The annual CVSA International Roadcheck is May 13–15 2025, and the focus this year is on tires and electronic logging devices (ELDs). If you're operating in Alberta, brace yourself—because I predict the ELD portion of this blitz is going to be an absolute gong show.
Why? Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight has utterly failed to provide direction, interpretation, or training to industry stakeholders and the very inspectors who are tasked with enforcement. I’ve written more than a few blogs about this ongoing ineptitude, and Roadcheck 2025 is about to put it on full display.
The Problem with Alberta’s Approach to ELDs
The ELD regulation was published in 2019, came into force in 2021, and was fully adopted across Canada on January 1, 2023. That means Alberta has had 835 days and counting to provide clear, actionable guidance. And what have they done with that time? Absolutely nothing.
Motor carriers are being penalized roadside and during NSC Standard 15 audits for regulations that Alberta hasn't applied correctly—or consistently. This lack of leadership, guidance, and basic communication is setting the industry up for failure, and during Roadcheck, it amounts to entrapment.
When provinces adopt federal regulations, it's their job to explain what those rules mean to their stakeholders and how they'll be enforced. Alberta's refusal to do this amounts to information hoarding—keeping the industry in the dark so they can issue more penalties. It’s hard to punish an educated industry, and Alberta Transportation knows that.
Let’s break down the key ELD focus areas for Roadcheck 2025, based on the CVSA’s announcement, and what you really need to know.
1. Tampering (The Big One)
Tampering will be a huge issue, especially because Alberta Transportation has failed to pass along critical information. In August 2024, Transport Canada and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) directed provinces that an active data diagnostic event (displayed as a "D" on the ELD) is not a violation—it may resolve on its own once conditions change.
Alberta never told carriers or drivers. Now, during Roadcheck, an inspector may falsely label a diagnostic event as tampering or a disconnected device. This is unacceptable.
2. Driving While Not Logged In
Unidentified driving events are created when a truck moves and no one is logged in, or the driver hasn't Bluetooth-connected to the ECM. This leads to missing mileage and data. Make sure the ELD is paired and connected before moving the vehicle.
3. Odometer Mismatch
There is no regulation that says the ELD mileage must match the truck’s dash odometer. In fact, under the Weights and Measures Act, it’s illegal to alter the truck's odometer. The FMCSA clarified this in 2017: How should the ELD handle the dashboard odometer display not matching the odometer value returned by the ECM? For instance, when the engine is replaced and the value is not synced. If the dashboard odometer display does not match the odometer value returned by the ECM, the ECM odometer value must be identified as the valid value.
4. Improper Edits
Drivers and admins can and should edit to ensure accuracy. For example, if you fuel and then go off-duty but forget to change status, editing that later with a clear annotation is not a violation. Inspectors should be trained to evaluate the context of edits—but in Alberta, don’t count on it.
5. Ghost Drivers & Login Issues
6. Personal Conveyance (PC) Misuse
To legally use PC:
And yes, annotate that you're in PC and state why.
7. Misuse of Adverse Driving Exemption
This isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card. If you regularly use adverse driving to extend your hours, expect scrutiny. It’s for unforeseen events, not bad planning.
8. Off-Duty While Working
If you're working—loading, unloading, waiting at a border, even fueling—you’re on-duty. If your BOL shows a 10:00–12:00 loading time and you’re logged off-duty, you’re going to get nailed. Inspectors can and will ask for documentation to verify your RODS.
9. Malfunctions (Critical Omission)
Shockingly, CVSA’s bulletin didn’t mention ELD malfunctions. If your ELD shows an active malfunction, you must:
Failure to do so? Violation.
10. Daily Vehicle Inspection (pre-trip) location not matching RODS location
This is not a violation this a result of ELD programing. The daily vehicle inspection location is derived from GPS. The ELD location is derived from the Canadian Geo-Location Database which is not always the same. The data is coming from 2 different locations.
The bigger problem of Roadcheck and ELD violations, no room to park!
In Canada Roadcheck 2024 inspectors conducted inspections of 5411 commercial vehicles over 72 hours. The hours of service regulations are very specific regarding what violations a driver would be put out-of-service and not able to drive. If even half the drivers have violations for ELDs there is not enough room at the scales or at a roadside inspection area to park 2500 trucks for 8 to 10 or up to 72 hours until the required time off is taken by the driver to not be out of service.
What You Should Actually Do
According to the CVSA bulletin: Inspectors are available to answer questions about tire maintenance and violations, and to help drivers and motor carriers navigate the hours-of-service regulations in their jurisdictions. Based on the hours of service tickets I have encountered from my clients don’t count on it.
