. to noon, or 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.)?
When and why? Please provide the scientific data that supports your
answer.
Split Sleep--General
22. Should the FHWA allow split-sleep periods in facilities other
than the sleeper berths to improve driver alertness? Why? Please
provide data that supports your answer.
23. Should periods of less than 2 hours in the sleeper berth or
other facility count toward the accumulation of a minimum off-duty
period? Why? Please provide data that supports your answer.
24. Should the total minimum sleeper berth time change if split
periods are used? Why? Please provide data that supports your answer.
[[Page 57259]]
25. What is the proportion of drivers who currently split their
periods of off-duty time for purposes of rest or sleep? Please provide
data that supports your answer.
26. How do drivers most commonly split their rest periods (6/2, 5/
3, 4/4)? Please provide data that supports your answer.
27. If split sleep periods are allowed, should there be some
minimum for the longer period of time to encourage at least one lengthy
period of sleep daily? Why? Please provide data that supports your
answer. (e.g., within the current 8 hour rule, there might be a
requirement for one period to be at least six hours)
28. Should there be some minimum for the shorter period of time to
encourage a minimum amount of rest? Why? Please provide data that
supports your answer. (e.g., within the current 8 hour rule, there
might be a requirement for one period to be at least three hours)
29. What is the proportion of drivers who utilize sleeping
compartments while the CMV is in motion? Please provide data that
supports your answer.
Split-Sleep Periods on Motor Coaches
30. Should the FHWA allow split-sleep periods for motor coach
drivers who sleep in a motor coach passenger seat? Why? Please provide
data that supports your answer. [The FHWA currently allows motor coach
drivers to sleep or rest in a motor coach seat at certain times.]
31. Should the FHWA allow drivers to use sleeper berths built into
the cargo compartment of motor coaches while the vehicle is in motion?
Are there safety concerns that should be considered? Please provide
data that supports your answer. [The FHWA is considering whether motor
coach drivers should be able to sleep or rest in a motor coach cargo
compartment at certain times.]
Exemptions
32. Should the FHWA allow exemptions, variations, or customizations
of any specific provisions (e.g., local/short haul versus long haul,
4,537 to 11,794 kilograms [10,001 to 26,000 pounds] gross vehicle
weight rated motor vehicles versus over 11,794 kilograms [26,000
pounds])?
Long-Haul Vs. Short-Haul Defined
a. How should the term ``long-haul'' be defined?
b. How should the term ``short-haul'' be defined? Should there be
other definitions? [regional, local] How should they be determined?
Why?
Variations by Weight of Vehicle
c. Should the HOS regulations be written in such a way that the
weight or size of the CMV is considered? Why? (i.e., 4,537 kilograms
(10,000 pounds) to 11,794 kilograms (26,000 pounds) gross vehicle
weight rating versus weight ratings over 11,794 kilograms)
Variations by Cargo
d. Should the HOS regulations be written in such a way that the
type of cargo transported is considered? Why? (i.e., hazardous
materials versus non-hazardous materials, passengers (bus) versus
freight, for-hire carriage versus private carriage)
e. Should the HOS rules for passenger carrier drivers differ from
the HOS rules for other CMV drivers? If yes, why should the HOS rules
be unique for passenger carrier drivers and how should they be
different? Please provide scientific data that supports your answer.
Small Motor Carriers
f. Should the FHWA have special provisions for small business motor
carriers? Why? (i.e., to be responsive to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requirements, see discussion below in Regulatory
Analyses and Notices)
g. How should small business motor carriers be defined?
h. What should those special provisions be (e.g., less paperwork,
different HOS limits, different rest periods, partial/total exemption)?
Other Segments Defined
i. Should the FHWA try to define any segments of the motor carrier
industry? Why?
j. How should the FHWA define segments of the industry?
k. Should the FHWA present a matrix/table, in a subsequent NPRM,
for comment?
Regulation of Shippers and Consignees
33. What consequences, if any, should be imposed upon a shipper or
consignee if a driver violates the HOS requirements due to the actions
or demands of the shipper or consignee?
34. How should the loading and unloading of freight, lumping, and
engaging in activities other than driving be addressed? Please provide
data that supports your answer.
35. How should situations where drivers encounter delays at
shippers or consignees be considered in the proposal?
36. Should the FHWA seek legislation from Congress to regulate
shippers and consignees to prohibit them from making demands on a motor
carrier and its drivers that would cause a violation of the HOS rules?
Why?
Cost and Benefit Analyses
37. What are the costs and benefits that would be associated with
HOS regulations and performance-based systems (these questions are
being asked to help determine the cost-benefit and the paperwork burden
associated with any HOS proposal)? Please address these following
specific questions:
a. What would be the unit cost for each type of monitoring device?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
b. How many hours would be necessary to process, review, and store
each type of record? Please provide data that supports your answer.
c. How many records per driver, would be generated? Per motor
carrier? Please provide data that supports your answer.
d. How many hours would be necessary to process these records?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
e. What would be the unit cost for staff compensation to handle
these records? Clerks? Management? Please provide data that supports
your answer.
f. What would be the unit cost for staff fringe benefits who handle
these records? Please provide data that supports your answer.
g. What are the various types and the average prices of each type
of commercial space to collect, inspect, and store these records?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
h. What is the unit cost of the non-productive staff time
(holidays, vacations, training, breaks, meetings) that should be used?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
i. What is the unit cost of staff supervision time (supervisory
wages, salary, fringe benefits, staff space, and non-productive time)?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
j. What is the type and average price of equipment used? Please
provide data that supports your answer.
k. What are the types and average prices of furniture, supplies,
and purchased services used? Please provide data that supports your
answer.
l. Are there any economies of scale that could be used in the
computations? Please provide data that supports your answer.
m. What are the unit costs for general and administrative services?
Please provide data that supports your answer.
n. What are the unit costs for organizational overhead? Please
provide data that supports your answer.
o. What is the average cost of CMV accidents involving human
fatalities?
[[Page 57260]]
Please provide data that supports your answer.
p. What is the average cost of CMV accidents involving only bodily
injuries, excluding fatalities? Please provide data that supports your
answer.
q. What is the average cost of CMV accidents involving only
property damage? Please provide data that supports your answer.
r. What is the average cost of lost productivity time for
individuals injured in CMV accidents? Please provide data that supports
your answer.
s. What other monetary considerations should the FHWA use in the
cost and benefit analysis of the revised HOS regulations? Please
provide data that supports your answer.
