Utilization of Electronic on board recording (EOBRs) devices for hours-of-service (HOS) monitoring is low, according to research released this week by the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), a not-for-profit research subsidiary of the American Trucking Associations.

Some of the reasons for the low usage, according to ATRI, are overall system costs, a lack of EOBR safety and productivity returns-on-investment, and concerns over what functionalities and standards will be needed should a mandate for EOBRs be made official.

ATRI said its findings were based on surveys and interviews of motor carriers that are EOBR users and non-users, and vendors to understand the specific reasons motor carriers are reluctant to use EOBRs.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issued an advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) requesting stakeholder comments on EOBR usage in September 2004, as well as comments regarding whether EOBRs should be mandated. The feedback at that time indicated that there was a lack of cost-benefit information and EOBR technical specifications, and more evidence was needed to connect EOBR usage and safety. There is another NPRM scheduled for EOBRs later this year.

While EOBR usage is still low, the research indicated that 76 percent of users said that EOBR deployment improved driver morale. Another 19 percent said EOBRs improved driver retention, and no EOBR user respondents said driver retention was hindered because of EOBRs.

Despite nearly 80 percent of respondents indicating EOBR adoption improved driver morale, many carriers feel the initial investment costs were too great to justify potential benefits, according to Dan Murray, ATRI vice president of research.

“Because cost is a primary issue, strategies to reduce unit costs and management costs must be considered, including things like tax credits and bulk discount pricing,” said Murray. “Another major concern is the lack of government-supported, clear-functional and technical standards. It is too risky for carriers to invest in a system now, knowing that a future mandate-and related requirements-may make their investment obsolete.”

Murray added that is the EOBR mandate becomes official there is a general sense that EOBRs will be very effective. But he cautioned that more information is still needed.

“As a safety tool, substantially more information is needed relating compliance to fatigue and fatigue to safety outcomes,” said Murray. “Some of that research discretely exists today, but it has not been synthesized and adequately related so that true safety ROIs (return on investments) can be included in a carrier’s cost-benefit analysis.”