If you’re confused about ELD rules—or worse, get a ticket or out-of-service —call or email me before you accept guilt. I’ll help you review and fight it. Think of me as your friendly neighborhood Fairy RODSmother.
Let’s have a safe, successful Roadcheck 2025.
Recent US litigation against JB Hunt raises questions about the threshold for effective carrier driver oversight. As part of the lawsuit against the carrier and driver it is alleged the carrier did not effectively monitor the driver or correct the driver’s behaviour and this lack of oversight contributed to the collision. This case underscores the complexities of internal monitoring regulations for commercial carriers, especially in the absence of clear regulatory guidance.
Regulatory Requirements for Carrier Hours of Service Monitoring
The Federal Hours of Service Regulations (SOR/2005-313) impose several key obligations on carriers:
However, these regulations do not define what constitutes adequate monitoring or what corrective actions are necessary for different violation thresholds, leaving significant room for interpretation.
The JB Hunt Case: A Breakdown of the Allegations
In this case, a JB Hunt driver was involved in a fatal collision in the US while allegedly using his phone on a dating app. This was confirmed with driver facing camera data and phone records. Prior to the collision, two incidents within 6 weeks raised concerns about the driver’s behavior:
The issue in the lawsuit is whether the carrier’s failure to address the previous incidents contributed to the driver’s negligence. This raises a larger question: should a single five-second violation trigger disciplinary action by a carrier?
Industry Standards vs. Regulatory Ambiguity
Carriers receive frequent alerts from electronic logging devices (ELDs) and AI-driven cameras for minor infractions 24 hours a day. Without explicit regulatory guidance, it remains unclear how many brief incremental time violations should warrant carrier intervention. Regulators like Transport Canada, the CCMTA, and Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight have yet to provide an ELD interpretation guide despite the regulation being in effect for four years.
Key considerations include:
Regulatory Harmonization and Compliance Uncertainty
The lack of clear internal monitoring standards complicates enforcement. The Regulations Amending the Contraventions Regulations (SOR/2023-137) propose a $2,000 penalty per driver for a carrier’s failure to monitor. Yet, without concrete guidance, how can regulators fairly assess compliance?
As Transport Canada and the CCMTA work toward inter-provincial regulation harmonization, cases like JB Hunt’s illustrate the pressing need for explicit internal monitoring directives. Incremental time violations are a fact of life in data rich environments like ELDs and driver facing cameras. Clear regulatory guidance is urgently needed and would benefit carriers by ensuring fair enforcement and reducing liability uncertainties.
Conclusion While the JB Hunt case highlights the potential consequences of inadequate monitoring, it also exposes gaps in regulatory clarity. Carriers need definitive guidance on what constitutes effective driver hour of service oversight to ensure compliance and roadway safety. Until such guidance is provided, industry stakeholders remain in a precarious position—balancing operational feasibility with legal risk in an evolving regulatory landscape.
One of the best things about living in Alberta is no Provincial sales tax, especially if you move here from a Province that has PST, it is like everything is on sale all the time! In my blog The Confusing World of Alberta’s Safety Fitness Certificates (SFC), I explained the differences between Federal and Provincial SFC and the additional regulations federally regulated carriers must be aware of in other jurisdictions. Another thing to be aware of is the carrier’s obligation to pay PST to the jurisdiction you are operating in. Disclaimer, I do not work in IRP, IFTA or PST, this information is general information I have learned, for specifics contact your IRP/IFTA tax consultant or British Columbia and Saskatchewan tax office.
PST Charges for Alberta Trucking Companies in British Columbia
Alberta-based trucking companies operating in British Columbia (B.C.), face Provincial Sales Tax (PST) in B.C. due to its specific rules for multijurisdictional vehicles (MJVs). For Alberta trucking companies, understanding how and when PST applies to their fleet is essential for staying compliant and avoiding unexpected tax assessments or audits.
Here’s a breakdown of how PST applies to Alberta-registered trucking companies when operating in B.C., based on information from the Consumer Tax Audit Manual and PST Act.
PST and Multijurisdictional Vehicles (MJVs) in B.C.
When Alberta trucking companies operate in B.C. using multijurisdictional vehicles (MJVs), they become subject to B.C.'s PST on a proportional basis. This proportion is calculated based on the ratio of kilometers traveled in B.C. compared to the total distance traveled in all jurisdictions.