IX. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
All comments received before the close of business on the comment
closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available
for examination in FHWA Docket MC-96-28 at the above address. Comments
received after the comment closing date will be filed in FHWA Docket
MC-96-28 and will be considered to the extent practicable, but the FHWA
may issue an NPRM at any time after the close of the comment period. In
addition to late comments, the FHWA will also continue to file, in the
docket, relevant information that becomes available after the comment
closing date, and interested persons should continue to examine the
docket for new material.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FHWA has determined that this document may contain a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. It is a
significant regulatory action under the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures because this action has substantial
public interest. In addition to the substantial public interest, the
HOS regulations impose the largest paperwork burden on the FHWA's
regulated industry. Any significant change to the HOS requirements, or
their recordation requirements, will also have a significant impact
upon the paperwork burden estimates.
The FHWA does not know what direction this rulemaking will take or
what the economic impacts of any proposals will be in the future. The
FHWA does not expect that this rulemaking will be inconsistent with any
other agency actions or materially alter the budgetary impact of any
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs. Evaluation of the
costs of this rulemaking action cannot be determined at this time.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
To meet the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this rule on
small entities and has preliminarily determined that this regulatory
action will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
Although this document does not include any specific proposal at
this time, the FHWA believes this action will lead to a proposed rule
that will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small motor carriers. The FHWA requests small entities to comment on
the questions asked in this advance notice (specifically the questions
with respect to the costs and benefits of compliance and question 17
above), so that the FHWA may accurately determine the economic impacts
any proposal will have on the small entities.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
This action has been analyzed using the principles and criteria
contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been preliminarily
determined that this proposal may have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment.
Although there are no proposals in this document, any future
proposals are expected to preempt State laws and regulations with
respect to the HOS of interstate motor carriers and their drivers.
These changes, if adopted, would limit the policy making discretion of
the States. The additional costs or burdens that the FHWA would impose
upon the States because of this action would be generated from the
requirement that the States incorporate these future proposed changes
into their safety regulations for interstate operations. The FHWA does
not expect this action would infringe upon the State's ability to
discharge traditional State governmental functions because interstate
commerce, which is the subject of these regulations regarding
interstate operations, has traditionally been governed by Federal laws.
The FHWA expects that it would require, as a condition of the Motor
Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP), the States to adopt these
regulations for intrastate safety once they are promulgated.
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), the FHWA will ask State and local governments
to comment upon any proposals made to amend the HOS regulations and the
effects the changes will have upon the various State and local
governments.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor
Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and
activities do not apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the OMB regulations, 5 CFR 1320, Controlling Paperwork
Burdens on the Public (1995), the FHWA will be required to estimate the
burden new regulations impose to generate, maintain, retain, disclose,
or provide information to or for the FHWA. The FHWA believes that this
rulemaking action will result in changes that would substantially
reduce the collection of information requirements that are currently
approved.
On January 25, 1994, the OMB approved the information collection
request for driver's time cards under 49 CFR 395.1(e). It was assigned
OMB control number 2125-0196. The information collection request
estimates that the annual cost to the public is $110,733,330. This is
based upon 11,073,333 hours burden for alternative time records (motor
carriers usually and customarily utilize time cards or time sheets for
this purpose). See Table 2 for a summary of this information
collection.
On February 23, 1995, the OMB approved the information collection
request for driver's records of duty status under 49 CFR 395.8. The OMB
assigned control number 2125-0016. This information collection request
estimates an annual cost to the public of $399,798,455. The estimate
includes an annual time burden of 11,720,681 hours for records of duty
status and supporting documents. See Table 2 for a summary of this
information collection.
Background of Past OMB Approvals
OMB Number: 2125-0016.
Title: Driver's Record of Duty Status (RODS).
Background: Title 49 U.S.C. 31502 allows the Secretary of
Transportation to promulgate regulations which establish maximum hours
of service of employees of motor carriers. The Secretary has adopted
regulations that require information to be recorded in a specified
manner, but no specific form is required. The FHWA regulations allow
motor carriers to make electronic
[[Page 57261]]
records produced through the use of automatic on-board recording
devices, in lieu of making paper records. The FHWA estimates that these
automatic on-board recording devices substantially reduce, by as much
as 90 percent, the time involved in preparing, filing, and storing
paper. The FHWA believes that the use of automatic on-board recorders
continues to be uncommon and is not likely to grow significantly based
upon the current regulations.
The RODS must be maintained with all supporting documents for a
period of six months from the date of the RODS.
The FHWA believes the record keeping requirements are necessary for
motor carriers and drivers to properly monitor their compliance with
the HOS regulations. It is also necessary for Federal, State, and local
officials who are charged with monitoring and enforcing the HOS
regulations. The HOS regulations are allowed by statute to promote the
safe operation of CMVs, and the FHWA believes this record keeping
requirement is not unnecessarily duplicative of information that would
otherwise be reasonably accessible to the FHWA.
Based upon improved data collection, the FHWA's 1996 data indicates
there are 2,084,000 drivers and 390,000 motor carriers in interstate
commerce that would be subject to the HOS regulations. The FHWA's data
indicates that 70 percent of CMV drivers operate farther than 100 air-
miles from their normal work reporting location and 30 percent are
eligible to use the 100 air-mile radius exception in Sec. 395.1(e).
Recordkeepers: Approximately 1,452,000 CMV drivers.
Average Burden per Response: 2 minutes for driver's to prepare the
daily record of duty status; 15 seconds per record for motor carriers
to audit each record of duty status; and 5 seconds per record to file
records of duty status and all supporting documents.
Collection of Information Frequency: RODS: Every day of the year.
Two or more days off duty may be kept on one record. Supporting
documents: Every day of work.
Time Records
OMB Number: 2125-0196.
Title: Time Records.
Background: Title 49 U.S.C. 31502 allows the Secretary of
Transportation to promulgate regulations which establish maximum hours
of service of employees of motor carriers. The Secretary has adopted
regulations that require information to be recorded in a specified
manner, but no specific form is required. The regulations allow motor
carriers to make electronic time records, in lieu of making paper time
records.
Recordkeepers: 632,000 CMV drivers or their motor carriers.
Average Burden per Response: 2 minutes per time card per day.
