BREAKING NEWS: Proposed HOS rule leaves open for comment 10- or 11-hour driving time,

More specific link to the breaks is


http://www.safedriverhours.com/2-way comparison chart current and Dec 2010 proposal.pdf

 

Agreed, I'm just pointing out that a 1 hour break is not required.

 

A break is required during the day at least for a 30 minute time.

Depending on the amount of driving, it could require a second 30 minute break. Which would be horrible if it happened in the last hour or so of getting back.

 

Now I'm confused. The ATA interpretation states specifically that a one hour break or two 30 minute breaks are required yet the FMCSA proposal says otherwise.

 

It is going to be a long time till July.

 

My vote is for a 10 hour rule, so that there has to be more trucks and drivers on the road to get the same amount of freight hauled....might drive up the pay some.....heck, let's just go with an 8 hour driving rule and really drive up the price of freight.

 

That is why I don't worry about these rules, as there are not enough LEOs to enforce any of these rules, except at the weigh stations.

It is not humany possible to come up with rules that make sense for every trucking company and every driver....as a short haul driver, I have to use my common sense. I want to be safe, but I am not going to be stupid and follow regs that the feds come up with for OTR drivers, cause I can't sleep on the schedule that the FMCSA wants me too.

 

I'm reading both, and it sorta seems to be there, but also seems to not be there? Yes, I do understand that my statement makes no sense.

I come up with where I must have had a half hour break within 7 hours of driving from the FMCSA site...

Where the 1 hour comes from is this, although it never seems to actually require that amount of time...

So, my interpretation is that your 14 hour window is still 14 hours. But, it's now cut down to 13 hours of on duty or driving time, over a 14 hour period. Keep in mind that the break may actually be required, depending on how long you drive, as shown in my first example.

Now, the ATA example shows things a little different...

So, I can drive 7 hours, then I must take a 30 minute break. Then I can drive 4 more hours, until I hit my 11.

What gets me is that I read this as saying that I must now take another half hour off duty (to total 1 hour) before I can go off duty for the night, otherwise I would be in violation?

There is no way that this can be correct. I have to assume that this is a misinterpretation of that 13 hours of work vs. 14 hour window thing, but I'm waiting to see if there is something that someone else understands that I don't.

Also from the ATA site...

I read this is saying that we have to stop working at the end of our 14 hours. Not that I have to stop driving until we have a 10 hour, like we had before, but that we have to stop working altogether. Anybody else read it the same way?

 

It would seem that what the Feds have accomplished has been, primarily, to further complicate the logging process. Where the original rules had 10-8-70 restrictions, we now have 7-10-10-70-34 restrictions. In my view, another avenue for LEO to get it wrong when examining your log book (and those of us who were here when the current rules went into effect remember how everyone seemed to have a different view on their interpretation).

Talking to a couple of friends the last couple of days, we've put on our tin foil hats and have come up with the following conspiracy theory: it's designed to FORCE carriers to implementing EOBR's. With so many hour restrictions to keep track of, the only way carriers can ensure their drivers are in compliance is to institute the black box baby sitter. Rather than training drivers to do it on paper, and then training their office personnel on how to audit them (or spend thousands on new log auditing software), the path of least resistance may be to just go paperless.