Key Points to Note:
PST Charges for Alberta Trucking Companies in Saskatchewan
As an Alberta trucking company operating in Saskatchewan, understanding your Provincial Sales Tax (PST) obligations is crucial. Saskatchewan requires trucking companies based in Alberta, to pay PST on certain goods and services. Here is what Alberta trucking companies need to know about PST in Saskatchewan.
Understanding the Prorated Vehicle Tax (PVT)
Alberta trucking companies registered for interjurisdictional travel in Saskatchewan are subject to the Prorated Vehicle Tax (PVT). The PVT is designed to proportionally tax vehicles based on the distance they travel in Saskatchewan. If you have an apportioned vehicle registration (cab card) that includes Saskatchewan, you will pay the PVT upon registering your vehicles in the province.
This tax is calculated based on the taxable value of the vehicle, the applicable tax rate, the Saskatchewan distance ratio (the portion of total distance traveled in Saskatchewan), and the remaining months in the registration period. This ensures the tax reflects the vehicle's actual use in the province.
Staying Compliant: Best Practices
Alberta-based trucking companies can minimize the risk of tax complications by following these best practices:
Audit Implications for Alberta Trucking Companies
PST audits are common and are part of broader compliance checks that often include IFTA and IRP audits. A company may be selected for an audit if they’ve not been previously audited or if their tax filings raise red flags (e.g., exceptional mileage or fuel reporting). Trucking companies must be prepared for these audits by keeping thorough and accurate records of their operations, particularly when it comes to distances.
Conclusion
If you are an Alberta trucking company reporting kms to IRP and IFTA but, not paying PST in British Columbia or Saskatchewan you may want to investigate that. It's crucial for Alberta-based trucking companies operating in British Columbia and Saskatchewan to understand and comply with PST obligations in these provinces. Whether it's B.C.'s rules for multijurisdictional vehicles or Saskatchewan's Prorated Vehicle Tax, keeping track of kilometers traveled, properly estimating tax liabilities, and maintaining accurate records is essential for avoiding audits and penalties. By staying informed and prepared, carriers can ensure compliance and minimize the risk of unexpected financial obligations.
In Alberta's commercial vehicle regulatory landscape, some trucking companies still consider fines, tickets, and administrative penalties as just another expense—like fuel or rent. However, this corporate mindset is not only outdated but also risky, as the regulatory environment becomes more data rich and enforcement technology advances. Compliance is no longer optional, and treating penalties as a cost of doing business is a flawed corporate approach that needs urgent revision.
The Evolving Enforcement Landscape
Alberta's transportation industry has seen significant technological upgrades in recent years, and with them, the opportunity to write more penalties for non-compliance. A prime example is the Weigh2Go system, which allows real-time data sharing across the highway scale network. These scale bypass systems determine if a truck should be stopped and weighed based on historical data, minimizing human error in enforcement.
Travelling In Alberta you may have noticed the highway scales are never open. That is due to a couple of things:
1 The existing scales are old, and some are located in high traffic corridors like Balzac, AB. Having trucks lined up entering and exiting the scale is a safety issue.
2. Commercial vehicle inspectors are now in the Sherriff’s department, and those officers have expanded powers like firearms, detention and handcuffs.
The Sheriff’s mandate is roadside enforcement that focuses on speeding and impaired driving in addition to commercial vehicles. Roadside penalties are more expensive and roadside officers can write more tickets by targeting speeding trucks rather than sitting at the scale waiting for a violation to roll by. Smaller municipalities are starting to hire enforcement officers, by-law officers or their own police departments like in Grande Prairie, AB. Those officers are all trained or are being trained in commercial vehicle enforcement. To further enhance on-going enforcement the Province of Alberta has just announced: The new Law Enforcement Pathway under the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program (AAIP) is designed to attract experienced and skilled police officers from abroad, addressing both immediate hiring demands and enhancing community safety. It is clear indication that non-compliant companies will find fewer and fewer loopholes to exploit.
ELD Mandate: A Game Changer
The ELD (Electronic Logging Device) mandate is one of the most significant changes in trucking compliance. ELDs create a real-time, transparent RODS (record of duty status), and vehicle inspection reports. With a single data transfer, enforcement officers can instantly review a driver’s RODS and determine whether a driver was in an out-of-service condition. In a collision a roadside officer can assess penalties to the carrier or the driver before a tow truck even arrives. This level of real-time enforcement and transparency will put additional pressure on carriers to be compliant.