Collection of Information Frequency: Every day of work.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has
determined that this action will not affect the quality of the
environment.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 395
Global positioning systems, Highway safety, Highways and roads,
Intelligent Transportation Systems, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued on: October 29, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
Table 2.--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden (Currently Approved)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
OMB control No. Section No. of frequency per Total annual Hours per Total hours
recordkeepers recordkeeping records recordkeeper
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2125-0016--Expires Feb. 28, 1998....... 395.8 & 395.15................. 1,864,587 200 372,917,400 0.0333 14,799,033
2125-0196--Expires Mar. 31, 1997....... 395.1(e)....................... 1,100,000 302 332,200,000 0.0333 11,073,333
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix to Preamble for FHWA Docket No. MC-96-28 RIN 2125-AD
A. Research Into the HOS of Drivers
Copies of all research reports mentioned below are included in
the FHWA docket, number MC-96-28, and will be available for
examination. In addition to comments and research reports received
in response to this notice, the FHWA will also continue to file in
the docket other research reports that become available after the
publication of this document. Interested persons should continue to
examine the docket for new material.
Prior Research
The first scientific study which addressed the HOS of U.S.
commercial drivers was performed in the late 1930's. On April 25,
1938, the ICC requested the United States Public Heath Service
(USPHS) to conduct an investigation into the problem of fatigue and
HOS of drivers of commercial motor vehicles operating in interstate
commerce. See Fatigue and Hours of Service of Interstate Truck
Drivers, U.S. Public Health Service, Washington, D.C., Public Health
Bulletin No. 265, 1941. The USPHS found that ``it would * * * appear
that a reasonable limitation of the HOS would, at the very least,
reduce the number of drivers on the road with very low functional
efficiency. This, it might reasonably be inferred, would act in the
interest of highway safety.'' Although the ICC indicated the need
for further study, no further study was undertaken by USPHS or the
ICC.
In the 1970's, the FHWA and its sister agency, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), conducted three
studies which investigated driver performance and fatigue. They are
reported in:
1. William Harris, et al. Human Factors Research, Inc., ``A
Study of the Relationships Among Fatigue, HOS, and Safety of
Operations of Truck and Bus Drivers,'' (Springfield, VA, National
Technical Information Service, 1972, (PB-213 963)). The general
findings of the study indicated that driver performance
deteriorates, driver alertness (as reflected in psychophysiological
arousal) diminishes, rest breaks become less effective, and accident
probability increases, all within the 1972 10-hour daily limitation
on driving time. The study also concluded that the situation would
likely remain as long as drivers are rewarded economically in direct
proportion to the amount of time spent on the highway.
2. Mackie, R.R., O'Hanlon, J.P., and McCauley M., Human Factors
Research, Inc. ``A Study of Heat, Noise, and Vibration in Relation
to Driver Performance and Physiological Status,'' December 1974.
This study measured the stressful effects of heat, noise, and
vibration on the physiological status, feelings of alertness and
fatigue, and actual driving performance of automobile and truck
drivers under realistic conditions. The research found that heat and
humidity between 80 and 85 degrees Farenheit WetBulb-Globe-
Temperature (WBGT) index had somewhat adverse, but less dramatic,
[[Page 57262]]
effects on driver physiology and level of arousal for professional
truck drivers than nonprofessional drivers. The WBGT is an index
reflecting the combined effects of air temperature, air velocity,
and relative humidity. The study's findings also indicated that the
levels of fatigue and central nervous system arousal experienced by
drivers were not systematically different for the different noise-
vibration condition encountered.
3. Mackie, Robert R., and Miller, James C., Human Factors
Research, Inc., ``Effects of HOS Regularity of Schedules, and Cargo
Loading on Truck and Bus Driver Fatigue,'' (Springfield, VA,
National Technical Information Service, 1978 (PB-290-957)). The
study's findings indicated 18 main points, including that: (a) Some
cumulative fatigue occurs during 6 consecutive days of relay
operations, but time of day strongly affects how much will be seen;
(b) participation in moderately heavy cargo loading to the extent
engaged in by many relay truck drivers increases the severity of
fatigue associated with irregular schedules; (c) sleeper driver
fatigue, physiological state, and performance are strongly affected
by time of day; (d) bus drivers operating on irregular schedules
suffer greater subjective fatigue and physiological stress than
drivers on a regular schedule; and (e) the major problem posed by
irregular operations is that the driver must at some time drive
during those hours of the night when circadian depressions in
psychophysiological arousal are substantial.
The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social
Sciences' ``Prolonged Heavy Vehicle Driving Performance: Effects of
Unpredictable Shift Onset and Duration and Convoy Versus Independent
Driving Conditions'' (September 1983, Technical Report 585) found
that the effects of prolonged driving depend in part on when that
prolonged driving takes place, rather than simply on the prolonged
driving's actual duration. This was an empirical, field experiment
that used twelve Army truck drivers in experimental trucks in a
continuous convoy on four consecutive days on a pre-selected 300-
mile route. The report notes that feelings of fatigue, overall, did
not show dramatic change over time, although a trend was noticed in
the pattern of performance deterioration toward the end of the late
shift for drowsiness, exhaustion, and awareness-daydreaming-
hallucinations. The conclusion was that it is the timing, and not
the duration of the late shift, that makes driving more fatiguing.
In 1985, the American Automobile Association's (AAA) Foundation
for Traffic Safety in ``A Report on the Determination and Evaluation
of the Role of Fatigue in Heavy Truck Accidents,'' examined about
250 accident reports of heavy truck accidents in six Western States.
The study looked specifically at the driver's pre-accident
activities and attempted to determine whether fatigue was a primary
or probable cause of the accident. The study concluded that fatigue
was the probable or primary cause of 41% of those heavy truck
accidents.
In 1987, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment's
(OTA) report, ``Gearing Up For Safety,'' concluded that aggressive
Federal research programs addressing fatigue and sleep issues and
determining their role in truck accidents should be top priorities.
The report also concluded that the FHWA should reexamine the HOS
regulations, and develop revised standards based upon current
knowledge.
This same OTA report noted that in the Insurance Institute for
Highway Safety's ``Sleeper Berth Use as Risk Factor for Tractor-
Trailer Driver Fatality,'' evaluated the association of sleeper
berth use in two periods and tractor-trailer driver fatalities. The
study found that sleeper berth use increased the risk of fatality
more than twofold. Night driving was also found to significantly
increase the risk of truck driver fatality.
