CMV Speed Limiter talk again

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) is calling on the U.S. Department of Transportation to reject a speed limiter proposal suggested by the American Trucking Association and Road Safe America.

In a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, OOIDA said a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (NHTSA/FMCSA) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) mandating heavy-duty commercial vehicles have speed limiting devices would make roads less safe.

“This 2016 NPRM would not only fail to improve safety and likely lead to more crashes involving CMVs but would provide large carriers an even greater competitive advantage over small businesses. We are adamantly opposed to any proposals that would create a separate nationwide speed limit for CMVs,” the group wrote. “By establishing a one-size-fits-all federal mandate, the 2016 NPRM would create dangerous speed differentials between CMVs and other vehicles. Decades of highway research shows greater speed differentials increase interactions between truck drivers and other road users. Studies have consistently demonstrated that increasing interactions between vehicles directly increases the likelihood of crashes.”

The group said that speed limiters create operational challenges and dangers for truckers, including challenges navigating merges and the increased incidents of road rage in other drivers. Limiting speeds on trucks causes increased pressure and stress on truckers, the group said, because they would be required to drive the maximum number of hours to make up for slower speeds.

The group said NPRM would also give large trucking companies a competitive advantage over smaller, independent businesses and owner-operators.

“Any efforts to mandate speed limiters will take more control of the truck out of the driver’s hands and unnecessarily constrain small businesses,” the letter said. “There are countless scenarios where a driver’s expertise and discretion is needed to avoid an accident or other dangerous situations, but their abilities would be arbitrarily curtailed by speed limiters. Rather than mandating speed limiters and unproven technologies, the most efficient and cost-effective means to promote safer roads is simply enforcing existing speed limits, which Congress authorized states to set based on their own unique factors. We believe DOT and Congress should consider measures that would actually improve safety rather than technologies that have been proven to cause more crashes.”

 

So many other ways to improve safety and this idea has to be one of the worst. I already am my own speed limiter, and I downright hate/refuse to run in packs. I simply will not do it. So they talk of slowing us down and raising minimum insurance, well why if we're going to be so much safer?? Maybe it's just me but training, education, common sense, respect for your fellow motorists and your career, wanting to get home safe, and earning a decent living all seem like key factors in being a success in this industry. It's sad that the industry opens its doors to those that have no business even being around a truck simply out of demand for body with a pulse. Enough is enough already.

 

"That joint proposal from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration pitched requiring all trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating more than 26,000 pounds to be equipped with speed-limiting devices. The proposal suggested maximum top speeds of 60, 65 or 68 mph, but backed away from anti-tampering requirements that ATA had previously supported. ATA was an early supporter of speed limiters, but at the time of the NPRM had questions about some of these details."