The Future of Compliance: More Data, Less Tolerance
The future of Alberta’s commercial vehicle enforcement will be driven by data and automation. Weigh-in-motion scales are already being used enabling enforcement officers to weigh vehicles while they’re on the move. Jurisdictions are updating regulations to allow for the issuing of automatic penalties for overweight vehicles. This would be similar to receiving a red-light camera ticket. This is just the beginning—the enforcement data exchange integration of ECM (Electronic Control Modules) and ELD data will give enforcement agencies access to even more granular information about a truck’s performance and driver’s compliance status.
Imagine a scenario where a truck’s ECM data, combined with real-time ELD logs, is automatically transmitted to an insurance company following an accident. As private insurance companies leave Alberta’s market due to unsustainable market conditions, those that remain will increasingly seek detailed data to assess liability and avoid paying claims. In the near future, insurance companies may demand ELD and ECM data as part of a claims review, further raising the stakes for non-compliant carriers.
The True Cost of Penalties
For carriers that still see fines and penalties as the price of doing business, it’s time for a reality check. The cost of non-compliance is not just about the fines themselves; it’s about the damage to a company’s reputation, increased scrutiny, higher insurance premiums, and potential lawsuits that could sink a business. Every ticket or penalty raises a red flag, and in Alberta’s data-rich environment, red flags are harder to ignore.
Compliance is Your Competitive Edge
Staying up-to-date on regulations and prioritizing compliance isn’t just about avoiding penalties—it’s about staying in business. As insurance and enforcement environments tighten, only carriers with strong compliance programs will be able to avoid the mounting costs associated with non-compliance. Relying on outdated practices and brushing off penalties as a business expense will leave companies vulnerable to everything from hefty fines to insurance claims denial. Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section is not going to help you. It’s enforcement, not education! Give me a call or an email for all of your up to date ELD and NSC compliance education.
It’s Rodeo season in Alberta! Albertans attend local rodeos to celebrate the important history of the rodeo and more importantly the impact livestock and agriculture have on our community. When listening to the opening remarks of the various elected officials that attend these rodeos remember this, Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors created a special permit for the oil and gas industry. A permit that is not available to the livestock transportation sector despite the urgent need and requests from those drivers and carriers. See my blog The dirty business of lobbying and the impact on road safety for the specific details of that sketchy deal.
The oilfield exemption permit exempts federally regulated drivers operating under the oilfield permit from using a ELD (Electronic Logging Device), exempts the driver from the cycle restrictions and does not require the driver to record a work shift start and end time, only total hours. Federally regulated livestock transportation companies are required to install ELD’s and those drivers have zero exemptions.
The FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration), the United States transportation regulatory body, has a livestock transportation exemption, 395.1 (k)(4) (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation). The exemption was built into the ELD regulation and no permit is required. The ELD mandate in Canada requires a certified ELD to be programmed with the Canadian and the United States hours of service rules. The basis of the NAFTA agreement was to facilitate cross border trade between Canada, Mexico and the United States. How does allowing an exemption for US drivers but not Canadian drivers operating in the United States make any sense or respects the spirit of NAFTA?
The Alberta government mandate is focused on revenue generation and building the Alberta War Chest. If Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors is not interested in allowing a free exemption for Livestock Transportation providers, then establish a Livestock ELD permit and make some money. The Province of Manitoba issues an ELD exemption permit why can’t Alberta?
The Honourable Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors just announced in a news release July 4, 2024; Alberta is marking more than a year of working with Saskatchewan and Manitoba through the Prairies Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to advance economic corridors and enhance collaboration with Alberta’s prairie neighbours. To date, the three provinces have achieved harmonization of regulations related to commercial carriers that improve both safety and regulatory requirements.
“By keeping the momentum of the Prairies MOU going, we can continue to lead the way in building economic corridors, cutting red tape, and creating jobs. This paves the way to make nation-building projects a reality again in western Canada.” Devin Dreeshen, Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors
While the Prairies Memorandum of Understanding was supposed to harmonize regulations, the absence of ELD permits or ELD interpretations for commercial carriers in Alberta raises questions about consistency and accountability. It is crucial for commercial carriers to advocate for a level playing field and demand transparency from Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors.
As Albertans gather to celebrate Rodeo season and the contributions of livestock and agriculture, it's essential to address the unequal treatment of transportation providers in the province. The disparities in ELD exemptions highlight broader issues of fairness, safety, and accountability within the industry. It’s not nice to play favorites.