In February 1988, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in
``Tractor-Trailer Driver Fatality: The Role of Nonconsecutive Rest
In A Sleeper Berth,'' revised its earlier study of the association
of sleeper berth use and tractor-trailer driver fatalities. The
revised study found that sleeper berth use increased the risk of
fatality more than threefold, not twofold as originally reported to
Congress' OTA.
In June 1988, the Australia Transport and Communications' (ATC)
Federal Office of Road Safety in ``Driver Fatigue: Concepts,
Measurement and Crash Countermeasures'' (Report No. CR 72) reviewed
the concepts and theories directly related to fatigue, the
measurement of fatigue, and factors contributing to the onset and
development of fatigue. Also reviewed was the degree to which
fatigue is associated with road crashes, countermeasures having
potential for offsetting the degrading effects of fatigue on safety,
and an identification of research issues having promise for reducing
the role of fatigue in crashes.
On November 29-30, 1988, the FHWA sponsored a symposium on truck
and bus driver fatigue. Researchers in the area of fatigue and data
collection attended, along with motor carrier participants. The
primary purpose of this symposium was to identify research that was
needed in the area of driver fatigue.
The DOT, in ``Transportation-Related Sleep Research'' (March
1989), reported to the Congress about the Department's actions in
researching sleep and its effects on transportation safety. The
report gave special emphasis to the efforts of NHTSA and FHWA
related to the truck and bus industries. The discussion included the
FHWA-sponsored symposium, past commercial driver fatigue- and
alertness-related research, and future research to be undertaken.
The Institut National de Recherche sur les Transportes et Leur
Securite's (INRETS) report, ``Working Conditions of Drivers in Road
Transport,'' (October 1989, ACTES INRETS No. 23) presented twelve
research discussion abstracts written by various researchers from
Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Sweden, Netherlands, and the
United Kingdom at a conference in France on June 3 and 4, 1988.
Topics included ``Sleepiness at Work: Measurement and Regulation,''
``Reviewing Fatigue and Driving,'' ``Disposition of Waiting Time and
the Waiting Behaviour of Truck-drivers,'' ``Working Hours of
European International Truck-Drivers,'' ``Know-how in the Management
of Working-Time and Safety,'' ``Medical Survey of French Truck-
Drivers: a Cross-sectional Study of the Most Frequent Pathologies,''
``Problem-Study of the Work of Heavy-goods Drivers in Quebec: Work
Accomplished and Future Prospects,'' and ``Regulations in Seven
E.E.C. Countries Concerning Work Duration of Long Distance Lorry
Drivers.''
The NTSB published a study in February 1990, of 182 fatal-to-
the-CMV-driver heavy truck accidents in eight States resulting in
207 fatalities. The NTSB's accident investigations considered the
presence of fatigue, alcohol and other drugs, and medical factors
involved in these accidents. Fatigue was implicated as a causal
factor in 31 percent of these accidents.
The ATC's ``NSW (New South Wales) Heavy Vehicle Crash Study
Final Technical Report'' (August 1990, Report No. CR 92 (FORS), CR
5/90 (RSB)) concluded that ``heavy vehicle driver fatigue is clearly
an important issue * * * in at least 14 percent of (Australian)
heavy vehicle crashes.'' The report indicated that the regulations
should recognize that there are factors other than just the period
of time at the wheel of the heavy vehicle that are important.
The FHWA's ``HOS Study: Report to Congress'' in November 1990,
reported on the FHWA's progress in addressing driver fatigue. The
report summarized prior research, discussed factors that had been
identified with the onset of driver fatigue, and described the
FHWA's current research efforts.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's ``Who Violates Work
Hour Rules: A Survey of Tractor-Trailer Drivers'' (January 1992)
surveyed long-haul tractor-trailer drivers to estimate what
proportion of drivers report that they regularly violate the HOS
rules and to identify the drivers most likely to commit HOS
violations. The survey found that almost three-fourths of the
drivers responding to the survey violated the HOS rules. About two-
thirds of the drivers reported that they routinely drive or work
more than the allowable weekly maximum. The survey found that the
primary impetus for violating the HOS rules appeared to be economic
factors, including tight delivery schedules and very low driver
earnings per mile rates (less than 30 cents per mile). The study
reported many other driver, job, and vehicle characteristics
significantly associated with the HOS violator.
The ATC's ``Strategies to Combat Fatigue in the Long Distance
Road Transport Industry, Stage 1: The Industry Perspective'' (May
1992, Report No. CR 108) reported on an effort to gather information
about the strategies that would be effective and practical in
reducing driver fatigue. The study involved international
authorities in the area of fatigue, major employer and employee
organizations in Australia, and a questionnaire-based survey of
drivers across Australia. The results of the study indicated that
shorter trips and greater flexibility in organizing the trip,
reducing driving in the early hours of the morning, improving roads,
easing schedules, and improving loading and
[[Page 57263]]
unloading were all factors that were either related to lower levels
of fatigue in drivers or were favored by them as ways of managing
their fatigue.
The Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute's ``Evaluation
of the Impact of Changes in the Hours of Service Regulations on
Efficiency, Drivers and Safety'' (October 1992) surveyed the
opinions of five large for-hire motor carriers and their drivers
concerning the FHWA's 1992 proposed change to the HOS regulations.
The study distributed 3,500 survey forms to these five motor
carriers which, in turn, distributed the forms to their drivers. The
study received 754 surveys. The study concluded that ``[d]rivers,
carriers, and society in general would appear to experience positive
net gains from a change in the cumulative HOS rules from the current
70-in-8 day rule to a 24-hour restart provision.'' The study report
clearly indicated that the survey was ``in no way meant to be
represented as a random sample.''
The ATC's ``Strategies to Combat Fatigue in the Long Distance
Road Transport Industry, The Bus and Coach Perspective'' (June 1993,
Report No. CR 122) is a continuation of the May 1992 report
discussed above. This report focuses upon bus and motor coach
drivers (the previous report discussed only truck drivers). It also
reported that bus and motor coach drivers typically report fatigue
before the tenth hour of work, and most commonly in the early hours
of the morning.
The Murdoch University Institute for Research into Safety and
Transport's ``Driver Impairment Fatigue and Driving Simulation:
Conference Programme and Proceedings'' (September 16-17, 1993, ISBN:
1 86308 014 7) reported on twenty five research projects that were
presented at this 1993 conference. The twenty five research papers
are included in the docket.
The Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.'s ``Changing Trucking
to Match A Changing Work Force'' (November 1993, SP-979) included
papers on fatigue and sleep deprivation, as well as labor force
trends and an overall review of changes that should take place. In
``Driver Fatigue and Long Distance Truck Drivers: Implications for
Trucking Operations,'' the author, James C. Miller of Miller
Ergonomics, discusses scheduling of over-the-road, commercial
trucking operations. He suggests that drivers who have work shifts
that end just before dawn, should have their work-rest cycle altered
to allow more time to rest during the 24 hours leading up to the end
of the work shift. This additional period of time to rest could then
be split between additional time for cumulative sleep and the
introduction of time for a nap. In Merrill M. Mitler's report on
``Sleep Deprivation and Its Consequences for Performance,'' he
recommends five things. His recommendations include: (a) Recognition
that present day risks due to fatigue-related human error
necessitate accurate cost accounting of human error accidents and
effective approaches to risk management; (b) round-the-clock work
schedules must be biologically compatible with human sleep
requirements; (c) drivers who transport the public or dangerous
materials should be tested regularly for their ability to stay awake
on the job; (d) people with sleep pathology such as obstuctive sleep
apnea and narcolepsy must be identified and treated; and (e) the
Federal government must take the lead in formulating new hiring and
scheduling guidelines that do not place workers at jobs and on
schedules for which they are biologically unsuited.
The University of Tennessee's ``Driver-Related Factors Involved
with Truck Accidents'' (January 1994, STC Project No. 23385-019)
study found that fatigue was not specified as a contributing factor
in accident reports, but that truck drivers reported that fatigue
was a major crash cause.
The ATC's ``Strategies to Combat Fatigue in the Long Distance
Road Transport Industry, Stage 2: Evaluation of Alternative Work
Practices'' (September 1994, Report No. CR 144) found that a 12 hour
trip was fatiguing for drivers, irrespective of schedule. In
particular, driving to a flexible schedule, where rest was taken on
a ``needs'' basis rather than according to the breaks specified in
current (Australian) regulations, was found not to be different than
driving performance in driver-subjective outcomes. It also did not
appear to make a difference whether the trip was ``staged'' or
driven by a single driver. In addition, staged trip drivers were
more fatigued at the beginning of the staged trip, compared to the
other two trips that they undertook, and remained so at the end of
these trips. The study concludes that the effects of accumulated or
chronic fatigue may overshadow the effects of acute or short-term
fatigue, at least within a 12 hour trip.
The NTSB's January 1995 publication, ``Factors That Affect
Fatigue in Heavy Truck Accidents,'' PB95-917001, NTSB/SS-95/01,
examined factors believed to influence driver fatigue. Since the
study was not meant to be a study of the incidence of fatigue, the
NTSB specifically selected truck accidents that were likely to
include fatigue-related accidents, such as single-vehicle accidents
that occured at night. Based upon its review of 107 accidents, using
a multivariate statistical analysis (a multiple discriminant
analysis), the NTSB found the most important factors in predicting a
fatigue-related accident in its sample to be the duration of the
driver's last sleep period, the total hours of sleep obtained during
the 24 hours prior to the accident, and split sleep patterns.
The FHWA has also placed in the docket a paper entitled
``Management of Fatigue in the Road Transport Industry'' which was
distributed by the Second International Conference on Fatigue in
Transportation at Fremantle, Western Australia (February 1996). The
discussion paper states that ``over the final two days of the
conference, delegates discussed the characteristics of fatigued
drivers and what steps could be taken to measure and limit fatigue
by Government, the transport industry, and the community who are
both drivers and clients of the transport industry.'' The paper
provides recommendations at the conclusion of the discussion of each
item.
The ATC's ``Strategies to Combat Fatigue in the Long Distance
Road Transport Industry, Stage 2: Evaluation of Two-up Operations''
(December 1995, Report No. CR 158) suggests that the best strategy
to manage fatigue on very long trips may be the judicious use of
effective night rest in combination with two-up driving. The study
used a regular pre-selected route. The route typically took 100
hours to complete and was a total distance of 4,500 kilometers. The
route traversed remote zones. The report concludes that the most
effective improvements in managing fatigue must take into account
the overall work practices, including activities in the past week,
activities before driving begins as well as the way in which the
trip is structured.
Current FHWA Research in Relation to Fatigue and Alertness
Driver Fatigue and Alertness Study
The FHWA's motor carrier research and technology program has
undertaken research into driver fatigue and loss of alertness. The
program incorporates and integrates physiological, psychological,
and performance testing technologies. The research began in earnest
in 1989, with the award of the baseline ``Driver Fatigue and
Alertness Study'' to the Essex Corporation, Goleta, California, and
a companion study of physiological measures of alertness awarded to
the Trucking Research Institute (TRI) of the American Trucking
Associations Foundation in 1990. For over six years, this massive
piece of research has encompassed one of the most technologically
and logistically complex field research activities concerning CMV
drivers ever conducted--in either the U.S. or the world. This
significant piece of research forms the basis for many of the
following human factor studies examining driver fatigue and
alertness that will be conducted by the FHWA in the years to come.
The FHWA's commercial driver fatigue and alertness effort is
being coordinated with the NHTSA and with other DOT operating
administrations that support related research on operator alertness,
especially the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Federal
Railroad Administration. At the same time, ongoing interaction with
the various motor carrier industry associations and drivers'' groups
continues. These include the TRI, the National Private Truck
Council's Private Fleet Management Institute (PFMI), the Owner-
Operators Independent Drivers' Association (OOIDA), the Independent
Truck Driver's Association, the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Transport Canada, the Private Motor Truck Council of
Canada, and the Canadian Trucking Association.
In 1996, the FHWA will conclude the multi-year, baseline study
of Driver Fatigue and Alertness. It has been accomplished with the
significant cooperation of five research contractors, two
governments (U.S. and Canada), two industry associations, three
participating motor carriers, and 80 professional drivers and their
management and labor representatives. The overall intent of this
research has been to:
1. Provide a technically sound basis for evaluating the current
HOS requirements for CMV operators; and
2. Identify potentially effective countermeasures for reducing
fatigue and increasing driver alertness.