In my blog, Tampering 86(3) and Table 4, I reviewed the Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions from the Technical Standard Table 4 and the troubleshooting to mitigate these events. Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions are a continuous source of annoyance for ELD administrators and drivers. Without an interpretation guide from Alberta Transportation industry is flying blind and most carriers do not know how Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions are treated in a hours of service review in a NSC Audit.
There are ongoing efforts to revise the Technical Standard and allow Data Diagnostic Events to self-clear when the underlying issue is resolved. This would greatly benefit drivers and administrators by simplifying the process and reducing the burden of manual entries by the driver to clear these events.
These changes are urgently needed but, the wheels of government turn slowly. First, the proposed Technical Standard changes have to be adopted and a new Technical Standard written. The ELD providers will have to write new code, new programming needs to be tested and recertified. All of the ELD providers are either recently re-certified or are in the process of getting recertified. No ELD provider wants to pay for re-certification halfway through a 2-year certification term. The ELD certification process is already a massively expensive debacle (think ArriveScam). These ELD changes (if adopted) are at least a couple of years out.
In the interim I suggest using the NSC Standard 9 Hours of Service, Malfunctions section 78 (1) as the interpretation guide for Table 4 in the Technical Standard. NSC Standard 9 was developed by the CCMTA and endorsed by Transport Canada, Standard 9 focuses on the resulting Malfunctions rather than Data Diagnostic Events, aligning with the proposed revisions to the Technical Standard.
By following this strategy, carriers and ELD administrators can have a clearer understanding of how to interpret ELD-generated data while waiting for the necessary changes to be implemented. This interim solution offers a regulatory-supported approach to managing Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions effectively.
In my BLOG, “Why is trucking so F%&$ed up in Alberta? I can tell you why”, I explored the concern that Transportation and Economic Corridors have a vested interest in the economy and transportation safety becomes a secondary priority. Stop expecting Alberta Transportation to help you! Compliance and Oversight makes their budget from writing tickets, no matter how government tries to sell it.
Enforcement and education are two key components in a transportation regulatory framework, and they serve very different purposes. Enforcement uses penalties, fines, or legal actions to ensure compliance with regulations. It is a reactive approach that focuses on punishing non-compliance and deterring future violations. Education provides information, guidance, and resources to help industry understand and comply with regulations. It is a proactive approach that aims to promote awareness, understanding, and voluntary compliance.
Enforcement mechanisms are important for holding unsafe carriers and drivers accountable and maintaining whatever integrity is left of the commercial transportation industry. Where it all falls apart is when the regulatory bodies make the rules and don’t inform industry what those rules mean to them. Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors has had the ELD regulations for three years and carriers facing departmental intervention are clueless to the risks.
In a roadside stop ELD penalties can add up fast. An example is; a driver’s ELD was in a malfunction state for the day the driver was stopped and inspected and the 14 previous days. If the driver did not follow the malfunction protocol the driver could be charged under 78(1) failure to ensure ELD operates in good working order and is calibrated and maintained. That penalty is recommended to be $1000.00 per offence for the driver. That would be $15,000.00. The carrier could be facing: 78(5) Failure to repair or replace ELD within required timeframe. $1000.00 per offence is $15,000.00 for the carrier. If the driver intentionally disconnecting the ELD to avoid accurate recording of the information that could be 86(3), Tamper with ELD $1000.00 per offence and the carrier could be facing 86(3) request require allow a person to tamper with ELD $2000.00 per offence. The carrier could be charged for every day because the carrier is supposed to be monitoring the driver, (87(1) and 78.3 (1)) using the carrier ELD dashboard and is aware of the malfunction. Imagine explaining to your boss how a driver earned the company a $32,000.00 penalty. Nobody gets a safety bonus this month!
This isn’t the good old days of trucking; drivers and carriers are monitored in real time and roadside officers are armed and have expanded powers including detention. Drivers need to take care during a roadside stop, speak respectfully and ask questions respectfully, even if the driver is correct and the officer wrong. In a roadside situation the person with the gun is always right and drivers need to remember that.
In summary, enforcement is about penalizing non-compliance, while education is about empowering compliance through awareness and understanding. Both enforcement and education are important tools in a regulatory framework, and a balanced approach that combines both can be effective in achieving regulatory goals. The problem is Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors Alberta is not balanced; the focus is enforcement with no education for the carriers to be successful. Why would Alberta Transportation and Economic Corridors slit the throat of this cash cow when carriers can be kept in the dark and the cash keeps flowing?
Introduction:
Increasingly, carriers utilizing Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) face challenges with unidentified driving events that can lead to violations during audits and investigations. However, by leveraging the exempt driver functionality within the ELD system, carriers may mitigate those unidentified driving events.
Understanding the Exempt Driver Functionality:
All ELD systems come equipped with an exempt driver function, allowing carriers to configure accounts for drivers who may be exempt from ELD usage. For instance, drivers operating under the short-haul exemption within 160 km of their home terminal can be designated as exempt. This designation enables the sharing of ELD-equipped commercial motor vehicles between exempt and non-exempt drivers seamlessly. The Technical Standard. 3.1.3 Configuration of user account exempt from using an ELD: As specified in 4.3.3.1.2 of the Technical Standard, an ELD must allow a motor carrier to configure an ELD for a driver who may be exempt from the use of an ELD. An example of an exempt driver would be a driver driving under the short-haul exemption under current HOS regulations (i.e. specified in regulation as within a radius of 160 km of the home terminal). Even though exempt drivers do not have to use an ELD, an ELD equipped CMV may be shared between exempt and non-exempt drivers and motor carriers can use this allowed configuration to avoid issues with unidentified driver data diagnostics errors.
Implementation and Training:
Drivers and administrators must be trained on how to utilize the exempt functionality in real-world scenarios. Administrators need to activate the exempt function when creating driver accounts, customizing it for specific drivers even if only a few will be using the exemption.
Compliance and Monitoring:
Drivers using the exempt functionality are not exempt from federal Hours of Service regulations but are excused from using a ELD to record the driver’s time. However, they still need to maintain alternative time records that meet regulatory criteria. Drivers must verify their exempt status periodically, as the ELD does not automatically maintain this status.
Challenges of the Exempt Driver Function:
Transitioning from exempt to non-exempt status can pose challenges, especially when the exemption ends, and ELD usage becomes mandatory. Drivers are required to enter time from paper logs or alternative records.
The Technical Standard 4.3.2.2.4 Indication of Situations Impacting duty-/driving-hour limitations: c) An ELD must provide the means to indicate additional hours that were not recorded for the current motor carrier during the current day or the required previous days specified in current HOS regulations:
(1) When this function is selected, the ELD must prompt the user to select one of the following
options:
i. Option 1: additional hours already recorded and reported in a RODS for another motor carrier.
ii. Option 2: additional hours not recorded since the driver was not required to keep a RODS immediately before the beginning of the day.
Conclusion:
The exempt driver functionality within ELD systems offers a valuable tool for carriers with drivers alternating between exempt and non-exempt status. While managing this transition may require additional effort from both drivers and administrators, the benefits of leveraging the exempt driver function for seamless operations and compliance monitoring cannot be overlooked. By understanding, training, and effectively implementing the exempt driver functionality, carriers may avoid unidentified driving events and avoid administrative penalties.
Table 4: Data Diagnostic Events and Malfunctions
Data diagnostic events and malfunctions are a continuous source of annoyance for carriers and drivers. Without an interpretation guide from Alberta Transportation industry must refer to the Federal Hours of Service Regulation and the Technical Standard.
ELD Refresher
ELDs record and transmit data, that is it. ELDs are programmed with parameters to account for real life and allow for little variances. For example, the ELD will start recording when the vehicle reaches 8 kms a hour. ELDs are required to record certain pieces of data that are regulated in the Technical Standard. If any pieces of data are missing, and the driver does not manually input the missing data the ELD will record a data diagnostic event.
Connection Concerns
The majority of data diagnostic events are due to connectivity issues. ELDs rely on technology and technology can fail. ELDs can be hardwired or connected via Bluetooth. We all have cellphones that rely on the existing cellular network. Think about a ELD like a cellphone. When you fly to Mexico for vacation you turn off your phone or go into airplane mode for the duration of the flight. Your life does not disappear for those 5 hours, your still getting text messages and comments on your Instagram. The phone holds on to the data in the cloud and when you land and reconnect to a network all the data is waiting. ELDs work the exact same way. When a ELD reconnects to the network and data is missing or the data isn’t correct the ELD will record a data diagnostic event.
Carrier Due Diligence and Accountability
Data diagnostic events turn into malfunctions when not resolved. The driver and the company are aware of data diagnostic events and malfunctions due to:
Data diagnostic events can self-clear if conditions are met. Example the ELD has a period of no connection to Bluetooth. The device will record a data diagnostic event and when the device is reconnected the event is cleared. It is still recorded as a data diagnostic event because the event happened but, the event will be cleared and it is no longer a compliance issue.