[[Page 57264]]
Through the efforts of these various participants and the
combined scientific expertise they offer, the ``Driver Fatigue and
Alertness Study'' has obtained information on a broad range of
interrelated items involving the driver/vehicle environment, such
as:
1. Driver performance and vehicle operating parameters;
2. Objective and subjective measures of driver psychological and
physiological state; and
3. The vehicle operating environment (e.g., cab temperature and
air quality).
The TRI has participated with the FHWA in providing assistance
to help collect, review, and analyze physiological data from the
same driver test subjects. Additionally, the TRI, Transport Canada,
and the Canadian Trucking Research Institute have provided financial
and on-site assistance to the project.
During the test phase, data were collected through driver field
testing for four different driving and operating conditions. A set
of field experiments, designed to replicate a range of carrier
operations, performed under real world conditions, were undertaken:
1. A ``baseline'' U.S. operation, consisting of a regular
daytime schedule of 10 hours of driving;
2. An ``operational'' U.S. schedule, which saw driving start and
end at different times of the day and night. This schedule was
chosen to permit the assessment of a varying schedule set to
maximize distance traveled, and yet adhere to the 10-hour driving
limit and 8-hour off-duty requirement now in effect;
3. A 13-hour daytime driving schedule operated in Canada which,
while longer than the U.S. regulations currently allow, is permitted
in certain Canadian provinces. The FHWA was interested in learning
if this extended schedule may promote increased driver alertness by
keeping the driver's work and rest cycles closer to a 24-hour
circadian time table; and
4. A 13-hour nighttime driving schedule, again undertaken in
Canada, to ascertain if extended nighttime driving, while on a
regular schedule, had adverse effects upon driver performance.
Concurrent with this study, the FHWA undertook, in early 1995, a
survey of 500 drivers to assess current use, and to determine
potential application of safe, legal, and effective fatigue-reducing
and alertness-enhancing countermeasures.
The study was the most comprehensive ``operational'' study ever
performed and benefitted from unprecedented international
partnerships among governments, industry, and research communities.
The study has already demonstrated that these partnerships are
needed to develop solutions to the fatigue and alertness problem.
The FHWA anticipates that a final report of the ``Driver Fatigue
and Alertness Study'' will be made available to the public this
autumn. A copy of the final report will be placed in the public
docket when it is completed.
At congressional direction, in 1991, 1992, and 1993, the FHWA
has undertaken a series of additional studies associated with driver
fatigue. These research efforts are:
1. Longer Combination Vehicle Driver Fatigue and Stress Study;
2. Driver Work and Rest Needs Study;
3. Interstate Rest Area Availability Study;
4. Obstructive Sleep Apnea Study;
5. Commercial Driver Fitness-for-Duty Testing Study; and
6. Performance of Older Commercial Drivers Study.
Longer Combination Vehicle Driver Fatigue and Stress Study
Section 4007 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act (ISTEA), Pub. L. 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, directed the
Department to perform a study on the possible effect of multiple-
trailer combination vehicle (MTCV) operations on driver stress and
fatigue. Working together with the Battelle Human Affairs Research
Center and the Oregon Trucking Association, the FHWA and the NHTSA
directed this 24-driver, 2,700 mile study that used specially
equipped and loaded single and triple-trailer combination vehicles
under controlled experimental conditions. Typical operating
conditions were encountered and standard operating practices were
followed. Tractors were equipped with video and digital equipment to
gather data on the drivers' performance during the study.
Test drivers answered standardized questionnaires concerning
their perception of stress and fatigue during the driving day. In
addition, measurements were taken of the drivers' physiological
responses, mental processes associated with driving safety and
performance, and driving performance. Of the nineteen measures used
in the study, only two produced statistically significant results.
These were a measure of perceived workload, and a measure of
steering wheel reversals. Interestingly, only the drivers'
subjective perception of increased workload while driving MTCV's
suggested that such operations might result in increased driver
stress and fatigue.
This study indicated that the most important contributing factor
in predicting stress or fatigue is the driver. Tolerance of
potentially fatiguing conditions varies a great deal among
professional truck drivers. The study also has shown that, although
the number of trailers attached to the tractor may influence a
drivers' subjective estimate of his or her fatigue, the related
objective measures of performance and physiological condition
registered very little, if any, difference. It appears that vehicle
variations alone are not significant predictors of driver fatigue
and stress under these conditions (e.g., drivers, daytime driving,
12 consecutive hours off-duty).
Driver Work and Rest Needs Study
This study is designed to assess the work and rest needs of CMV
drivers. Working with the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research,
the FAA, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the FHWA seeks
to determine driver performance and physiological and subjective
states after varying amounts of sleep. This study is using four new
and different technologies to develop a means by which alertness-
related performance can be measured and driver proficiency predicted
(i.e., performance-based technology). This study is projected to be
completed in late 1997. The study will also attempt to determine how
much off-duty time is required to ensure a driver obtains enough
sleep to be sufficiently rejuvenated to safely operate a CMV.
Interstate Rest Area Availability Study
The TRI and its subcontractors studied the adequacy of truck
parking at public rest areas on the Dwight D. Eisenhower Interstate
Highway System and private truck stops adjacent to those highways.
States were surveyed about parking capacity and restrictions at
public rest areas. The research also observed truckers' usage of
public and private stops along Interstate Route 81, interviewed CMV
drivers, and surveyed motor carriers and private truck stop
operators about the perceived need for, and availability of,
Interstate CMV parking. Based partly upon this information,
assessments of utilization and demand for public and private parking
spaces for CMVs were also undertaken. A final report on the study's
findings was completed in May 1996.
Obstructive Sleep Apnea Study
Working with the TRI and the University of Pennsylvania
Hospital, the FHWA is responding to congressional direction to
examine the problem of obstructive sleep apnea among CMV operators.
The overall goals of the study are to:
1. Obtain a more precise estimate of obstructive sleep apnea
based upon CMV operators' responses to a questionnaire regarding the
prevalence of sleep apnea in a sample of CMV drivers who may be at
high risk because of the disorder; and
2. Estimate the level of sleep apnea (i.e., identify a threshold
of apneatic episodes during sleep) at which the CMV drivers may be
operating while impaired.
First identified in the 1960's, obstructive sleep apnea has been
recognized as a major health problem, affecting millions of
Americans. The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea among CMV
drivers may be greater than the four percent estimated in the
general male population. Truck driving is largely a sedentary
occupation and, therefore, conducive to obesity. Obesity, along with
age and high blood pressure, is associated with an increased risk of
obstructive sleep apnea.
Because obstructive sleep apnea is a disorder characterized by
breathing cessations, it interrupts restful sleep. The quality of
sleep is greatly diminished due to frequent awakenings. Identified
as a leading cause of excessive daytime sleepiness, obstructive
sleep apnea has been found to greatly increase the potential for
accidents among sufferers. Thus, it poses a potentially significant
risk to drivers of CMVs and, in turn, the motoring public.
To obtain an accurate estimate of the prevalence of obstructive
sleep apnea among the CMV driver population, the University of
Pennsylvania Hospital first conducted a pilot test to validate a
questionnaire using 200 truck drivers drawn from the TRI's list of
operators. Results of that pilot test, obtained in January 1995,
demonstrated the feasibility of such a sampling effort in obtaining
[[Page 57265]]
information about apneatic conditions from the CMV driving
population. During 1996, a full-scale sample will be undertaken,
with results provided on the prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea
among the CMV driving population.
Commercial Driver Fitness-for-Duty Testing Study
At congressional direction, the FHWA also has sought to identify
and test technologies, both in-terminal and in-vehicle, that will
detect and identify a driver who is not fit for duty. An initial
study, begun by the TRI and its partner Systems Technology, Inc.
(STI) in 1993, undertook an evaluation of the accuracy and
reliability of four fitness-for-duty performance tests. The research
evaluated the testing devices to determine their effectiveness at
motor carriers' terminals, and also sought to determine if
miniaturized versions of the equipment could be successfully used
in-cab, to test drivers away from their home terminal.
Data were collected on drivers' test results, driver and motor
carrier management acceptance of the tasks, the effects of terminal
and in-cab environments on the hardware, and system reliability and
maintainability. The conclusion of this initial study was that in-
cab testing was feasible. The findings of the study also recommended
that, for a motor carrier's program to work effectively, testing had
to be made mandatory, and the motor carrier had to permit drivers
failing the test to stop driving and take a rest without penalty.
In early 1995, the FHWA entered into a second phase of fitness-
for-duty testing, also with the TRI and STI. More frequent
monitoring of driver alertness was instituted. Using a second-
generation version of in-vehicle testing equipment employed in the
first generation's effort, the TRI and its subcontractor also added
a lane tracking device to monitor the driver's fitness-for-duty.
Under the proposed study design, a driver using this device must
first establish a ``baseline'' of performance that documented his or
her own ability to keep a vehicle in its lane. If a deviation from
the baseline is detected, the driver would be alerted. If the
deviation continues, both the driver and the motor carrier would be
notified. The test driver then would be required to stop the vehicle
at the nearest safe location and take a five minute test. Depending
upon the test results, the driver would either be permitted to
continue driving or be required to sleep, or nap, before continuing
to drive.
The NHTSA is focusing on continuous monitoring of drivers in its
research on commercial driver fitness-for-duty testing. The ultimate
goal is to produce a practical vehicle-based driver alertness
monitor for use in heavy vehicles. The technologies employed include
systems to evaluate the driver's steering and lane tracking
performance, and his or her psychophysiological condition
(principally eye activity). A contemporary and complementary
fitness-for-duty study to the FHWA's research, the Carnegie-Mellon
Research Institute is conducting the NHTSA's research. This research
will use several equipment prototypes mounted in two CMVs. This work
is based upon previous driving simulator studies at the Virginia
Polytechnical Institute and State University. It will produce a
recommended specification for heavy vehicle driver alertness
monitors, including both detection algorithms and appropriate driver
warning devices.
Performance of Older Commercial Drivers Study
In 1993, the Congress directed the FHWA to undertake research to
determine the influence of age on CMV drivers' performance. Again
relying on the services of the TRI and subcontractors, the study
investigated 15 human perceptual, cognitive, and psychomotor
abilities. Age, by itself, was not found to be a significant
predictor of driving performance. Nevertheless, older CMV drivers
(defined in this study as 50 years or older) are more likely to
demonstrate age-related perceptual, cognitive, and psychomotor
impairments which directly influence driving performance. However,
their performance was improved after they had taken training.
B. Future FHWA Research Envisioned
A number of new research projects are planned for 1996 and
beyond that will evaluate driver performance and needs. A number of
these will be undertaken in response to congressional recommendation
and direction. Topics include:
a. Assessment of Technological Interventions;
b. Impact of Loading and Unloading Commercial Vehicles on Driver
Fatigue and Alertness;
c. Drivers Engaged in Local/Short Haul Operations;
d. Sleeper Berth Use and Fatigue;
e. Shipper and Consignee Involvement in Driver HOS Violations;
f. Scheduling Practices;
g. Driver Proficiency and Wellness; and
h. Crash Investigation Project.
Assessment of Technological Interventions
In 1996, the FHWA, in cooperation with the TRI, will begin an
assessment of the most promising technological interventions and
other countermeasures identified in the Driver Fatigue and Alertness
Study and other research. Individual interventions and
countermeasures will be field-tested and evaluated in terms of their
feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Also with the TRI, the FHWA will
develop, evaluate, and disseminate educational and training programs
targeted at CMV drivers, dispatchers, risk managers, and shippers.
Current knowledge about fatigue and effective countermeasures,
including ways CMV drivers can recognize impending drowsiness, will
be explained.
Impact of Loading and Unloading Commercial Vehicles on Driver
Fatigue and Alertness
In 1978, Human Factors Research, Incorporated (now Essex
Corporation) conducted a study for the NHTSA which included a
limited assessment of the influence of driver fatigue on cargo
loading and unloading. Using a simulated loading task, the study
sought to determine if cargo loading either enhanced or reduced the
CMV driver's alertness. The results indicated mixed effects on the
driver's subjective feelings, physiological status, and performance.
It appeared to researchers that performing the loading task had
``some beneficial activating effects that persisted for much of the
driving stint, especially during late night/early morning trips.''
Yet, the final report also found ``considerably greater incidence of
`critical incidents' involving sleepiness or lack of attention for
drivers who engaged in moderate work.''
The limited 1978 assessment left unresolved the issue of whether
substantial periods of loading and unloading a CMV would introduce
or exacerbate fatigue to such an extent that driving would be
impacted. The FHWA has for many years desired to further assess the
effects of this simulated loading task, in particular on long-
distance, over-the-road operators engaged in interstate commerce.