The Federal Hours of Service Tampering:
86 (3) No motor carrier shall request, require or allow any person to, and no person shall, disable, deactivate, disengage, jam or otherwise block or degrade a signal transmission or reception, or re-engineer, reprogram or otherwise tamper with an ELD so that the device does not accurately record and retain the data that is required to be recorded and retained.
A ELD that is unplugged or disconnected from the internet is not accurately recording or retaining the data that is required to be recorded and retained as per the Hours of Service 86(3)
Table 4: Compliance Malfunction and Data Diagnostic Event Codes:
P Power compliance malfunction
E Engine synchronization compliance malfunction
T Timing compliance malfunction
L Positioning compliance malfunction
R Data recording compliance malfunction
S Data transfer compliance malfunction
O Other ELD detected malfunction
1 Power data diagnostic event
2 Engine synchronization data diagnostic event
3 Missing required data elements data diagnostic event
4 Data transfer data diagnostic event
5 Unidentified driving records data diagnostic event
6 Other ELD identified diagnostic event
Code 1: Power Data Diagnostic Event
Problem: The ELD is not fully powered/functional within one minute of the vehicle’s engine receiving power. “Fully powered” requires that the driver connect to the vehicle with the ELD within one minute of the vehicle powering on.
Solution: Ensure that the driver connects the ELD to a vehicle within one minute of the vehicle powering on.
Code P: Power Compliance Malfunction
Problem: The ECM connection is unplugged from the ELD and there is driving time over 30 minutes over 24-hour period.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD is connected to the vehicle ECM whenever the vehicle is in motion. Drivers should follow the Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code 2: Engine Synchronization Data Diagnostic Event
Problem: The ELD has lost ECM connectivity and can no longer acquire data within five seconds. Connectivity must be maintained between the ELD and the ECM while the vehicle is powered on.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD remains connected to the vehicle ECM while the vehicle is powered on.
Code E: Engine Synchronization Malfunction
Problem: The ELD loses connection to the vehicle ECM for a cumulative 30+ minutes of missing data: GPS, VIN, date/time, engine hours.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD remains connected to the vehicle while the vehicle is powered on. Engine Synchronization Malfunctions will clear on their own after 24 hours have passed since the last logged malfunction. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code T: Timing Compliance Malfunction
Problem: The time on the ELD varies more than 10 minutes from the designated home terminal time.
Solution: The ELD will automatically resync its local clock to the GPS time once it becomes valid. If the driver is using the ELD on a cellphone disable the Automatic Time Zone Detection or Automatic Time Zone Adjustment function. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code L: Positioning Compliance Malfunction
Problem: The ELD cannot obtain a valid GPS position within five miles of the last valid position for over 60 minutes of driving in a 24-hour period.
Solution: Ensure a satellite GPS connection. Try moving the ELD near a clear, unobstructed view to the sky. Reboot the ELD to re-establish a satellite GPS connection. Enter locations manually, manual locations will indicate a M in the latitude and longitude fields of the RODS and the CSV.
Positioning Compliance Malfunctions will clear after 24 hours have passed since the last logged malfunction. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code 3: Missing Required Data Elements Data Diagnostic Event
Problem: There is missing data: GPS, VIN, date/time, engine hours in the ELD event record.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD remains connected to the vehicle while the vehicle is powered on.
Code R: Data Recording Compliance Malfunction
Problem: The ELD can no longer record new event data due because it is full.
Solution: Ensure there’s an active internet connection before using Bluetooth to connect the ELD with the ECM. Keep the driver ELD app open for the data to transfer to the server. Do not force close the ELD app. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code 4: Data Transfer Data Diagnostic Event
Problem: The internal monitoring of the data fails and is unable to send the output file data.
Solution: Ensure there’s an active internet connection before using Bluetooth to connect the ELD with the ECM. Keep the driver ELD app open for the data to transfer to the server.
Code S: Data Transfer Compliance Malfunction
Problem: When a ELD records a data transfer data diagnostic event, the ELD increases the frequency of the monitoring to check every 24-hour period. If the ELD stays in the unconfirmed data transfer mode following the next three consecutive monitoring checks, the ELD must record a data transfer compliance malfunction.
Solution: Ensure there’s an active internet connection before using Bluetooth to connect the ELD with the ECM. Keep the driver ELD app open for the data to transfer to the server. Do not force close the ELD app. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code 6: Other ELD identified diagnostic event
Technical Standard 4.6.1.8 Other Technology-Specific Operational Health Monitoring. In addition to the required ELD monitoring the ELD provider may implement additional, data diagnostic detection and may use the ELD’s data diagnostic status indicator to alert the ELD’s non-compliant state to the driver.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD remains connected to the vehicle while the vehicle is powered on.