The FHWA has deferred action on this important effort in order to
first complete the multi-year ``Driver Fatigue and Alertness Study''
and, thus, be able to employ driver assessment technologies
validated in that study in the evaluation of the impact of loading
and unloading. In 1996, in response to congressional direction, the
FHWA is initiating a study of this frequent work requirement.
As currently proposed, the study will be undertaken in two
phases. The first phase, carried out in cooperation with the TRI and
the PFMI, will undertake a critical literature review which: (1)
Concentrates on the effects of physical activity on alertness,
fatigue, and performance; (2) identifies critical variables for
field study; and (3) identifies appropriate measures and measurement
technology. The FHWA believes it is important to understand, from
the motor carrier industry perspective, what actual physical
requirements are being imposed on drivers by representative types of
cargo being transported. Once these activities are completed, a
second phase of study will assess the actual physical demands
imposed in performing loading and unloading tasks by examining an
appropriate industry segment and its work schedule. This second
phase will include the collection of on-the-road measurements of
driver alertness, fatigue, and performance. The second phase will
provide a report that analyzes the relationship between the loading/
unloading requirement and fatigue.
Drivers Engaged in Local/Short-Haul Operations
The local/short-haul operations segment of the motor carrier
industry engages in work practices which distinguish it from the
long-haul, over-the-road interstate operation. Chiefly, these
practices are characterized by pick-up and delivery activities which
result in the vehicle operator engaging in non-driving activities
(e.g., package pick-up and delivery) which consume a significant
portion of the driver's work day. This type of CMV driving was
originally intended to be included in the baseline ``Driver Fatigue
and Alertness Study'' begun in 1989. It had to be postponed due to
financial constraints and the need to focus resources on the
significant data analysis activity required by the over-
[[Page 57266]]
the-road portion of the study. In fiscal year 1996, in response to
congressional direction, the FHWA plans to award a contract for a
study focusing on driver fatigue in local/short-haul operations. The
planned study will employ both direct observation (i.e.,
instrumented vehicle studies) and driver interviews and focus
groups. These will help to determine the role played by fatigue and
related factors in driver errors and incidents involving local/
short-haul truck operations. In addition, the study will: (1)
Analyze crash statistics involving driver fatigue and related
factors as principal or contributing causes of local/short-haul
commercial vehicle crashes; and (2) investigate a sample of crashes
to obtain more in-depth crash causation data. The study will also
compare local/short-haul to long-haul operations in terms of driver
fatigue, associated safety concerns, and the overall safety picture.
Sleeper Berth Fatigue
In its limited 1978 study, Human Factors Research, Incorporated,
assessed the impact of sleeper berth use. That study indicated that
CMV drivers who rely upon sleeper berths for rest demonstrated
performance effects of sleep degradation, such as lower scores on
hand-eye coordination tests and a higher incidence of lane drifting
and drowsiness. The FHWA intends to award a study, in 1996, that
will assess the impact of sleeper berth use upon the level of driver
alertness. The study would assess the quality of rest achieved while
the vehicle is both stationary and in motion. Because sleeper berth
users tend to operate on irregular schedules, the FHWA would like to
include in the research an evaluation of the effects of irregular
schedules and sleeper berth use.
Shipper and Consignee Involvement in Driver HOS Violations
The Senate Report to the 1996 Department of Transportation and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act called upon the FHWA to ``sign a
contract before November 1, 1995, to conduct research to determine
the scope, nature, and extent of shipper involvement in
noncompliance with the safety regulations'' (S. Rep. No. 126, 104th
Cong., 1st Sess.97 (1995)). This year, the FHWA has undertaken both
contractual and in-house tasks to satisfy this requirement. The FHWA
has engaged Calspan Corporation to undertake a series of focus group
sessions and in-depth interviews. This undertaking will generate
qualitative data about the state of shipper (and consignee) demands
on the motor carrier industry and its drivers. Concurrent with this
effort, the FHWA will seek to identify and analyze existing data
that may help define the scope of the problem, pinpoint factors that
appear to be related to driver violations of the HOS regulations,
and eliminate others which do not appear to be correlated.
Subsequent tasks still remain to be determined, with their selection
and design to be linked, in part, to initial findings. The FHWA may
decide to test specific segments of the motor carrier industry where
evidence indicates, for example, that time-sensitive deliveries are
the norm and pressure from shippers and consignees may tend to be
greater than the norm.
The FHWA envisions that this study will indicate some important
safety issues, and is prepared to work with the Congress and various
industry groups toward their resolution. Such resolution might
involve a determination of effective enforcement and educational
activities that would help to reduce any misunderstanding about the
critical need for driver compliance with the HOS rules.
Scheduling Practices
Concurrent with the shipper study, the FHWA, in 1996, will also
begin surveying a variety of CMV drivers, motor carriers, and
shippers to determine the prevalence of various shipping and
scheduling practices, associated driving schedules, and possible
effects of fatigue. This work will be undertaken in cooperation with
the TRI and the PFMI. A proposed outcome of this research would be a
symposium of recognized experts in shift work, traffic management,
trucking operations, and trucking safety, convened to review the
survey findings and make appropriate recommendations for safer
operations.
Driver Proficiency and Wellness
As the current decade draws to a close, the FHWA plans to expand
its efforts on behalf of the CMV driver beyond the traditional areas
of fatigue detection and prevention. The demand for fast, efficient
passenger and cargo delivery is placing increasing pressures upon
drivers. This is resulting not only in immediate performance
decrement, but also long-term stress. Consequently, our efforts to
counteract fatigue and stress must not only continue but be expanded
to promote the creation of positive models of driver wellness and
proficiency. At this stage, the FHWA believes that non-regulatory
approaches being developed by the National Motor Carrier Advisory
Committee's Subcommittee on Drivers, the PFMI, and the OOIDA, such
as education, could be the key to the success of this effort. Such
wellness education might address such lifestyle issues as nutrition,
exercise, and, of course, sleep.
Crash Investigation Project
This project, planned to begin in 1996, will compile a database
of in-depth crash investigation reports from the various States and
other sources in order to determine the contributing factors,
causes, fault, or reasons for truck and bus crashes. This CMV crash
causation study is intended to employ a comprehensive classification
of crash causes (including drowsiness/fatigue as well as other forms
of driver inattention) and a broad, representative sample of CMV
crashes. The FHWA regards these as critical methodological elements
in any valid study of CMV crash causation.
[FR Doc. 96-28353 Filed 11-4-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.