Code O: Other ELD detected malfunction.
Technical Standard 4.6.1.8 Other Technology-Specific Operational Health Monitoring. In addition to the required ELD monitoring the ELD provider may implement additional, malfunction detection and may use the ELD’s malfunction status indicator to alert the ELD’s malfunction or state to the driver.
Solution: Ensure that the ELD remains connected to the vehicle while the vehicle is powered on. Drivers should follow Malfunction criteria in the Hours of Service 78.
Code 5: Unidentified Driving Records Data Diagnostic Event
Problem: There is over 30 minutes of unidentified driving time for the vehicle over the last 24 hours. If the vehicle is moving and there is no driver logged in, the ELD records that time separately.
Solution: The solution for unidentified driving is for the carrier to assign unidentified driving time. Unidentified driving data diagnostic events will clear when the cumulative time for unidentified driving is less than 15 minutes for the current day plus the last 7 or 14 previous days. That means once all the unidentified time is cleared up the malfunction clears up. A truck driving down the street with no driver behind the wheel would be considered a problem, why is a ELD recording a truck with no driver behind the wheel not a problem?
Unidentified Driving Records Data Diagnostic Events will clear when the cumulative time for unidentified driving is less than 15 minutes for the current day plus the last 7 or 14 previous days.
The Federal Hours of Service Tampering:
86 (3) No motor carrier shall request, require or allow any person to, and no person shall, disable, deactivate, disengage, jam or otherwise block or degrade a signal transmission or reception, or re-engineer, reprogram or otherwise tamper with an ELD so that the device does not accurately record and retain the data that is required to be recorded and retained.
A ELD that is unplugged or disconnected from the internet is not accurately recording or retaining the data that is required to be recorded and retained as per the Hours of Service 86(3)
Contraventions Regulations (ScheduleXVIII): SOR/2023-137
86(3) (a) Tamper with ELD $1000.00 – driver
86(3)(b) Request, require or allow person to tamper with ELD – $2000.00 carrier
When you mix transportation in with economic corridors there is always the risk that safety will not be a priority over the economy. I want to address some critical safety gaps that have been ignored by TEC (Transportation and Economic Corridors) for years. Albertan’s should be deeply troubled by the neglect of crucial safety policies within Compliance and Oversight.
The Compliance and Oversight department monitors the overall safety of trucking companies in Alberta. Compliance and Oversight conducts audits and investigations to ensure compliance with the NSC standards. However, there are glaring issues that demand immediate attention:
1. **Non-Compliance with Intervention and Discipline Policies:** There is a disturbing trend of Compliance and Oversight failing to adhere to its own policies. Companies with significant safety violations are not being labeled as unsatisfactory, allowing them to operate under conditional status without proper intervention. This negligence has been repeatedly highlighted in audits by the Auditor General, yet no corrective actions have been taken.
2. **Flawed Third-Party Auditor (TPA) Program:** The TPA program, responsible for conducting NSC Standard 15 Audits on behalf of the Alberta government, is fundamentally flawed:
- Auditors do not have encryption keys to be able to download complete RODS. This compromised data is used for hours of service reviews, impacting carrier safety and public road safety.
- Lack of support for auditors, hindering their ability to communicate with TEC for assistance.
- Inadequate training and monitoring of auditors, leading to unreliable audit information.
- Inefficiencies in data processing and communication, undermining the accuracy and effectiveness of audits.
If any carrier failed a audit or got a penalty as a result of a audit by a TPA in the last 2 years, I would 100% appeal it. The TPA audits are not accurate because TPA auditors do not have the “key” to unlock the box, that contains the accurate RODS. Would you pay your income tax if you found out the T4’s information has been wrong for years? Pretty simple argument.
To address these urgent safety concerns, the following actions are proposed:
1. Immediate review of all TPA audits and compliance records since June 2022, to ensure accuracy and reliability.
2. Establish a streamlined process for handling TPA audit by providing encryption keys, enhancing transparency and accountability.
3. Enforce intervention and discipline policies rigorously, ensuring that unsafe carriers are marked unsatisfactory and penalized accordingly, promoting road safety and public confidence.
Continuing to ignore these issues and allowing unsafe carriers continued operation is validating the perception that Alberta highways are more dangerous today. Unfortunately, these issues will be ignored until there is another incident involving a Alberta trucking company that Compliance and Oversight deemed safe.
